# Smapti is Pitted **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 21, 2014, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907 "2014-05-21T08:14:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 63
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1241 "2014-12-15T18:09:54Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If you get to claim a “higher moral purpose” as justification for breaking the law, then so do sociopaths, “broken people”, and those with a “warped” or “missing” sense of justice. You just don’t get it. Sure, anyone can make such a claim. And if the claim is outside the norm of human experience, it can be justly disregarded. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1242 "2014-12-15T18:11:11Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If you get to claim a “higher moral purpose” as justification for breaking the law, then so do sociopaths, “broken people”, and those with a “warped” or “missing” sense of justice. You just don’t get it. Yet another fundamental error (and I thought you’d already gone through the whole set!) in what passes for your “argument” – conflating a moral consensus with an individual idiosyncrasy. One example of the former: [“Over 700 Million People Taking Steps to Avoid NSA Surveillance”](https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/12/over_700_millio.html). The distinction from the latter (which boils down to “nut does nutty thing”) is obvious. > [@Fuji](#): > > Sure, anyone can make such a claim. And if the claim is outside the norm of human experience, it can be justly disregarded. Curses, ninja’d again… ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1243 "2014-12-15T18:11:39Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If there were such a thing as an innate sense of justice, there would be no need for law or government, because people would not do things to each other that necessitated the evolution of those concepts. One’s innate sense of justice is often at odds with another’s. In fact, genocide, revenge killings and wars are often the results of “innate sense of justice.” ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1244 "2014-12-15T18:12:05Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > I’ve answered that. Society as whole gets to decide and has done a good job so far distinguishing between the immoral actions (driving a truck full of explosives) and the moral ones (marches on Washington, protests at white only establishments). And that’s why the latter is legal and the former is not. If society believes that certain kinds of protests are acceptable, then it won’t make laws against them. The existence of laws against certain kinds of protest proves that society does _not_ find those kinds of protest acceptable. And that’s where your model falls apart, because you believe that your own personal notions of what’s right and wrong trump the democratic process. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1245 "2014-12-15T18:12:45Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Ah, well. You _said_ that that’s what I believe, so it _must_ be true. Shame on me for trusting my lying brain instead of believing you when you told me what my beliefs are. You said the only way disrupting traffic was not terrorism was if they did so “peacefully and non-disruptively”: > [@Smapti](#): > > They’re not terrorists if they’re doing so peacefully and non-disruptively and have acquired any appropriate permits. Aside from not making grammatical sense, this doesn’t apply to any of the links I cited (meaning that you’re saying they are terrorists), and doesn’t include any discussion of demands. You’re constantly changing your story and/or lying. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1246 "2014-12-15T18:13:07Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > Sure, anyone can make such a claim. And if the claim is outside the norm of human experience, it can be justly disregarded. And once upon a time, “people should not be allowed to own other people” was “outside the norm of human experience”. Should it have been justly disregarded? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1247 "2014-12-15T18:14:34Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And that’s why the latter is legal and the former is not. If society believes that certain kinds of protests are acceptable, then it won’t make laws against them. The existence of laws against certain kinds of protest proves that society does _not_ find those kinds of protest acceptable. And that’s where your model falls apart, because you believe that your own personal notions of what’s right and wrong trump the democratic process. Most of the current protests are legal – in fact, most of the current protests are ‘more legal’ than the protests during the Civil Rights movements, which were more frequently confronted by serious violence by police and authorities. By the Smapti measure, this means that the Civil Rights protests were closer to terrorism than the current protests. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1248 "2014-12-15T18:14:39Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Aside from not making grammatical sense, this doesn’t apply to any of the links I cited (meaning that you’re saying they are terrorists), and doesn’t include any discussion of demands… Except that you explicitly cite a case where one of the actors intended to prevent the Kentucky Derby from taking place unless a fair housing act was passed. You’re constantly changing your story and/or lying. