Viewing 100+ year old events through a modern morality lens

Yeah.
Most academics agree.

>>3254655
What will it take for normies to understand that slavery was a fact of life all over the world up until very recently?

>>3254655
Yes.

>>3254668
They need to realize how far we've come in a short short time.

>>3254655
well I think you're stupid why didn't the first british king legalize gay weed instead of going to wars and stuff

>>3254668
You're asking if normies will ever realize that history is not simple good and bad dichotomy and stop using it to score Facebook points? Never.

>>3254724
>Facebook points
I feel like I did a great service to myself by never signing up for any social networks outside of YouTube.

>>3254709
>Gay weed.
I laffed.

>>3254668
Just compare it with abortion, since it's an atrocity they have well integrated as "normal" in everyday's life
Tell them that slavers reasoned the same way they do with fetus (when trying hard to imply they're no human beings) with nigger to avoid feeling guilty

>>3254668
There's a difference between societies with slaves and societies based on slavery.

Morality is nonexistent.

>>3254826
Name a single society based on slavery

>>3254860
Roman Empire
Brazil, Caribbean until the mid-late 19th century
Southern United States

>>3254814
Actually not a bad argument

>>3254837
Wubbablubadubdub amirite? What's your reddit username I mod r/rickandmorty

File: spooked.jpg (62KB, 720x616px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 720x616px

>>3254998

>>3254968
>Southern United States
>Southern
>implying North didn't just quit slavery earlier than the South and scrub history clean of the central role slave labor played in the establishment and sustenance of the earliest Northern colonies for quite some time

>>3254968
>Roman Empire
Literally what? The only thing that changed between the Roman Republic and Roman Empire was the political center. Rome had always been a society with slaves. It's existence was never solely based on the institution.

>>3254668
These are the same shits that would have a panic attack if you told them that adultery was crime in which punishment was actually enforced the US up until very recently.

>>3254837
Wrong, morality is an objective and enforced mandate through the laws of whatever country you find yourself in. The importance of social contracts is bitch tier junior high-school shit you should have learned about already.

If you have a problem with that, shoot yourself so some poor EMT can "subjectively" try to save your life.

>>3255014
>implying it doesn't

ISHYGDDT

>>3254655
It's okay, in the vast majority of cases it applies to western(white) peoples only.

>>3254682
Homosexuality was only made legal about 50 years ago in my country and even conservaties are acting like toierance of LGBT people is a value we've always believed in.

Morality a spook

>>3255916
Well, assuming the average age of your politicians is the same as in my country's (51), they've always lived in a nation were homosexuality has been tolerated.

>>3254655
Who does this anyway?
Listening to such inanities only give them credit and publicity.

>>3256111
Various events of the past can be viewed as morally evil. But morality of the day is created by the people of the times.

Recognizing that people are a product of their times doesn't mean they're exempted from moral judgement.

>>3256316
Why does modern morality matter when viewing the past?

>>3256316
Moral judgement of their time, yes. Judging LouisXIV by our moral standard is a nonsense.

There's no real logic to this though because why should time matter?

It's not like there's 1 objective measure of morality we somehow have today that they didn't have back then, there's still different concepts of morality today in different cultures so by the same logic we cannot judge them either

Should I not judge racists for being racist? What if they grew up in a culture where being racist is normal?

Should I not judge ISIS? They think they're doing the right thing

>>3256406
Theres no problem judging modern events and people through modern morality though friend. This is about viewing history through modern morality.

>>3256413
There is no single "modern morality" though, ISIS doesn't believe the same shit you do

So if these people of the past were magically transported to the present day we can suddenly judge them? But we couldn't before?

>>3256419
>magically teleporting people through time
????
Does ISIS not use their modern morality to judge the past when they destroy historical monuments?

>>3254668
Hell in some parts of the world it's still going on like nobody ever banned it.
(Looking at you, Qatar)

Viewing past events in general through a moral lens is moronic. One's desire for the present should be to build the best world possible, not address the sins of the past.

>>3254668
Being "neutral" about cruelty is the same as condoning it. Humanity *has* progressed morally and will likely continue to do so. I invite the future to judge us just as harshly.

Funny how conservatard slavery apologists only accept moral relativism temporally. Talk to most of these people about modern Saudi Arabia and they'll explode at how relativism is absurd.

>>3256623
>1400 year old quran
>"""""modern"""""

>>3256714
Does it not influence their morality in modern times? Do their leaders not interpret it to affect said morality?

>>3255544
You know as well as I know that they're completely useless to worship if you want to have a big picture understanding, they're fine to temporarily follow for the sake of pure convenience but anything else is basically self harm.

>>3256718
They do, but the source is not modern, that's why they're reactionaries.

>>3256775
You can make the same argument for any religious dictation of morality desu