#Values and Ethics

[joyful-daddy]

Watch ""Empowering Kids: Strategies for Handling Peer Pressure and Making Informed Choices"" on YouTube

[rejectingrepublicans]

[ffcrazy15]

There's this way of doing female-ness in Christianity that I call "pastel flower journal Christianity." I've got nothing against pastel flower journals per se, but for some reason people believe it's the end all and be all of female spirituality, and I think it's a real disservice towards young Christian women.

One of these days I'd like to start a prayer-and-reading group or something for young women, but there would be no floral themes or over-focus on how "God thinks you're beautiful even if the world doesn't" (a true statement, but it's wayyyyy too often the focus in women's spiritual reading). Instead we would be reading:

Seneca's Letters from a Stoic

Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning

Sheed's A Map of Life

Portions of Pieper's book on leisure

Kreeft's Three Philosophies of Life

Guardini's The Lord (or something similar)

Therese's Story of a Soul

and some select portions of the Nicomachean Ethics.

(Also they're all getting the porn talk. I don't know why we give the porn talk to young men but not young women. There's this idea that women don't use porn and they only need the talk about "guarding their heart." Bullshit. There's porn on the YA shelves of Barnes and Nobles and before that there were bodice rippers. Young women need the porn talk too.)

Every young woman needs to be getting a basic grounding in virtue ethics, logic, natural law, scholastic philosophy and Biblical hermeneutics if they're going to get by in today's spiritual landscape. Enough faffery and emotionalism in young women's spiritual education! Give them real food to chew on, not pasty sentimentalism!

[iwatcheditbegin]

I know i’ve said it before. But this discourse about the ethics regarding taylor swift being a billionaire are so disingenuous. She doesn’t have a makeup line, clothing line, brand endorsements.

The bulk of her income is entirely from her own talent as a musician. She has not exploited anyone. She’s also not even close to being a cash billionaire when you look at the numbers it’s like half of that ( bc it’s hard to become a billionaire without shady shit) . Taylor is known to pay her employees well. By percentage what she gives away to charity and compensates her team with is unheard of. She gave 10% of her net worth away in bonuses to everyone who worked on her tour. That’s just what we know of.

I’m not even saying this as a fan, but you cannot look at someone like her and how she moves and compare that to other billionaires and oligarchs.

I’m all for wealthy people paying their fair share. I hate capitalism and the current system but I do think she’s a good example of doing the best to be ethical within the current system

[philosophybits]

Don’t glorify heroes, and people will not contend. Don’t treasure rare objects, and no one will steal. Don’t display what people desire, and their hearts will not be disturbed.

Laozi, Daodejing, Addiss & Lombardo tr. (Ch 3)

[bruciemilf]

Re: your most recent ask YESSS SAY UT LOUDER!!!!!!!! BRUCE LITERALLY STOOD BY HIS PARENTS MURDERER'S BEDSIDE WHILE HE DIED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO WOULD!!!!! BATMANS COMPASSION AND EMPATHY IS SUPPOSED TO DEFY BELIEF, ITS SUPPOSED TO BE BEYOND COMPREHENSION!!!!! HE IS THE LODESTONE FOR EVERY ROBIN, THEIR GROUNDING FORCE, THEIR MORAL TRUE NORTH!!!!!

Yeah!!! To me, Bruce is not moral creature. He’s a virtuous creature

[beccawise7]

Strong. Ethical. Men.

They handle a lot without saying a word. Unfortunately, a weaker society often does not value them.

In our current world, they are often criticized for being too bold or too strong.

However ...

Strong, independent women desire ethical men, who are unafraid to lead & also value a powerful woman.

The respect, adoration & relationship between a strong man & fierce woman is often reciprocal & highly valued.

Never be ashamed of valuing those who choose strength, wisdom & patience in a world that knows little of these things.

~beccawise7💜🖤

[thatboreddrake]

So, do y'all remember a while back I made a post about a Stormlight AU where Kaladin becomes an Edgedancer instead of a Windrunner? So that idea was bouncing around in my head, and @catcas22 and I wanted to put down some bullet points of how this would actually change the story:

Kaladin goes off to study as a surgeon in Kharbranth before Amaram comes recruiting

Roshone drafts Tien, but Lirin elects not to send word to Kaladin, as he fears that Kaladin would quit his training and return if he knew

Kaladin gains a reputation as one of the more promising surgeons in Kharbranth

Eventually, one of his patients gets transferred to Taravingian's secret Diagram project (so they can drain their blood for a Death Rattle)

Kaladin, naturally, wants to stay with them and make sure they recover

He's told to "forget about them and move on to the next patient"

He can't accept that, so he starts digging into where the patients are being transferred to (with the help of an unusually talkative spren)

He is interrupted from his investigations by a request to help heal an important foreign dignitary from a strange form of poison

His path intersects with Jasnah and Shallan while he helps Shallan recover from Kabsal's attempted assassination

Over the course of her recovery, Kaladin confides in Jasnah his worries about Taravingian, and enlists the two of them in helping him get to the bottom of it

