Discrimination and philosophy of mind

There was an interesting exchange recently between visiblink and yargo

[1,2,3] on the subject of what does or does not make it okay to make

fun of someone. I am going to dramatically escelate this discussion

well beyond where I imagine either author wanted it taken, because,

well, why not? :p

Reference was made to the idea, relatively common, I think, that it's

okay to criticise people for their beliefs and ideas because those are

under the person's direct and conscious control, and thus they are

responsible for them, but that it's not okay to criticise somebody for

their physical appearance because that's not a matter of choice or

something they can change, and is utlimately out of their control.

This philosophy is pretty sensible on the face of it and I am not

surprised that many people probably thought like this last century.

In 2019, if you look closely enough, this argument is actually

straining at the seams, and badly.

The reason is that in the last decade or two, Western society has

embraced materialistic philosophy of mind[4]. Not explicitly, of

course. Most people have never heard of the idea, and if you describe

it to them I think many people would actually explicitly reject it

as cold-hearted reductionism.

But actions speak louder than words and here are some facts: if you

try to publically argue in 2019 that somebody who is seriously and

reguarly depressed, or never able to focus their attention on

something, or is incredibly anxious about routine interactions, needs

to simply grit their teeth and cheer up, or try harder - basically

try in any way to change their mental state through the application of

force of will or through rational thought - you will be condemned as a

dinosaur, and told something like "mental illness is real", and that

people can't "just snap out of" depression etc. because these mental

states are the consequence of some chemical inbalance in the brain

which can only be treated with SSRIs or similar medication.

However, if somebody were to claim that they couldn't, through force

of will or following a rational line of argument, snap themselves

without chemical assistance out of being sexist or racist or

homophobic, the very idea would be considered intrinsically offensive,

or at least ridiculous, and no public commentator would dare to be

seen as giving it even the slightest bit of credence.

This is, of course, having your cake and eating it too. If you really

believe that nothing happens inside the human skull which violates the

natural laws which hold everywhere outside of it - and how can our

brain scanning, mental illness diagnosing, drug prescribing society

coherently reject this notion? - then the whole idea of people bearing

moral responsibility for their beliefs seems no more well-founded than

people bearing moral responsibility for their appearance.

Where does this leave us on the question of who is fair game for

mockery by comedians? Well, what makes you think comedians have

conscious control of who they make fun of? :p

[1] gopher://zaibatsu.circumlunar.space:70/0/~visiblink/phlog/20190117

[2] gopher://zaibatsu.circumlunar.space:70/0/~yargo/clog/yr-joking-about-others.txt

[3] gopher://zaibatsu.circumlunar.space:70/0/~visiblink/phlog/20190118

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism