Atheistforums.com

Humanities Section => Philosophy & Rhetoric General Discussion => Topic started by: gentle_dissident on May 18, 2016, 11:43:11 PM

Title: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 18, 2016, 11:43:11 PM
It occurred to me that the underlying issue of the Calvin Klein upskirt ad is loss of innocence. There are some people who seem to have been waiting for an event to give them a reason to protest the loss of innocence. I may be incorrect about this segues, but I still want to look at the subject.

What is innocence and why are some without it? It occurred to me that the concept of innocence might be misrepresented and placed in an unfavorable light simply by definition. So, I entered words for Google to define, and chose the definitions I thought most apropos. Of course, I looked up “innocence” 1st.

Quoteinnocence

lack of guile or corruption; purity.

Quotepurity

freedom from immorality, especially of a sexual nature.

synonyms: virtue, morality, goodness, righteousness, saintliness, piety, honor, honesty, integrity, decency, ethicality, impeccability

I conclude that being free of guile and corruption will render a person good. There is the problem of “innocence” being the definition of “naïveté”.

Quotenaïveté

lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment.

innocence or unsophistication.

It is obviously not wise to be naïve. However, it is not naïve to be free of guile and corruption.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Hydra009 on May 19, 2016, 01:18:27 AM
Pretend the last time I saw an ad was 2006 and am unfamiliar with this particular public outcry.

What exactly is this immorality/corruption that a person is supposed to avoid?
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 01:45:14 AM
Quote from: Hydra009 on May 19, 2016, 01:18:27 AM
Pretend the last time I saw an ad was 2006 and am unfamiliar with this particular public outcry.
It's not important.
Quote from: Hydra009 on May 19, 2016, 01:18:27 AM
What exactly is this immorality/corruption that a person is supposed to avoid?
You should check Amazon for guile and corruption manuals.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: marom1963 on May 19, 2016, 02:53:14 AM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 18, 2016, 11:43:11 PM
It occurred to me that the underlying issue of the Calvin Klein upskirt ad is loss of innocence. There are some people who seem to have been waiting for an event to give them a reason to protest the loss of innocence. I may be incorrect about this segues, but I still want to look at the subject.

What is innocence and why are some without it? It occurred to me that the concept of innocence might be misrepresented and placed in an unfavorable light simply by definition. So, I entered words for Google to define, and chose the definitions I thought most apropos. Of course, I looked up “innocence” 1st.

I conclude that being free of guile and corruption will render a person good. There is the problem of “innocence” being the definition of “naïveté”.

It is obviously not wise to be naïve. However, it is not naïve to be free of guile and corruption.
It's all nonsense. No one can get through a day w/o lying about something. We make ourselves feel better by categorizing most of our lies as "white lies." Nonetheless, we are being dishonest.
Fact is, hypocrisy is the true currency of human society. This has always been so, and I suspect that it will always be so.
Accusations are hurled at this group or at that group - fact is, we're all guilty of something.
Children are NOT innocent. As the least powerful members of society, they are the most in need of lies, cheating, and ruses in general. You may have been naive as a child, my pet, but were you were not honest - be honest about it, pookhums. If you weren't trying to get over on your teachers, you were trying to get over on mom and dad, then later your bosses at your lousy part time job.
I'll repeat myself: the World is a Used Car lot, and we all keep the shiny parts turned out and the dents tucked in.
We're all full of shit - and anyone who says he is not - is really loaded.
I'm so sick of the bull. I'm tired of the "I'm honest" come on. No one's honest. You can't survive by being honest. Somewhere, some time, you've at least got to bend the truth a bit, and you know it.
What's the big deal? It's like being embarrassed at the porn shop when you bump into your neighbor there. Why be embarrassed? Your neighbor's as "guilty" as you are, and the two of you should have a nice chat and maybe swap parts of your collections!

Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: SGOS on May 19, 2016, 08:45:46 AM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 18, 2016, 11:43:11 PM
It occurred to me that the underlying issue of the Calvin Klein upskirt ad is loss of innocence.

