Sociopath Community

I'm in the same boat. 

If I were to be categorized as racist it's be a very old world racism, where skin color holds no importance but instead spirit and will mean everything. In such a case the spirit of a culture is what is superior, not the skin color that is predominant in a ruling culture. 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

AliceInWonderland said: 

I'm in the same boat. 

If I were to be categorized as racist it's be a very old world racism, where skin color holds no importance but instead spirit and will mean everything. In such a case the spirit of a culture is what is superior, not the skin color that is predominant in a ruling culture. 

It is about culture, yes.

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

I've always been a snob, in a sense. I don't disrespect people outside of what i consider the 'elite', but i expect them to be less impressive and they usually are. It is not their fault, but i always have a problem choosing between disrespecting them and being patronizing. Its like it has to be one, but cant be both, because I can see why they are that way, but if i tell them, it will be rude, so i have to go around it and its like i am talking to a child(and i may even like them, i just dont know what to do lol)... With my 'elite' friends, i am always 'disrespectful'(more like bluntly rude), because they can take it and not care, but instead they give me the same treatment.

Either way tho, it doesn't change the result, where a culture is subjectively superior then another. Whatever the reason why.

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

 I actually agree with this and fundamentally do not view Faustian culture (there's your Spengler vocab ;) ) as superior here in its winter, hence I do not discriminate on the pretense that we are superior but instead on the truth that we've grown inferior in a multitude of crucial capacities.  

Yes all societies rely on the elite to drive them forward but the elite do not drive the culture, the culture drives the elite because culture is a deterministic potential that an elite can only hope to actualize but not change. 

Concerning the snob comment, I don't see how that'd matter even if true. I would hope you think my ideals pertaining to culture are not so simplistic as to think I believe "meh we are just better because we are". 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

 I actually agree with this and fundamentally do not view Faustian culture (there's your Spengler vocab ;) ) as superior here in its winter, hence I do not discriminate on the pretense that we are superior but instead on the truth that we've grown inferior in a multitude of crucial capacities.  

Yes all societies rely on the elite to drive them forward but the elite do not drive the culture, the culture drives the elite because culture is a deterministic potential that an elite can only hope to actualize but not change. 

Concerning the snob comment, I don't see how that'd matter even if true. I would hope you think my ideals pertaining to culture are not so simplistic as to think I believe "meh we are just better because we are". 

Snobbery doesn't have to be simplistic.

QuietBeef said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

 I actually agree with this and fundamentally do not view Faustian culture (there's your Spengler vocab ;) ) as superior here in its winter, hence I do not discriminate on the pretense that we are superior but instead on the truth that we've grown inferior in a multitude of crucial capacities.  

Yes all societies rely on the elite to drive them forward but the elite do not drive the culture, the culture drives the elite because culture is a deterministic potential that an elite can only hope to actualize but not change. 

Concerning the snob comment, I don't see how that'd matter even if true. I would hope you think my ideals pertaining to culture are not so simplistic as to think I believe "meh we are just better because we are". 

Snobbery doesn't have to be simplistic.

 Indeed it doesn't, I will clarify what I meant. 

If I believed some culture at some point in its being was superior to others at that point one could deem me being snobbish about that culture, but if I have set of thorough and justifiable reasons for that held belief then someone placing me in the category of 'snobbish' doesn't matter because it really doesn't negate argument nor prove the belief as false. 

If I were instead to have an oversimplified reason for my held belief, even if the belief is true, then me being snobbish would prove my ignorance. 

AliceInWonderland said: 

QuietBeef said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

 I actually agree with this and fundamentally do not view Faustian culture (there's your Spengler vocab ;) ) as superior here in its winter, hence I do not discriminate on the pretense that we are superior but instead on the truth that we've grown inferior in a multitude of crucial capacities.  

Yes all societies rely on the elite to drive them forward but the elite do not drive the culture, the culture drives the elite because culture is a deterministic potential that an elite can only hope to actualize but not change. 

Concerning the snob comment, I don't see how that'd matter even if true. I would hope you think my ideals pertaining to culture are not so simplistic as to think I believe "meh we are just better because we are". 

Snobbery doesn't have to be simplistic.

 Indeed it doesn't, I will clarify what I meant. 

If I believed some culture at some point in its being was superior to others at that point one could deem me being snobbish about that culture, but if I have set of thorough and justifiable reasons for that held belief then someone placing me in the category of 'snobbish' doesn't matter because it really doesn't negate argument nor prove the belief as false. 

If I were instead to have an oversimplified reason for my held belief, even if the belief is true, then me being snobbish would prove my ignorance. 

 So you see snobbishness as either ignorance or good taste, depending on how justifiable the reasons based on your own standards of success?

QuietBeef said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

QuietBeef said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

Inquirer said: 

I'd argue a lot of people within "superior" cultures actually lack the spirit that made them great and instead we've relied on an intellectual elite to drive us forward. Discriminating based on that sounds less like old world racism and more like snobbism.

 I actually agree with this and fundamentally do not view Faustian culture (there's your Spengler vocab ;) ) as superior here in its winter, hence I do not discriminate on the pretense that we are superior but instead on the truth that we've grown inferior in a multitude of crucial capacities.  

Yes all societies rely on the elite to drive them forward but the elite do not drive the culture, the culture drives the elite because culture is a deterministic potential that an elite can only hope to actualize but not change. 

Concerning the snob comment, I don't see how that'd matter even if true. I would hope you think my ideals pertaining to culture are not so simplistic as to think I believe "meh we are just better because we are". 

Snobbery doesn't have to be simplistic.

 Indeed it doesn't, I will clarify what I meant. 

If I believed some culture at some point in its being was superior to others at that point one could deem me being snobbish about that culture, but if I have set of thorough and justifiable reasons for that held belief then someone placing me in the category of 'snobbish' doesn't matter because it really doesn't negate argument nor prove the belief as false. 

If I were instead to have an oversimplified reason for my held belief, even if the belief is true, then me being snobbish would prove my ignorance. 

 So you see snobbishness as either ignorance or good taste, depending on how justifiable the reasons based on your own standards of success?

Yes.

Someone can be a snob and present a well thought out argument that explains a phenomena with reasonable accuracy, I wouldn't call it having good taste though. Examples of such individuals that fall into this category are Isacc Newton and Oliver Heaviside, both were snobbish and had good reason to hold their beliefs. Reasons so good that one made Classical Mechanics possible and the other made Quantum Mechanics possible. 

Someone can be a snob and have no real reason to hold a belief, ignorance seems like a reasonable label.  

Having said this, I do not believe my initial comments in this thread were snobbish given Inq made his comment on the pretense that I hold the belief that my own culture is superior to all others and as I stated this is untrue.