The three of them use Jasnah's Soulcasting to break into the underground facility

Kaladin freezes when he realizes what Taravingian has been doing and desperately starts trying to heal the people who are having their blood drawn

Kaladin swears his Second Ideal in attempting to escape Kharbranth with the captives

Kaladin, Jasnah, and Shallan depart for the Shattered Plains with as many of the captives as their ship can carry

Meanwhile, in northern Alethkar:

Tien breaks in battle and tries to run away using Lightweaving (Sanderson has confirmed that Tien was some level of Lightweaver)

Tien is captured, then sold into slavery on the Shattered Plains because Amaram decides he's too much trouble

Without Kaladin there to save him, Amaram is killed by nascent Skybreaker Helaran

Helaran gets word that the Surgebinder in Amaram's army is still at large, and heads for the Shattered Plains

Now, on the Shattered Plains:

Tien ends up in the Bridge Crews on Bridge Four (because you gotta have Bridge Four)

While returning from the greatshell hunt, Bridge Four is sent to help the Kholins return to camp

Adolin strikes up a conversation with Tien, as he reminds him of Renarin in a way

Moash arrives on the bridge crews and decides he's going to organize the crews so that they can have a chance at escaping slavery

Adolin notices that an oddly intelligent windspren with a mischievous streak has begun following him around

His conversation with Tien and the rest of Bridge Four has him realize just how bad the situation is under Sadeas for the bridgemen

While considering what to do, he discovers that Tien died on one of the bridge runs

At the urging of his windspren friend, Adolin defies Dalinar's wishes and takes up dueling again, seeking to gain a chance to challenge Sadeas for the freedom of the Bridge Crews

Dalinar is furious and strips Adolin of Plate and Blade, effectively benching him for the rest of the book

When Dalinar leaves for the Tower with Sadeas, he leaves Adolin behind

Adolin refuses to stand by and takes his personal guards to follow after Dalinar, recruiting an off-duty Bridge Four to help him get there

Moash agrees, as he figures that eluding one lighteyes would be far easier than escaping the whole army

Adolin encounters Sadeas's forces on their way back and orders a double-time march to try and save the Kholinar forces if he can

He arrives at the Tower in time to see the Kholinar forces routed and swears the Second Ideal of the Windrunners in a desperate bid to save his army and his father

Moash rethinks his plan after seeing a lighteyes leap, essentially unarmed, across a canyon to try and save his men

Bridge Four establishes an escape route, but the Kholinar forces are decimated by the Parshendi

Adolin fails to find his father, who has been captured and brought back to Narak by Eshonai

Suddenly finding himself to be highprince of Kholinar, Adolin surrenders his Shardblade, which has begun to scream whenever he touches it, in exchange for the bridge crews's freedom

And that's everything that changes for the Way of Kings! I'll go more into Words of Radiance/Oathbringer later, but that's what I have for now!

[republicansaretheproblem]

“Because of ethical restraints, it is extremely rare for a senior government official, let alone a sitting president, to endorse a consumer product so explicitly. In 2017, when then-Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway told Americans to buy from Ivanka Trump’s clothing line, she received a warning from a government ethics office and promised never to do it again.

By reviewing the Teslas in public before cameras, Trump ensured that his purchase would get wide attention. Dan Scavino, a White House deputy chief of staff, livestreamed the event on X, the social media app owned by Musk.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the application of ethics rules.”

Lawless sack of s—t!

[recsspecs]

Might not shoot a person but kill an ant; is the value of life determined by the size of the body or human-centric understandings of social contributions or responsibilities?

[rejectingrepublicans]

[etz-ashashiyot]

So what’s the modern interpretation of the laws about keeping slaves? I’ve heard that said laws where a lot more kind to slaves then the surrounding nations but, like, it’s still slavery?

Hi anon,

With Pesach coming up, I'm sure that this question is on a lot of people's minds. It's a good question and many rabbanim throughout history have attempted to tackle it. Especially today, with slavery being seen as a moral anathema in most societies (obviously this despite the fact that unfortunately slavery is still a very real human rights crisis all over the world), addressing the parts of the Torah that on the surface seem to condone it becomes a moral imperative.

It's worth noting that the Jewish world overall condemns slavery. In my research for this question, I came across zero modern sources arguing that slavery is totally fine. I'm sure that if you dug deep enough there's some fringe wacko somewhere arguing this, but every group has its batshit fringe.

Here are some sources across the political and religious observance spectrum that explain it better than I could:

Chabad (this article is written by Rabbi Tzvi Freeman, a wonderful rabbi whose words I have learned deeply over the years. He is one of my favorite rabbis despite not seeing eye to eye with a lot of the Chabad movement)

Conservative (to be clear: this is my movement; it's not actually politically conservative in most shuls, just poorly named. We desperately need to bully them into calling themselves Masorti Olami like the rest of the world. It's [essentially] a liberal traditional egalitarian movement.)

