The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Politics and other such topical creams.
eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23579
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: deep in your Id

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by eumaas »

Marky Dread wrote:1. The damages are attributed to all parties by one mans lack of loyalty. Everybody will suffer as a result of the protaganists being high profile the media will see that.

2.As for John Terry's cheating on his wife and betraying his friend both acts are one and the same as he had made a commitment of sorts to both. Is John Terry's wife less important than his friendship with Wayne Bridge the answer is no. He betrayed both.

Do people who don't know these celebrities have the right to judge them and call them scum when they act poorly. Yes I believe they do as they are privilledged to be in their positions. Do we expect too much from them afterall they are only human. Treat them the same as you would anyone else in life afterall you are only human too.
Thank you so much! This is all very helpful.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23579
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: deep in your Id

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by eumaas »

"Privileged" is a good word. Everyone involved is a wealthy, high profile person. It's different to the butcher having an affair in that sense as the degree of scrutiny can magnify the effects of an action.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

101Walterton
User avatar
The Best
Posts: 21973
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by 101Walterton »

eumaas wrote:
Marky Dread wrote:
eumaas wrote:Incidentally, Marky, while you're here--could you answer the survey questions in the original topic?
Um which one? The one about Man Utd using underage boys they stole from the Vatican....it's all true. :shifty:
I was just kidding about that! Seriously. I don't think Man U has any pedophiles.

I meant these:
1. To whom do you think the most moral harm was committed? Bridge or Terry's wife? And what's the reasoning behind your choice?

2. From John Terry's position as a moral agent, which aspect of his act disfigured his character more: cheating on his wife or betraying his friend? Which moral commitment took priority? What's the reasoning behind your choice?
What I saw in the thread: people making moral judgments, and using the word "scum" even. I'm not coming down on either side of the issue. I just want to see the moral reasoning behind that particular judgment. And if you consider it inappropriate to talk about these people in particular, then address a hypothetical similar situation. I'm seeking to understand how people reason morally. All of this is fairly helpful both to 1. how I think about ethics in an academic way, and 2. trying to understand right and wrong in a more practical sense as it relates to my own decisions. So I think it's both a deep topic and a useful one.
It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 58887
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Marky Dread »

eumaas wrote:"Privileged" is a good word. Everyone involved is a wealthy, high profile person. It's different to the butcher having an affair in that sense as the degree of scrutiny can magnify the effects of an action.
This is exactly right had John Terry been your local butcher sadly no one would care although his crime would amount to the same.

"I ain't interested in the butchers leavings" Gangs of New York quote.
Image

Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty


We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.

"Without the common people you're nothing"

Nos Sumus Una Familia

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23579
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: deep in your Id

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by eumaas »

101Walterton wrote:It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.
My apologies if I misread it, but I included John Terry as part of the scum since you applied the word to his whole family as it were. I just saw it as an opportunity to pursue a discussion germane to something that interests me and affects my life--ethics/moral philosophy. I'm always trying to better myself (I know, progress is fucking slow, isn't it? Sometimes I think I'm headed backwards!) and part of that is studying moral reasoning, so thus the thread. Thanks for all your participation and comments! You've been helpful.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

101Walterton
User avatar
The Best
Posts: 21973
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by 101Walterton »

eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.
My apologies if I misread it, but I included John Terry as part of the scum since you applied the word to his whole family as it were. I just saw it as an opportunity to pursue a discussion germane to something that interests me and affects my life--ethics/moral philosophy. I'm always trying to better myself (I know, progress is fucking slow, isn't it? Sometimes I think I'm headed backwards!) and part of that is studying moral reasoning, so thus the thread. Thanks for all your participation and comments! You've been helpful.
I did mean to include him yes, his documented record of anti-social behaviour affords him part of the compliment. One word of advise, if your mate is English don't go behind his back ;)

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23579
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: deep in your Id

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by eumaas »

101Walterton wrote:
eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.
My apologies if I misread it, but I included John Terry as part of the scum since you applied the word to his whole family as it were. I just saw it as an opportunity to pursue a discussion germane to something that interests me and affects my life--ethics/moral philosophy. I'm always trying to better myself (I know, progress is fucking slow, isn't it? Sometimes I think I'm headed backwards!) and part of that is studying moral reasoning, so thus the thread. Thanks for all your participation and comments! You've been helpful.
I did mean to include him yes, his documented record of anti-social behaviour affords him part of the compliment. One word of advise, if your mate is English don't go behind his back ;)
Sure.

I did some informal polling among friends, and it seems to be more of an English rule of behavior than an American (and perhaps Canadian) one, incidentally. That's not a cultural difference I would expect--not that I know anything in particular about sexual mores, but just that I wasn't aware there'd be something that markedly different.
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 58887
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Marky Dread »

eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:
eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.
My apologies if I misread it, but I included John Terry as part of the scum since you applied the word to his whole family as it were. I just saw it as an opportunity to pursue a discussion germane to something that interests me and affects my life--ethics/moral philosophy. I'm always trying to better myself (I know, progress is fucking slow, isn't it? Sometimes I think I'm headed backwards!) and part of that is studying moral reasoning, so thus the thread. Thanks for all your participation and comments! You've been helpful.
I did mean to include him yes, his documented record of anti-social behaviour affords him part of the compliment. One word of advise, if your mate is English don't go behind his back ;)
Sure.

