This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Dustin
Pages: 1 ... 474849 5051 ... 194
1441
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:58:08 PM »
Kiyo:
- Enjoyable personality/fun to talk to
- Not so good at serious discussions
I'm not all that interested in debating, I prefer to watch them 
I would hate to get in a debate with you. Not gonna lie >_>
Depends on what we were debating, though 9/10 I'll end up fucking off on you. lol
Can we debate about who was responsible for 9/11 or can we all agree it was the jews?
1442
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:57:00 PM »
Unnatural.
1443
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:55:49 PM »
das
fat
likes men
would fuck anything, anything
is in military
based
So... which set is the good one?
both
1444
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:54:36 PM »
door
autistic
anarchist
fuckshit
fucking idiot
lies about not being betavirgin
non-stem
so autistic it's funny
1445
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:52:34 PM »
When you say it's objective, do you mean that certain actions contribute to or take away from human well-being to certain degrees (that aren't necessarily measurable but distinguishable)? Or do you mean that human well-being is inherently a good thing?
Certain actions objective contribute or take away from human well-being, and human well-being is the only reasonable/possible basis for morality in the first place.
Why is that though? Morality is ambiguously defined, by well-being and by idealism (correct me if I'm wrong). Why can't the idealism be something other than human well-being?
1446
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:47:26 PM »
das
fat
likes men
would fuck anything, anything
is in military
based
1447
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:45:29 PM »
And no one of importance was lost.
I'm going to need to properly teach you how morality is objective, one day. Then you'll be able to judge these things without needing an emotional response.
You little quasi-psychopathic scamp you.
When you say it's objective, do you mean that certain actions contribute to or take away from human well-being to certain degrees (that aren't necessarily measurable but distinguishable)? Or do you mean that human well-being is inherently a good thing?
1448
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:32:08 PM »
I'm guessing you don't have an Xbox One then
no
1449
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:29:46 PM »
gasai
shitposter
weeb
funny
seems to never get mad
1450
« on: January 09, 2015, 12:27:41 PM »
And no one of importance was lost.
1451
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:34:38 AM »
Even if that was the case, why question ethics? They sound like pretty good ideas to me, no matter where they came from.
If it is the case that ethics are based on the survival of your society rather than an ideal that we invented, then ethics are objective. Though you probably already think they are objective.
1452
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:27:41 AM »
But why would evolution give us fairness? How does that help us in any way? Evolution gave us sentience, not fairness. Because the fact is, not everyone thinks fairly. Some people are self-serving, self-interested cunts. We achieved sentience as a complex scheming tool to help us propagate the species more efficiently than any other organism. It's not that evolution is a god who is giving us the ability to perceive this rule-set that it created. We rationally constructed the notion of fairness by ourselves.
So there is nothing in our DNA that would cause us to have morality, just the intellect in order to support it?
Well there are genetic traits which would lead us to have the faculties to support moral judgements.
But there isn't an ineffable "moral code" in the genetic framework.
Are you sure? Maybe it isn't genetics we should be looking at. There are three kinds of evolution after all: genetic, non-genetic biological, and cultural. Let's look at an example of a wolf pack. There's no way to know (at this point in our technological history at least) if there is any genetic instinct for wolves to behave in the manner they do. It's entirely possible that the ones that behaved in an ethical manner were the ones that survived and reproduced, passing down their cultural discovery of ethics to future generations. Maybe humans formed ethics a long time ago when we lived in packs, and it has been passed down culturally ever since because the packs of humans without ethics didn't survive and reproduce.
1453
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:15:50 AM »
Would they kick you out of university if you continued to argue about it with your sensitivity teacher?
1454
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:10:39 AM »
But why would evolution give us fairness? How does that help us in any way? Evolution gave us sentience, not fairness. Because the fact is, not everyone thinks fairly. Some people are self-serving, self-interested cunts. We achieved sentience as a complex scheming tool to help us propagate the species more efficiently than any other organism. It's not that evolution is a god who is giving us the ability to perceive this rule-set that it created. We rationally constructed the notion of fairness by ourselves.
So there is nothing in our DNA that would cause us to have morality, just the intellect in order to support it?
1455
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:07:01 AM »
I'm not just saying to this to troll, but is it possible that Muslims are more violent because they come from such a poor socioeconomic status, rather than because they worship the Qur'an?
That's probably a significant variable, but not to extent you'd expect.
It doesn't even begin to explain why more middle-class Pakistanis are fundamentalists than working-class Pakistanis, or the extent of fundamentalism in Western European countries or why you find the same phenomenon among fascist movements throughout history.
This is indicative of people trying to work around the link between belief and action. No, they don't do it primarily because they're poor, they do it because they genuinely believe in the truth of doctrines like martyrdom.
