Why not? Needed only are appropriate parameters and measurement. What and how? Well, you start somewhere and see where and how it goes, improving and refining the process in progress.Can oppression be measured and compared? — coolazice
But what then? Does this lead to insights that might lead to reducing or eliminating oppression?better statisticians should do the leg work. — Benkei
To paraphrase Seneca:Treat your inferiors in the way in which you would like to be treated by your own superiors. And whenever it strikes you how much power you have over your slave, let it also strike you that your own master has just as much power over you. — Letters from a Stoic
Yeah and nah. I gave it a go with this challenge but so far no contrarian takers. A shorthand comes to mind now (sort of borrowed from Rawls): oppression is socioeconomic inequality forced by stronger communities on weaker communities that does not benefit the weaker communities.My question: is there any reliable and general way to assess such a claim? If so, are there 'degrees' of oppression? Can oppression be measured and compared? If so, how? If not, why not? (Another possible stance: it's possible to measure oppression, but not desirable/ethical to do so. Yet another stance: it's possible but not relevant to anything important.) If context matters, which contexts are important? Which can be excluded?
Or is it just ad hoc: "I know it when I see it..."? — coolazice
:100: :up:Complete oppression would mean no political or economic resources, which could be observed in slavery. The greater the access to political and economic resources, the more free someone is and therefore the less oppressed they are. To measure whether someone is oppressed or not, we should evaluate their resources. To be clear, by political resources, I mean things such as rights and protections. Economic resources could mean access to wealth, employment, and so forth. — Judaka
A shorthand comes to mind now (sort of borrowed from Rawls): oppression is socioeconomic inequality forced by stronger communities on weaker communities that does not benefit the weaker communities. — 180 Proof
Oppression is created primarily through the deprivation of resources, be they political or economic. Complete oppression would mean no political or economic resources, which could be observed in slavery. The greater the access to political and economic resources, the more free someone is and therefore the less oppressed they are. To measure whether someone is oppressed or not, we should evaluate their resources. To be clear, by political resources, I mean things such as rights and protections. Economic resources could mean access to wealth, employment, and so forth. In the case of the Palestinians, they are oppressed because Israel restricts their access to many fundamental political rights and protections, through their poverty and disproportionate lack of resources. Some people will talk about oppression in smaller environments than the state level, don't know how I feel about that. — Judaka
Why is oppression only about access to political and economic resources? What about the disabled? They get oppressed by people's preconceived attitudes and treatment. Nature oppresses the sick or those with various conditions. Societies place standards on jobs and behavior and that can oppress the disabled. Standards oppress. — BitconnectCarlos
Bitconnect, is this forum turning you? This sounds like something banno or streetlightx would say...
How do you define oppression? What does it mean to be "oppressed" by attitudes and treatment? And are you calling social convention a system of oppression? — Judaka
Murderers are historically looked down upon and treated as inferior, and surely their lives are far from ideal. So an oppressed category of people?Such as a value scale for statements like "have been looked down upon", "have been treated as inferior", etc. and then validate with "my life is close to ideal" to examine discriminant validity. — Benkei
oppression is socioeconomic inequality forced by stronger communities on weaker communities that does not benefit the weaker communities. — 180 Proof
But sure, there are aspects in which one can be subject to oppression more than others. Like if a person were black, Jewish and gay simultaneously, then such a person would likely be subject to more oppression than if that person were "only" gay, at certain periods and countries in human history. — Manuel
Complete oppression would mean no political or economic resources, which could be observed in slavery. — Judaka
If a person has a low sexual market value and nobody wants to date them, that's a form of oppression? Oppression requires a group with power to abuse that power to restrict the political and economic resources of others. — Judaka
Jobs and positions in society represent political and economic resources, so that fits nicely into my explanation of oppression. — Judaka
Some people will never change the way they view the world. Some may lessen the intensity of such feelings over time. — Manuel
Cui bono? the Romans said. Who suffers more in blood and humiliiation than whom – the weaker. Who effectively controls the lives and livelihoods of whom – the stronger. Isn't the slaveholder stronger than the slave? Aren't slaves in bondage weaker than the those running the slave-system?The obvious questions this raises: and how do you measure which is the strong and which the weak? — coolazice
Probably not "always"; when overwhelming strength meets (sniffs out) vulnerable weakness, human history teaches that oppression – military aggression (predation), conquest ("spoils of war" ~ captive/occupied populations), exploitation & domination – is far more likely to occur and re-occur than not.Is there always a strong and a weak?
Politics, like commerce, is nonzero-sum (i.e. negotiated, regulated, contractual trade); warfare & gangsterism, however, are zero-sum (i.e. organized crimes).Is political reality a zero-sum game?
Slave revolts sometime succeed. Former slaveholders have been known to find themselves in somebody else's chains sooner or later. Pendulums swing, slave-states rise and fall. Fuckers gorged on murder & misery forget in their sanguine stupors that 'the status quo' never lasts. Anicca, panta rhei, yinyang, bitches! Irie. :fire:Even if a strong and a weak, what happens when the roles swap over time - does oppression then change hands as well?
There is no "ultimate source" that I can see, cool; bondage takes two ... and opportunity ... and murderous violence ... and inhuman greed & power lust ... and "the banality of evil" of slave-system functionaries-beneficiaries ... and acquiescent victims ... and excruciatingly patient survivors ... for the stronger to attack the weaker for "profit & glory". Feral wolf packs will always attack sheep unguarded, or unguided, by disciplined sheepdogs.What is the ultimate source of this strong attacking the weak?
The obvious questions this raises: and how do you measure which is the strong and which the weak? — coolazice
There are even situations where people claim both parties are oppressed, but one is more oppressed than the other. — coolazice
They create pressure, fear, anxiety, psychological consequences. — BitconnectCarlos
Those who consider themselves powerless victims are often the most vicious and the least inclined to accept responsibility. If you don't believe me consider look into the story of Chaim Rumkowski who led the Lodz ghetto, and there were other Jewish community leaders like that. — BitconnectCarlos
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.