Well of course it is, but I think your missing the point, that is assuming I'm reading the add correctly.  The add is a subliminal appeal to the loss of innocence, because the loss of innocence in this case, is that it's fun, exciting, and sexy to call attention to your panties, and supposedly only Calvin Klein can provide the right equipment to do that for you.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 11:25:22 AM
Quote from: marom1963 on May 19, 2016, 02:53:14 AM
It's all nonsense.
After I posted this, I thought you might show up to rant about it. Thank you for coming.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: doorknob on May 19, 2016, 11:37:51 AM
Innocence is another word for stupid.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 12:04:07 PM
Quote from: doorknob on May 19, 2016, 11:37:51 AM
Innocence is another word for stupid.
Quotestu·pid
ˈst(y)o͞opəd/
adjective
adjective: stupid; comparative adjective: stupider; superlative adjective: stupidest

    1.
    lacking intelligence or common sense.
    "I was stupid enough to think she was perfect"
    synonyms:   unintelligent, ignorant, dense, foolish, dull-witted, slow, simpleminded, vacuous, vapid, idiotic, imbecilic, imbecile, obtuse, doltish; informalthick, dim, dimwitted, slow-witted, dumb, dopey, dozy, moronic, cretinous, pea-brained, halfwitted, soft in the head, brain-dead, boneheaded, thickheaded, wooden-headed, muttonheaded, daft
    "they're rather stupid"
    foolish, silly, unintelligent, idiotic, scatterbrained, nonsensical, senseless, harebrained, unthinking, ill-advised, ill-considered, unwise, injudicious;
    inane, absurd, ludicrous, ridiculous, laughable, risible, fatuous, asinine, mad, insane, lunatic;
    informalcrazy, dopey, cracked, half-baked, dimwitted, cockeyed, lamebrained, nutty, batty, cuckoo, loony, loopy

I'm not seeing it. I'm not seeing "naïveté" either. Although, "stupid" does come close to defining "naïveté".
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: aitm on May 19, 2016, 12:07:52 PM
Would have helped if you provided a link to whatever your on about.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 12:08:37 PM
Quote from: SGOS on May 19, 2016, 08:45:46 AM
Well of course it is, but I think your missing the point, that is assuming I'm reading the add correctly.  The add is a subliminal appeal to the loss of innocence, because the loss of innocence in this case, is that it's fun, exciting, and sexy to call attention to your panties, and supposedly only Calvin Klein can provide the right equipment to do that for you.
Sure. I was determining why a legal age girl showing her underwear was causing such an uproar. People who were waiting to rant about "loss of innocence" said, "That's close enough. Rant on!"
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 12:17:03 PM
Quote from: aitm on May 19, 2016, 12:07:52 PM
Would have helped if you provided a link to whatever your on about.
'Twas merely the impetus.

Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 18, 2016, 11:43:11 PM
I may be incorrect about this segues, but I still want to look at the subject.
The subject is clearly defined in the post. If you're curious and using Firefox, highlight "Calvin Klein upskirt ad", left click on it, then right click Search Google for "Calvin Klein upskirt ad" in the context menu.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: SGOS on May 19, 2016, 12:43:31 PM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 12:17:03 PM
The subject is clearly defined in the post. If you're curious and using Firefox, highlight "Calvin Klein upskirt ad", left click on it, then right click Search Google for "Calvin Klein upskirt ad" in the context menu.

I'd already seen the add.  It was linked at the top of my yahoo home page a couple of days ago, and of course, I couldn't resist clicking on it, but I decided to review it once more in the interest of adding more to enlightening discussion <ahem>, so I followed your suggested google route, and I found this in the first google link to the analysis of the add, which itself linked to further reading on the subject:

http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2015/01/07/justin-bieber-calvin-klein-campaign-lara-stone

