Again, who gives a shit. Plenty of entities try to influence social situations. For some reason, you have a google stick up your bum.
Nope. I am saying that the company if it wishes to serve the public should conform to its user wishes. Where do you see that I am advocating a company giving up control?
A company like google is doing one of two things here. Its either trying to shape the world or its trying to protect its image. It could be both, but for what Im about to say its easier to hold them as split things.
If Google is trying to protect its image then totally fine, but I also will not support that image and will advocate against that and look to do my business elsewhere. That is, if they are pushing the idea that Peterson's ideas are somehow harmful. If they were doing this type of thing to say the Spencer guy who got punched, I would say oh well.
If Google is trying to shape society into what it thinks is "right" then I have a huge problem with that and will be for more adamant in my stance.
Slavery was the straw you grasped in whatever frame of mind you're trying to paint me. You could choose from quite a few different topics to define me with, not sure why you chose this one. Plus, I never said what you're claiming I said. Please just google the word indifferent.
Morals are based on perceived right and wrong. In today's day and age, we've decided to accept slavery as not just immoral, but outright wrong without question. I wholeheartedly agree, and see the idea of owning another human detestable.
If I was born 2k years ago, I would likely be of a different mindset depending on who raised me, since perceived right and wrong was different back then.
So, in reflection on humans history, slavery being right/wrong is completely to subjective.
Start it then, go on a crusade against google. enjoy.
Just because you were born in a time of ignorance, does not make the actions moral. Culture and societies had not developed enough to be held to modern standards, but slavery is today as it was then inherently immoral.
Again, who gives a shit. Plenty of entities try to influence social situations. For some reason, you have a google stick up your bum.
You're still applying your current measuring stick to a different time and place.
What makes you think that I treat those other institutions any differently than I treat Google?
For example, Facebook has been pretty shitty when it has come to art. They have been censoring art with the nude human form because they find it to be offensive. Art that is by no means sexual is being removed by Facebook. Its why I do not have an active facebook account and when its a reasonable time talk about facebook and their actions to people around me. Facebook in terms of censorship is far worse than google.
Correct, which is clearly established. That said, some things are still inherently moral/immoral. As I already said, societies and cultures had not yet developed to grasp everything, but it does not change what it was. As we grow we should be judging ourselves by our updated standards. Its why in the western world we have cast off many horribly immoral things from the Churches that built our societies. Thankfully.
Then enjoy your internet experience without google.
I, too, don't use facebook. Mostly because of their lackluster privacy issues, and I don't like being a product without monetary gain.
It's only inherent by your current measuring stick, lol.
So you find not using Facebook as logical, but having that same feeling toward Google if this is all true is not.
Society has developed better tools. Not much else to say.
Yup, proving moral's based on perceived right and wrong are subjective.
You're as free to stop using google as you are to stop using facebook. It's completely logical.
That's a fairly spectacular straw man you're beating there.Some things can be neutral but sex with a 5yo is not. I think we are done here.
So when you said how cares, you are one of those people and as such dislike Facebook. So its totally reasonable to dislike Google and advocate against it, but...?
So because society did not have the tools to detect the atom, atoms did not exists.
Excuse me? That's quite an assumption, followed by a fairly thinly veiled threat. I assume you also missed the entire point of the conversation?
No, I got accused of being a pedophile because I was voicing my thoughts on morality, by someone who made a bold, and irrational assumption founded in absolutely nothing.
My views on morality don't mean I support pedophilia (much less make me one), and I'm rather astonished that anyone would presume that.
Morality is inherent to humans sure, but how can you say its a western idea and arguable at the same time. If the argument is valid, then it becomes inherent. If there is not a valid argument then its not inherent.
Do you think sex with a 5yo is not inherently immoral?
With the way Youtube is eliminated certain channels, it's probably an indication where we are heading.
Remember, Youtube only goes after certain "hate" speech while being completely OK with other hate speech. But hey, most people willingly have given these massive companies their trust and support. We get what we deserve.
so, what's the other other type of hate speech that youtube is OK with?
Some of the comments I see posted on innocuous YouTube videos are pretty vile...I'm talking fashion Vloggers not even getting into hate speech videos. I would imagine a video taken down for hate speech must be pretty wild. I use YouTube to relax & escape politics
Facebook, knowing I can open the app during lunch at work & not get hit with nudity is helpful while using company wifi.
Private companies are free to set their TOS & consumers are free to decide they don't want to use the service.