VivianMarlowe
Rookie
Do³±czy³: 04 Lut 2024
Posty: 3
|
|
 yoyo |
 |
Ignoring someone for lego star wars some socially perceived fault was encoded into law by Hammurabi who was the sixth king of the First Babylonian dynasty of the Amorite tribe, reigning from c. 1792 BC to c. 1750 BC. The Hammurabi code of laws , a collection of 282 rules, established standards for commercial interactions and set fines and punishments to meet the requirements of justice. The laws varied according to social class and gender , and it took a brutal approach to justice. And these codes did not die out with the conquering of Babylon.
The brutality is built right into the platform (as well as other social media platforms) and it can spill over into reality in terrible, evil ways. Consider the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar. This genocide used Facebook to incite terrible, brutal violence in the real world. The New York lego technic Times conducted an in-depth investigation of this genocide and reported what they found in this article: A Genocide Inci ted on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar's Military
"Members of the Myanmar military were the prime operatives behind a systematic campaign on Facebook that stretched back half a dec lego ninjago ade and that targeted the country's mostly Muslim Rohingya minority group, the people said. The military exploited Facebook's wide reach in Myanmar, where it is so broadly used that many of the country's 18 million internet users confuse the Silicon Valley social media platform with the internet. Human rights groups blame the anti-Rohingya propaganda for inciting murders , rapes and the largest forced human migration in recent history."
By now, it had been several weeks after I noticed the group had disappeared. I decided to ask my Facebook friend who was one of the hea lego friends d admin of this group what had happened . After a day of inquiring with the other admins, he simply told me one of his admins ( he didn't know who ) was cleaning up spam and removed me on that basis. Apparently, this admin did this without consulting with any of the other admins assuming that I was a fake account that was spamming the group. My friend, the admin, expressed no shock, no sadness, no remorse about what had happened.
What did the observer know and when did he know it? What did the observer report, and when did he report it? Did the observer know and report the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Was anything left out or distorted? Was any of it paraphrased, glossed over, or taken out of context? To my mind, this cuts to the issue of Bearing Accurate Witness (and the consequences of redacting information that one would rather not have brought to light).
Bébé , in her E-Mail to me, expressly decried the absence of an empathic yoyo human response. That created a dilemma for me, because Π was unable to provide the original context, so I had no useful information on what happened to cause Bébé to feel betrayed and wounded. Π could similarly see no reason for Bébé to be angry at him. But after I shared with him a bit more information, Π did see why her anger was directed at him. In other words, the failure to share relevant information blocks the possibility of empathy. If having and expressing empathy is the ultimate goal, then conce  aling information is anathema to that goal.
|
|
