The Modern Dilemma - The Sophistry of Process vs Socratic Inquiry

[Kirkhill]

The rot that could bring Western civilisation down began with these ancient Greek teachers

In the battle between sophistry and the pursuit of truth, the former is clearly winning

www.telegraph.co.uk

"the Sophists were more interested in teaching their pupils how to “win” arguments and become famous than in cultivating wisdom.

'Their services were sold to young noblemen and politicians who wanted to “persuade” their citizens. An orator, they thought, “does not need to know what is really just”, nor what is “really good or noble”. Persuasion, on their account, “comes from what seems to be true, not from the truth.”"

....

"This was not, for Socrates, merely a rival approach to truth. It was more serious than that. What was at stake in Athens was the question of whether public life ought to be anchored to anything real or whether it would dissolve into a competition of performances.

"Western civilisation is the inheritor of the Socratic tradition which insists that reality is more important than appearances."

....

Performace art. Virtue signalling. Sophistry.

The opposite of the enlightenment sought by David Hume and Adam Smith.

We would now rather be seen to bend the knee to settled truths than engage in disputatious science.

 

[Infanteer]

Yeah, but we don't teach Western Civilization and its texts anymore because its racist.

 

[FJAG]

This brings up an older Monk Debate from 2018. The resolution was: "Be it resolved that what you call political correctness, I call progress."

The fun part was that Stephen Fry argued against the resolution at the side of his partner Jorden Petersen. Ignore the initial long-winded bumph and go to the 30 minute mark where Stephen takes six minutes to explain why he would argue a position which most would think that he'd stand on the other side of.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Mods feel free to move if this is not in the right place.

Race-Based Sentencing Gains Ground in Canada’s Courts


Lady Justice has been depicted as blindfolded for centuries—an implicit promise not to judge a person by immutable factors such as skin colour. In Canada, that may be changing, as courts increasingly consider a defendant’s race when determining punishment.

Rulings of recent years highlight the trend: A B.C. judge earlier this year ruled that a black man who stabbed his girlfriend to death will become eligible for parole in 12 years in part because of “systemic anti-Black racism.” A man of Filipino heritage convicted of a hit-and-run in Ontario received a conditional sentence in 2024 in part because of reports of racism, including classmates making “slanted-eye” gestures at him as a child. And a hashish trafficker in Quebec had his sentence cut by a third last year, at least partly because he descended from slaves.

This shift reflects changes brought in by the Trudeau government, and the rapid spread in Canada of Impact of Race and Culture Assessments (IRCAs)—reports that detail how factors such as race and social marginalization may have shaped an offender’s life. Backed by millions of dollars in federal funding since 2021, their growing use is prompting debate over whether they promote fairness in sentencing or undermine the principle of equal treatment under the law......more>

Race-Based Sentencing Gains Ground in Canada’s Courts

www.theepochtimes.com