What? I think she’s a crazy tapir.
Nope. We didn’t get kicked out of our homeland by the Romans… cough
Yet…
Nope, just the Mongols!
Chinese culture > everyone else’s cultures
The Chinese culture has been around and survived the past 5000+ years.
Middle eastern culture has been around for that long as well.
Yet, neither culture produced The Beatles and are therefore failures. cough
Where are those Mongols now, huh?
Well, the Jews are back in Israel too!
In UR Frig, Eetin UR stuf!
There were a bunch of them parading around in China last August, then they went on a spree of beating people up and shooting off guns and bows. They seemed pretty happy with themselves. A couple of them, a guy over 200 lbs. and a little one even made off with some of China’s gold.
Can someone tell me WTF it means to be “valid” as a culture? Assuming something is a culture to begin with, what makes it “valid” or “not valid”?
That is one “Beam me up” away from Traficant Country (which is next door to Bat Country).
I thought those guys were sarcastic
I have to agree that it’s a poor choice of terms, but in my defense, I was going along with the terms that others had started talking about. Saying “culture” is particularly wrong because it’s a blanket term including many different things. In this context, it would be fairer to talk about the values of different cultures.
As for “valid”, in my case, it means values that are compatible with a society built around a modern liberal democracy. I can’t speak for anyone else.
Sorry, I was using ‘valid’ to avoid the word ‘good’. By valid, I’m talking about enabling human flourishing. I think the modern liberal democracy standard is begging the question. You don’t have to be a democracy to be a valid culture. If your culture is committing some sort of universal evil or violation of rights, then that aspect of your culture is NOT acceptable (valid). For example, a culture that condones female genital mutilation is not as legitimate as one that does not, at least in that one area. For general validity, you would need to examine the goods and bads of the culture (referring to universal goods and bads here, terms determined by history, anthropology, sociology, etc.).
Eg.: Slavery- not valid; covering your head to show deference to God rather than taking your hat off- valid.
Cultural relativism is a bad thing because it allows atrocities with no justifiable way of stopping them, as long as they are part of another culture.
The fact that she defines “Happiness” as “economic liberty” tells me everything I need to know about her.
I did some human flourishing earlier this morning.
Not to single out anyone in particular, but this is why I so strongly oppose the use of the word “valid” in most contexts. Valid as “good”? Valid as “modern liberal democracy”? Talk about a narrowly defined validity.
Anyway, just blowing off some steam. But damn do I hate that fucking word.
Your hate is valid.
That’s fine. But here’s the dictionary definition (from dictionary.com), part one:
“sound; just; well-founded”
I never defined it as a modern liberal democracy. I’m saying valid means that it acknowledges basic human rights. What’s wrong with my use of valid in that context? Give me a better word for what I have in mind, and I’ll use it.
While I don’t want to sound like Francis Galton, I have to say, just taking one look at Bachman talking just screams “The lights are on but nobody is home.”
It’s like one of those 80 movies where the zany teenster has moving cardboard behind the windows to make it seem like someone is actually there.