this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
405 points (91.8% liked)

Memes

45734 readers
1135 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 22 points 4 months ago (59 children)

Thanks for providing an example of an opposite.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 4 points 4 months ago (58 children)

how is that an opposite?

an opposite would be something everybody thinks is a bad idea until you name it

unless you're saying people disagree with the concepts and goals of eugenics until you say "but that's just eugenics" at which point they're fully on board?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 13 points 4 months ago (57 children)

Most people think that Eugenics are a bad idea even if you don't name it, which is the opposite of people actually agreeing with the ideas behind Marxism without knowing its Marxism.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

but that's not what the comment said?

Lots of people promote eugenics

people sometimes end up accidentally talking themselves into eugenics and promoting eugenics before somebody points out that they're talking about eugenics

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

But it is what the comment said. It's saying that people promote eugenics without realizing it. They do so by talking about the mechanics of eugenics without naming them.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i'm baffled as to what's going on here

  • if you describe the mechanics of eugenics, people like the idea
  • if you label the mechanics of eugenics as eugenics, people do not like the idea

versus

  • if you describe the mechanics of marxism, people like the idea
  • if you label the mechanics of marxism as marxism, people do not like the idea
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Your confusion comes from the fact that you assume most people like the mechanics of eugenics. If that's the sort of crowd you hang out with, then you may be associating with fascists.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

but that's literally what the comment's saying? and you're saying "that's an example of the opposite?

e.g., there's a pretty good argument that pre-natal screening is a form of eugenics

if you describe the mechanics of pre-natal screening to somebody, i suspect most would be in support of that, but wouldn't be if you described it using the term "eugenics"

like, if you were to notice that completing tertiary education makes it more difficult for people to have children, and you decided to create some form of government aid to offset that, then oopsie daisy you just did a eugenics, but you could absolutely package that idea in a way that most people would instinctively go "yeah that sounds okay"

also to preempt pls nobody do the intellectually dishonest thing of pretending me following this line of argument means im in love with eugenics and am here to argue for more eugenics or that i just dont think eugenics is such a bad thing after all thnk u

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

This is all just semantics and how the word 'opposite' can be applied in different ways. I wouldn't spend too much time on this.

[–] thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

But but there's a person on the internet that might be wrong! *shakes fist at sky*

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

if you want to use the sentiment expressed in this post as an argument for marxism being good, which seems pretty transparent in this case, then that same sentiment being used to justify eugenics isn't a good thing for said argument

i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago (35 children)

Except that doesn't follow logically, but it's pretty clear that you're determined to work hard not to understand that.

load more comments (35 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound

The problem is that your argument relies on the idea that "most people support eugenics until you say what it actually is," which is false in my experience while the post is correct.

[–] polonius-rex@kbin.run 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i've given two examples where i think the average person would come down on the side of "let's do some eugenics" until being told "haha you just agreed to do some eugenics"

the problem with the post is that if you boil it down, it becomes "things that sound good on the surface are automatically good", which doesn't hold

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (9 children)

It doesn't say they are automatically good, just that people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism even if the ideas are sound and good.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago

Actually I think I get what you're saying now and I think you have a point. I am not sure the two can be directly compared that way, though. There are different reasons for why people think each is bad once they hear the name and I don't think the meme is actually saying that this is an argument for or against anything. Just a funny observation.

load more comments (55 replies)
load more comments (55 replies)
load more comments (55 replies)