|
Amaros -> RE: Bush administration collars maker fetish films (9/9/2006 5:04:04 PM)
|
To be sure there is a distinction between a given institution and one who subscribes to said institutions implicit and explicit value matrix: morality, mores, ethics, etc.
Such institutions are in fact social groups established by consensus in order to promote or discourage certain ideas, behavior patterns, etc., and they are both initiatied and influenced by the individuals who concieve, represent, or embody the principles of the given institution, whether it be government, science, religion, etc.
Third, people often behave differently in groups than as individuals: institutions typically promote social controls that consist largely of edicts and interdicts - edicts promote certain behaviors and often operate as informal, implicit permissions - it's "all right to act this way", for example discriminate against Jew's, homosexuals, etc., which are often encountered on a more widespread level of common culture, but may be given impetus by the institutions that influence that culture.
If the permissions are broad enough, and defensive centripetalization invoked, the result can be genocide.
i.e., individual Christians may or may not be murderous by nature, but under mob conditions, and centripetalized according to basic primate instinctual responses to threats to group fitness, real or imagined, have been known to act genocidally and/or conspire to unjustly deprive other members of their own or another culture of basic human rights.
The same can be said for a number of other institutions historically - however: once such a precedent has been set, it is only a natural act of self preservation to expect similar behavior under similar conditions from these institutions, or individuals subscribing to these institutions, and their value matricies as permissions for this behavior have been previously explicitly established by said institution, and in most cases, have never been explicitly or formally repealed.
Good enough?
|
|
|
|