I did some informal polling among friends, and it seems to be more of an English rule of behavior than an American (and perhaps Canadian) one, incidentally. That's not a cultural difference I would expect--not that I know anything in particular about sexual mores, but just that I wasn't aware there'd be something that markedly different.
It just isn't cricket.
Image

Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty


We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.

"Without the common people you're nothing"

Nos Sumus Una Familia

101Walterton
User avatar
The Best
Posts: 21973
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by 101Walterton »

eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:
eumaas wrote:
101Walterton wrote:It was I that used the word scum however you will note I did not use the word to describe Terry as a result of the incident. What I said was " Lets face it the Terry family are all scum". Fair comment considering his dad is a drug dealer, his mum is a shoplifter and Terry himself has a long long history of anti social and dishonest behaviour however as a Chelsea fan you would know that.
My apologies if I misread it, but I included John Terry as part of the scum since you applied the word to his whole family as it were. I just saw it as an opportunity to pursue a discussion germane to something that interests me and affects my life--ethics/moral philosophy. I'm always trying to better myself (I know, progress is fucking slow, isn't it? Sometimes I think I'm headed backwards!) and part of that is studying moral reasoning, so thus the thread. Thanks for all your participation and comments! You've been helpful.
I did mean to include him yes, his documented record of anti-social behaviour affords him part of the compliment. One word of advise, if your mate is English don't go behind his back ;)
Sure.

I did some informal polling among friends, and it seems to be more of an English rule of behavior than an American (and perhaps Canadian) one, incidentally. That's not a cultural difference I would expect--not that I know anything in particular about sexual mores, but just that I wasn't aware there'd be something that markedly different.
To be quite honest I'm a little gobsmacked myself. I considered it was possibly an age/ generation difference (on here) but that wouldn't explain Terry Bridgate.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Flex »

101Walterton wrote:To be quite honest I'm a little gobsmacked myself. I considered it was possibly an age/ generation difference (on here) but that wouldn't explain Terry Bridgate.
I don't know if I would frame it as United States versus British culture per se, but I do think it probably has to do with cultural differences between groups. Probably age and nationality are contributing factors, but I'd hesitate to view it through specifically one lense or the other.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Wolter
User avatar
Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Albert Brooks
Posts: 55432
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Wolter »

Flex wrote:
101Walterton wrote:To be quite honest I'm a little gobsmacked myself. I considered it was possibly an age/ generation difference (on here) but that wouldn't explain Terry Bridgate.
I don't know if I would frame it as United States versus British culture per se, but I do think it probably has to do with cultural differences between groups. Probably age and nationality are contributing factors, but I'd hesitate to view it through specifically one lense or the other.
I know plenty of Americans that would agree with the Brits on this, actually. Like the guy whose girlfriend I stole. What a loser he was. :shifty:
”INDER LOCK THE THE KISS THREAD IVE REALISED IM A PRZE IDOOT” - Thomas Jefferson

"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Flex »

Wolter wrote:I know plenty of Americans that would agree with the Brits on this, actually. Like the guy whose girlfriend I stole. What a loser he was. :shifty:
Right. I think this "lad culture," as it's apparently called in some quarters, is pretty prevalent in both countries and pretty much around the world.

It's usually good to keep in mind that the core of American/Canadian posters who post in The Dictator are, while not unique, probably in the minority position on a lot of issues.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

101Walterton
User avatar
The Best
Posts: 21973
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by 101Walterton »

Flex wrote:
Wolter wrote:I know plenty of Americans that would agree with the Brits on this, actually. Like the guy whose girlfriend I stole. What a loser he was. :shifty:
Right. I think this "lad culture," as it's apparently called in some quarters, is pretty prevalent in both countries and pretty much around the world.

It's usually good to keep in mind that the core of American/Canadian posters who post in The Dictator are, while not unique, probably in the minority position on a lot of issues.
This is nothing at all to do with "lad culture", wrong label entirely.

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by Flex »

101Walterton wrote:This is nothing at all to do with "lad culture", wrong label entirely.
Fair enough. That was a label suggested to me by someone else, I apologize if it was inaccurate. since it is inaccurate, maybe you can explain why a friend is obligated to condition their behavior based on the belief another friend has that they're entitled to some say over the independent agency of another person. Thanks in advance!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

101Walterton
User avatar
The Best
Posts: 21973
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific

Re: The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

Post by 101Walterton »

'Lad culture (also Laddish culture and Laddism) is a subculture commonly associated with Britpop music of the 1990s.

It also involves a liking for alcoholic beverages (especially lager), football, fast cars and men's magazines'


Please don't confuse this issue with some borish, male chauvanistic mentality. This isn't about Jocks locker room antics or Frat House unity (trying to think of what a US comparison to Lad Culture would be).

"based on the belief another friend has that they're entitled to some say over the independent agency of another person". This is where you still don't get the point.

Post Reply