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1249 "2014-12-15T18:15:01Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And that’s why the latter is legal and the former is not. If society believes that certain kinds of protests are acceptable, then it won’t make laws against them. The existence of laws against certain kinds of protest proves that society does _not_ find those kinds of protest acceptable. And that’s where your model falls apart, because you believe that your own personal notions of what’s right and wrong trump the democratic process. Not true. If the government is who you are protesting against, you can’t always trust they will give you the venue to do thta protest. You think China and North Korea are thinking up ways to allow lawful protest? Even here in the United States lawful protest is met with unlawful demand by law enforcement to disperse or to have those rights curtailed. It is an unjust request that deserves to be protested against. We have many opportunities for just protest that are used. But when the government agencies ARE the problem, the often the only avenue left is what is moral if unlawful. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1250 "2014-12-15T18:15:14Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > You’re constantly changing your story and/or lying. He’s also conveniently avoided acknowledging his error in regards to the existence of innate morality. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1251 "2014-12-15T18:15:44Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Most of the current protests are legal – in fact, most of the current protests are ‘more legal’ than the protests during the Civil Rights movements, which were more frequently confronted by serious violence by police and authorities. > > By the Smapti measure, this means that the Civil Rights protests were closer to terrorism than the current protests. …the Ferguson thugs got authorization from a federal judge to burn the bitch down? Garner’s fellow travelers got an Army escort while they blocked freeways? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1252 "2014-12-15T18:17:21Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > You think China and North Korea are thinking up ways to allow lawful protest? China and North Korea are not democracies, and the way they make law and treat protestors is not germane to a discussion of how people in the civilized world are obligated to behave. ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1253 "2014-12-15T18:19:08Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And once upon a time, “people should not be allowed to own other people” was “outside the norm of human experience”. Should it have been justly disregarded? Oh, for fuck’s sake. Here - let me stipulate more precisely: the “norm” is of course specific to the time and place in question. We are not living in a time and place where acceptance of slavery is the moral norm. Other people in other times and places were. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1254 "2014-12-15T18:19:27Z")
> [@Fuji](#): > > He’s also conveniently avoided acknowledging his error in regards to the existence of innate morality. Huh? Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1255 "2014-12-15T18:19:36Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > China and North Korea are not democracies The point is that they are countries run according to your model of How Things Ought To Be. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1256 "2014-12-15T18:22:07Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Except that you explicitly cite a case where one of the actors intended to prevent the Kentucky Derby from taking place unless a fair housing act was passed. > > You’re constantly changing your story and/or lying. There was no “demand” as you were using it – they were protesting in support of a bill. That’s not handing lists of demands to the government – all protests in the history of humanity had something they were in support of or opposed to. But which is it? Were Hosea Williams, MLK Jr., and the SCLC terrorists, or weren’t they? ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1257 "2014-12-15T18:22:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Huh? Cite? To wit: > [@Smapti](#): > > If there were such a thing as an innate sense of justice, there would be no need for law or government, because people would not do things to each other that necessitated the evolution of those concepts. > [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > There are a multitude of studies demonstrating concepts of fairness and justice exist in non-human primates. Here is a summary article: [Justice- and fairness-related behaviors in nonhuman primates - PMC](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3690609/) > [@Fuji](#): > > No, that does not follow. There is research by [Frans de Waal](https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/where-does-morality-come-from-a-demonstration-with-monkeys/) and others that demonstrates that there is indeed this innate primtive morality. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1258 "2014-12-15T18:24:24Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > The point is that they are countries run according to your model of How Things Ought To Be. No they aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1259 "2014-12-15T18:27:03Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > …the Ferguson thugs got authorization from a federal judge to burn the bitch down? Garner’s fellow travelers got an Army escort while they blocked freeways? I said “most of the current protests”, not all. The current protests have resulted in far less severe opposition from law enforcement than those in the 60s. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907/1260 "2014-12-15T18:28:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But which is it? Were Hosea Williams, MLK Jr., and the SCLC terrorists, or weren’t they? To the extent that they attempted to sabotage the Kentucky Derby, yes. In general, no. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907.md?page=62) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smapti-is-pitted/688907.md?page=64)