At root this is a philosophical problem. The professional philosophers have created a disarray in the field of values, claiming that they are subjective and arbitrary, and that's resulted in the inability of people to rally around common, objective values of right and wrong. And when you say something like this, you generally just get what these philosophers have said repeated back to you, and some weak-kneed alternative to saying "this is right, that is wrong", which is precisely why we are where we are.
Is that actually, causally, the reason for the U.S.'s rather harsh justice system? I mean, postmodernism is not exactly popular in the US. Are law-and-order populist politicians pushing "tough on crime" agendas and long sentences all secretly fans of French philosophers? If anything, the problem is that they are too sure of their own values, and willing to enforce them with imprisonment.
So? You can't claim certainty is per se evil without lapsing into hypocritical contradiction. Those who zealously preach anti-certainty are hypocrites, intrinsically.
And this is different from the status quo how? How does running to the same group of "experts" who have engineered our social systems help? Note how conditioned the response is: you see a problem with the system, you're conditioned to trust in the system (and its approved representatives) to give you answers.
You're part of the problem of course. You and everyone like you. By rejecting philosophy you reject ethics and therefore any possible means of addressing these systematic problems.
I am of course in the minority, but it's not the minority who's created these major systemic problems. We try to point them out and are ignored (and here, downvoted), and you bumbling fools keep doing things that wreck civilization. Inadvertently of course. But good intentions count for zero, you still bear partial responsibility for widespread injustice.
The problem lies in Democracy, it is not for nothing that it is called the least worst ruling system.
The difference between most democracies and dictatorships is that a dictatorship is despotism by minority and most democracies despotism by majority, not often are democracies systems of fairness.
No, it's not with democracy, it's with the values of the populace. If you have a predominately good people, then many political systems can work; if you have a predominately duped and corrupt people, no system can work.
If you think that the problem with the U.S. is that everyone is hopelessly enamored with Rorty or other postmodernists, then, I think maybe you are out of touch with "reality" just a little bit. :) I don't think the NRA is going to start quoting Derrida any time soon.
What are you talking about? I have training in philosophy but I have no idea what you're talking about; I'm not sure what professional philosophers have to do with this situation at all.
So you're serious? You think the US laws were written by postmodernists and that most US citizens are relativists? Really? This seems like a weird version of a tin foil hat conspiracy theory.
So, you're a philosophy buff, but you can't help yourself regarding ignorant presumption about another person's thoughts.
I don't think philosophy has taught you much about being careful with ideas. That too is ironic. I shouldn't have to disclaim your ignorant presumptions every time you open your ignorant, presumptuous mouth.
Also, I asked you a basic question. I asked you what the purpose of philosophy was. Why are you evading the question?
