User:RD/9k/pinning False to anecdotes (Q642)
Main entry
- pinning False to anecdotes / pinning True to specific incident / pinning True to oddly-specific outcome / pegging truth values to oddly specific outcomes ->
I have problems with critical-theory doing this because of how specific it gets without realizing how specific it got, but at the same time, it's an interesting concept if you look at it in its totality and think about all the possible ways you could do it. I independently reinvented it on my own with early Trotskyism before I even had any idea that critical-theory was doing it. then, after puppetting the concept of Liberal-republicanism ironically I finally realized that pointing to the need to resolve court cases, or pointing to the need to get rid of "prejudice" was the same thing. each example has weaknesses in that other sociophilosophies won't think it's important, but when you take a reasonably diverse array of examples together you see a clearer picture start to form of what all the examples are actually saying.
Boring setup rules
- It is an Undesired outcome for people to believe codes of morality that are Materially Inaccurate; if people believe a code of morality and believing that code of morality causes observed outcomes established as Undesired outcomes, then that code of morality is Materially Inaccurate and people continuing to believe it is Undesired
- Trotsky and Stalin reasonably expect different outcomes from the same policies / Expectable consequentialism is Idealism; any claim that somebody's actions are to be judged based on what a person can "reasonably expect" will be colored by individual people's specific chosen ideology and set of biases, and allow people to get out of any accusation by claiming that it wasn't what they reasonably expected / Expectable consequentialism is just a reinvention of deontology from a different angle (sense)
- A reasonable anarchist can break down your door for any choice / Reasonable consequentialism is ideological chauvinism; any attempt to get out of the problems of expectable consequentialism by attempting to say that models of reality must be "reasonable" opens the floodgates for any possible definition of "reasonable" to declare itself the only correct definition in the world and call all actors who do not use that definition unreasonable and prone to making the wrong decisions
Scenarios
- Corporations spontaneously converting property is an Undesired outcome / A society in which the brand owner of a franchise store can confiscate a pile of products that does not belong to them approximately equaling the value of a Lamborghini SUV, and not expect any legal consequences for spontaneously drawing new lines of legal protection around significant amounts of property, is an Undesired outcome
Oppressing early Trotskyism is Undesired
/ In the First World Trotsky is sacred / (9k/Q29,84, Q41,91) -> widely repeated by Liberal-republicanism, but also approved by Trotskyists; something of a classic.- Restoring capitalism in the Soviet Union is Undesired -> nobody wanted this. the only people who wanted this were outright supporters of the United States empire.
- Allowing foreigners to create businesses in Cuba out of African slaves is Undesired (1880-1930) [1]
- Cuban exiles are currently chipping away at Cuba's government to try to get compensated for sugarcane plantations -> this really shows how imperial every single seemingly innocuous act of buying and selling something is, I mean, the arrogance to think somebody will just pay you to prove they have the elite expertise to take back what might have been a site of slavery. has agorism ever been anything but inherent hierarchy over the rest of the world the instant lines are drawn around a single person or drawn around anything?
Truth values
Desired
(truth value) / desirable outcome (truth value) / good consequence [2] -> a desirable outcome is an outcome which might be written into law as the correct answer, written into a party program, assumed to be the outcome a Materialist model of reality is intending to unravel the steps to, or simply accepted when it happens. Desired does not inherently correlate with "Good"/"Right", although given the typical purpose of morality they will often happen to align. marking an outcome Desired is not a guarantee that determination was objective, but an objective determination is more likely to be reached if two factions come to a consensus on something as Desired and a third faction rival to the consensus evaluates the consensus from a skeptical position before ending up at the conclusion of Desired.Undesired
(truth value) / undesirable outcome (truth value) / bad consequence [3] -> an undesirable outcome is an outcome which is identified as a problem to society for some specific reason. Undesired does not inherently correlate with "Bad"/"Wrong", often because a lot of outcomes marked Undesired within any number of ideologies are reached by something more resembling inanimate processes than moral agents. this in turn leads to arguments that even processes which were not anyone's choice need to be managed by giving people new responsibility.Materially Accurate
(truth value) / True (physics, natural sciences; truth value) -> one of the most generic truth values. this describes statements that are true with regard to the real world in general and with regard to material reality but not taking into account subjective forms of truth that are described by other sets of truth values, such as Technically Impressive (arts) or Character Is Furry (furry fandom).Materially Inaccurate
(truth value) / False (physics, natural sciences; truth value) -> this describes statements that are not true with regard to the real world in general. because of the difficult problem of rare events, there may be many auxiliary truth values needed in between Materially Accurate and Materially Inaccurate to properly describe how accurate a statement is and when it applies, such as Some Occurrence, True In United States, or True In Capitalism.
Related
- rule consequentialism / An action is morally right if it corresponds to the overall set of behaviors of a population that would result in the best outcomes [4] -> oh god, it's the only version of consequentialism that actually makes sense. but it really highlights how the creation of ethics almost inherently results in the creation of government. this would probably be why deontology hasn't entirely died. people's desire to create government versus aversion to creating government is a big part of it.
- double consequentialism / An action that is morally right (Desired) is the one predicted to be objectively right; the action which is objectively right is the action which actually has the best consequences [5]
Ideologies or fields
- / formal logic
- / non-binary logic
- / truth values
- / Truthy values
- / Falsy values
- / Liberal-republicanism
- / Kantianism
- / critical theory