This was disappointing to say the least, because I really can't further comment intelligently without first knowing what Justin Bieber has to say about this dark and controversial situation, which could  have guided me towards a clarification of my own thoughts and feelings.  Well OK.  I thought I could at least get another look at her panties from a better camera angle.  But all I got was probably the same thing you got, a totally blank page.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 02:10:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk_sAHh9s08
The "What are you listening to?" thread bogs down my 9 year old Dell.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: SGOS on May 19, 2016, 02:30:15 PM
I guess I had that coming.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 02:56:37 PM
This is, of course, much ado about nothing.  If the skirt were off, then it would be simply a rather large bikini--and they would have thought her quite modest then.  Especially for a model.  It is only a matter of a point-of-view, nothing more. 
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 02:59:54 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 02:56:37 PM
This is, of course, much ado about nothing.  If the skirt were off, then it would be simply a rather large bikini--and they would have thought her quite modest then.  Especially for a model.  It is only a matter of a point-of-view, nothing more.
Yes, that is the point I make as well. Hence, the deeper exploration.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 03:02:39 PM
Quote from: marom1963 on May 19, 2016, 02:53:14 AM
It's all nonsense. No one can get through a day w/o lying about something. We make ourselves feel better by categorizing most of our lies as "white lies." Nonetheless, we are being dishonest.
Fact is, hypocrisy is the true currency of human society. This has always been so, and I suspect that it will always be so.
Accusations are hurled at this group or at that group - fact is, we're all guilty of something.
Children are NOT innocent. As the least powerful members of society, they are the most in need of lies, cheating, and ruses in general. You may have been naive as a child, my pet, but were you were not honest - be honest about it, pookhums. If you weren't trying to get over on your teachers, you were trying to get over on mom and dad, then later your bosses at your lousy part time job.
I'll repeat myself: the World is a Used Car lot, and we all keep the shiny parts turned out and the dents tucked in.
We're all full of shit - and anyone who says he is not - is really loaded.
I'm so sick of the bull. I'm tired of the "I'm honest" come on. No one's honest. You can't survive by being honest. Somewhere, some time, you've at least got to bend the truth a bit, and you know it.
What's the big deal? It's like being embarrassed at the porn shop when you bump into your neighbor there. Why be embarrassed? Your neighbor's as "guilty" as you are, and the two of you should have a nice chat and maybe swap parts of your collections!
I agree with most of that.  Except, what is 'truth'?  Is it totally objective all the time?  My truth may not be your truth.  That house may be called red by most, except if it is the correct shade (or incorrect shade) it looks green to me.  So, the truth of the color of that house is that it is red---or green.  Both can be true.  "Does this blouse look good on me", my wife asks of her favorite blouse.  I reply "Yes, it looks great!"--except it looks decent, at best.  Yeah, I could tell her that and it would be upsetting for her.  And for her friends who like that blouse on her as well.  So, am I lying when I say 'yes'?  I guess--but I think of it as being smart.   But you are correct, humans do lie quite a bit and about things they don't need to or shouldn't lie about.  So, when I'm asked if I'm honest, I reply usually with--'most of the time.'  And leave it at that.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 03:02:39 PM
I agree with most of that.

I've been looking forward to your own words.

Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 03:02:39 PM
what is 'truth'?

What is "is"?

Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 03:02:39 PM
"Does this blouse look good on me", my wife asks of her favorite blouse.  I reply "Yes, it looks great!"--except it looks decent, at best.  Yeah, I could tell her that and it would be upsetting for her.

I've never played that game with my GF.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 06:03:55 PM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 03:10:18 PM
I've never played that game with my GF.
What games do you play with your GF?

I'm curious--what is truth?
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 06:08:40 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 06:03:55 PM
What games do you play with your GF?

We last played a wooden version of Booby-Trap.

Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 06:03:55 PM
I'm curious--what is truth?

I hope you find it.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 06:17:53 PM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 06:08:40 PM
We last played a wooden version of Booby-Trap.

I hope you find it.
Booby-trap (yes, lots of infantile jokes pop up in my head when I type that--but that's just me), I've heard of it but have not played it.  My wife and I like to play Boggle often--the 5 x 5 version.  We especially like it in the back yard (we don't have a blade of grass, but a huge organic veggie/herb/flower/fruit tree garden).  In the spring and fall it is ideal!

Truth--yeah, I guess it is mostly, if not always, relative--if it even exists.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: Flanker1Six on May 19, 2016, 06:19:25 PM
Quote from: SGOS on May 19, 2016, 08:45:46 AM
Well of course it is, but I think your missing the point, that is assuming I'm reading the add correctly.  The add is a subliminal appeal to the loss of innocence, because the loss of innocence in this case, is that it's fun, exciting, and sexy to call attention to your panties, and supposedly only Calvin Klein can provide the right equipment to do that for you.

Fuck that!  My standards are low, but I do have them...............I'm not wearing panties!    :uchicken:  LOL!
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 07:09:05 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 19, 2016, 06:17:53 PM
Truth--yeah, I guess it is mostly, if not always, relative--if it even exists.
We discover truths like a scientist discovers laws. The truth is, we've strayed from the discussion of innocence found.
Title: Re: A Case for Innocence
Post by: marom1963 on May 19, 2016, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: gentle_dissident on May 19, 2016, 11:25:22 AM
After I posted this, I thought you might show up to rant about it. Thank you for coming.
You're welcome ... Next time, send an invitation, and I'll do some raving, too.