Is there any meaningful distinction between between culture and religion? Maybe it's the culture of their backgrounds that does it? If someone were to convert to Islam without the Middle Eastern culture interfering, would they become more radical or violent?
1456
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:03:00 AM »
There's more discrimination against women than men, but it's all still too small to have relevance.
>Baiting this hard
There's really no way to count discrimination, and I only ever sympathize with a side depending on what I have on my mind at the time.
1457
« on: January 09, 2015, 09:01:32 AM »
I'm not just saying to this to troll, but is it possible that Muslims are more violent because they come from such a poor socioeconomic status, rather than because they worship the Qur'an?
1458
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:57:44 AM »
A species more intelligent than us would be smart enough to know that might doesn't make right. You cite the example of animals in the wild--but we're a fuckton more intelligent that animals in the wild. "Animal morality" is not parallel to "human morality" in the slightest. We are much more intellectually capable of wild animals--and we have these moral standards, why? Because it's good not to be a scumfuck. You look around, see a lion mauling a gazelle or whatever. And you ask yourself, "what if that were me?" And you determine that if you didn't want that to happen to you, you shouldn't do anything similar to that to anything else. It's called fairness, it's called ethics, it's called rationality. To dismiss that notion and succumb to carnal desire for no other reason than "it's our biological calling" or some bullshit like that is just pure lunacy.
But why would evolution give us fairness? How does that help us in any way?
1459
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:56:26 AM »
I'd say it's a byproduct of cognitive thought, but dolphins are notorious rapists.
If it is just a byproduct of being intelligent then our society is doomed to get weeded out by evolution. Unless morality is part of evolution (necessary), morality is a weakness.
1460
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:53:27 AM »
Vanilla coke and vanilla root beer are the only good sodas.
That is factually wrong. Stop.
Soda makes my stomach feel like it's about to explode, so when I have soda it has to be good.
1461
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:51:12 AM »
Vanilla coke and vanilla root beer are the only good sodas.
1462
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:45:40 AM »
I'm honestly under the impression that our species is going to die out and be replaced by another intelligent species. I really just don't see how morality is at all evolutionary beneficial. A Darwinist society would inevitably rise up and defeat a moral society for the simple reason that their power is not restrained by morality and ethics.
Am I right in saying this or am I looking at morality wrong? Animals of the same social groups have ethical codes too. They'll hunt together, share their food together, not kill each other. Their morality lies in keeping their 'society' alive. So if animal morality is any bit parallel to human, then our morality is exactly that: keeping society alive. And as we become more and more reliant upon each other and more and more globalized, our entire species becomes morally connected.
I honestly think this is a much better explanation for morality than what I thought prior, that morality is merely idealism born from our emotions.
1463
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:34:14 AM »
Assuming no harm is ever done to any child, is it morally incorrect for someone to publicly act upon those urges (be open about pedophilia)? Should people be morally obligated to be disgusted by pedophilia?
Is pedophilia morally incorrect because of the harm it causes children or because of the way the public reacts to it?
1464
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:17:35 AM »
Some degrees are in demand and some aren't.
That's exactly the problem--the government is propping up a scheme whereby un-demanded qualifications will become artificially demanded because the price mechanism has been turned on its head.
Price mechanisms?
1465
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:15:59 AM »
Their fault for waiting for so long to say anything.
I think if I get stabbed by someone.. I should wait 10 years before saying anything. Then point to the scar that doesn't match the wound of a blade and say this person DID do it!
How can I not be legit? 
You should only ever wait to sue if that person is going to inherit a bunch of money soon.
1466
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:14:05 AM »
We'll all be better off for it in the end.
Not if everybody's qualifications are worth less. . .
That really depends though. Some degrees are in demand and some aren't. I see no reason why the government shouldn't support more business, engineering, and medical students since it'd heavily benefit society.
1467
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:10:17 AM »
Is it not obvious to anyone else that this is just another policy that's supposed to sound good to people but doesn't actually help with anything?
But why would he be worried about this if he's not up for re-election and Republicans will control House and Senate until after he's gone regardless?
His legacy of course. Presidents kinda care about that.
1468
« on: January 09, 2015, 08:09:20 AM »
Their fault for waiting for so long to say anything.
1469
« on: January 09, 2015, 07:52:20 AM »
I'm seriously beginning to consider Islam a hate movement.
It's just the radicals that are doing this. The real Muslims preach peace and tolerance.
Topqeq
Okay troll. I actually know Muslims that hate what's going on in the Middle East and even support Israel.
1470
« on: January 09, 2015, 07:50:00 AM »
I'm seriously beginning to consider Islam a hate movement.
It's just the radicals that are doing this. The real Muslims preach peace and tolerance.
Pages: 1 ... 474849 5051 ... 194
|
Show Posts