Conservative pt. 2 (different rabbi's take)

Reform (note that this is from the Haberman Institute, which was founded by a Reform rabbi. Link is to a YouTube recording of a recent lecture on the topic.)

Chareidi (this rabbi is an official rabbi of the Western Wall in Israel, so in a word, very frum)

Modern Orthodox

I want to highlight this last one, because it is written by the Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chovevei, which is a progressive Modern Orthodox rabbinical school. They work very hard to read Torah through an authentically Orthodox lens while also maintaining deeply humanist values. As someone who walks a similar (if not identical) balancing act, this particular drash (sermon) spoke very deeply to me, and so I'm reposting it in its entirety**

[Edit: tumblr.hell seems real intent on not letting me do this in my original answer, so I will repost it in the reblogs. Please reblog that version if you're going to. Thanks!]

Something you will probably notice as you work your way through these sources, you'll note that there are substantially more traditional leaning responses. This is because of a major divide in how the different movements view Torah, especially as it pertains to changing ethics over time and modernity. I'm oversimplifying for space, but the differences are as follows:

The liberal movements (Reform, Renewal, Reconstructionist, etc.) view halacha as non-binding and the Torah as a human document that is, nevertheless, a sacred document. I've seen it described as the spiritual diary of our people throughout history. Others view it as divinely inspired, but still essentially and indelibly human.

The Orthodox and other traditional movements view halacha as binding and Torah as the direct word of G-d given to the Jewish people through Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses) on Mt. Sinai. (Or, at a minimum, as a divinely inspired text written and compiled by people that still represents the word of G-d. This latter view is mostly limited to the Conservative and Modern Orthodox movements.)

Because of these differences, the liberal movements are able to address most of these problematic passages by situating them in their proper historical context. It is only the Orthodox and traditional movements that must fully reckon with the texts as they are, and seek to understand how they speak to us in a contemporary context.

As for me? I'm part of a narrow band of traditional egalitarian progressive Jews that really ride that line between viewing halacha as binding and the Torah as divinely given, despite recognizing the human component of its authorship - more a partnership in its creation than either fully human invention or divine fiat. That said, I am personally less interested in who wrote it literally speaking and much more interested in the question of: How can we read Torah using the divinely given process of traditional Torah scholarship while applying deeply humanist values?

Yeshivat Chovevei does a really excellent job of approaching Torah scholarship this way, as does Hadar. Therefore, I'm not surprised that this article captures something I have struggled to articulate: an authentically orthodox argument for change.

[letterful]

as it should ❤️

[philosophybits]

Oppression tries to defend itself by its utility. But we have seen that it is one of the lies of the serious mind to attempt to give the word “useful” an absolute meaning; nothing is useful if it is not useful to man; nothing is useful to man if the latter is not in a position to define his own ends and values, if he is not free. Doubtless an oppressive regime can achieve constructions which will serve man: they will serve him only from the day that he is free to use them; as long as the reign of the oppressor lasts, none of the benefits of oppression is a real benefit. Neither in the past nor in the future can one prefer a thing to Man, who alone can establish the reason for all things.

Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity

[hussyknee]

I'm really not a villain enjoyer. I love anti-heroes and anti-villains. But I can't see fictional evil separate from real evil. As in not that enjoying dark fiction means you condone it, but that all fiction holds up some kind of mirror to the world as it is. Killing innocent people doesn't make you an iconic lesbian girlboss it just makes you part of the mundane and stultifying black rot of the universe.

"But characters struggling with honour and goodness and the egoism of being good are so boring." Cool well some of us actually struggle with that stuff on the daily because being a good person is complicated and harder than being an edgelord.

Sure you can use fiction to explore the darkness of human nature and learn empathy, but the world doesn't actually suffer from a deficit of empathy for powerful and privileged people who do heinous stuff. You could literally kill a thousand babies in broad daylight and they'll find a way to blame your childhood trauma for it as long as you're white, cisgender, abled and attractive, and you'll be their poor little meow meow by the end of the week. Don't act like you're advocating for Quasimodo when you're just making Elon Musk hot, smart and gay.

[annabelle--cane]

Wasn’t Jon giving up control over himself and his actions to a ‘god’ his entire fucking problem. I.e, not taking ~~accountability~~. Why the fuck you would think that he would benefit from a “”program“” that requires him to do that with a different one in the first place is beyond me.

yes that's the joke. the joke is that jon has a massive complex around seizing and ceding control where he flips flops back and forth between feeling like he's powerless and desperately trying to prove that he's not powerless by making the first active choice available to him, and so trying to follow a program where the literal first step is "accept that you have no control" would be Bad for him no matter where he was on his "I'm powerless/I'm uniquely culpable" rotation.

I think you're taking away the idea that that was a pro twelve step post? it's not, I'm not saying that this is a Good Thing that jon would simply be too bad at self-care to accept, the point is that twelve step programs are super super not suited for everyone even though they're usually the first and most easily accessible port of call for addiction support groups. the framing of "I keep wanting to say this thing" is mostly just a set up for the rest of the joke.