i'd rather let one person go jail

what a scumbag

You could have basically just asked if we agree with innocent until proven guilty and the discussion wouldn't have changed at all.

Except that's not what I'm asking. Innocent until proven guilty stems from the mindset that a free guilty man isn't as bad as an imprisoned innocent man.

On a broader spectrum, and this is a hypothetical, but literally freeing 100,000 murderers is less immoral than willingly putting on innocent man in prison.

the quote is just really misleading
this isn't some Barabbas bullshit
it's about the fact assumption of innocence is required for an equitable justice system

Well duh, but that's the branch, not the tree. It's about the fact that it's better to be too lenient than to be too harsh. Letting a child murderer go free isn't 1/100 as wrong as putting an innocent man in jail for child murdering.

Butchered the quote so it would fit

Do you agree with this?

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 10:27:28 AM

Quote from: Dietrich Six on April 19, 2016, 10:24:33 AM

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 08:33:10 AM

Quote from: goootsbyX on April 19, 2016, 06:03:36 AM

there are no other forums to move to

there's always r/greydelisle

hear that place is amazing

Lol the first and only post is literally who?

People just don't appreciate her   

Nobody knows who the fuck she is.

They should!

People die every day, from cancer to getting murdered on the street. People will always die, just like animals will always die. The only thing that makes these septillions of deaths worth anything is us moving forward as a species. And the only thing that distinguishes us as a species is our morality. No one, no matter the situation, should be forced to kill themselves or be executed. Being born in and of itself is an unfair, cruel event, and it's our duty to ensure that every human life on this planet gets all the same rights and privileges. Fairness, consent, and equality are all.

You bring up the killing Hitler example, but if Hitler allowed himself to be taken prisoner, it would be morally wrong to kill him. Executions in general are wrong. If cancer was somehow held accountable for its actions, then it would be wrong. But the person who "has" to kill themselves didn't cause cancer, and they didn't ask for this hypothetical to be placed on them. All the human lives lost to reach this point in history mean NOTHING if we're going to trample over and ignore the rights every human is born with.

but not in vain

in the scenario i illustrated, the cancer patient's sacrifice was certainly not in vain

it was for (perhaps) the greatest of all causes

does that not matter to you

So in your mind, the ends justify the means. Since there was a good result, the fact that the cancer patient was forced into self-sacrifice means nothing to you?

Curing cancer is obviously a great cause, and it would matter to me if there was a moral way to achieve it. But the hypothetical you brought up doesn't have that way. The end result is intrinsically good, but reaching that result means throwing away the human right to sovereignty of your body. I think any decent person would kill themselves to meet the end, but if they choose not to, that's the end of it. If you supercede that wish and kill them anyway, you're murdering someone. You're not giving people cancer if you choose not to murder him, everything would be exactly the same as it was yesterday.

Quote

If you were told we could have eternal world peace and happiness if 100 people were forced to stay alive and be in constant excruciating pain eternally, then I don't give a shit what you say.

see, that's a different kind of thing, though

like, completely

you're talking about suffering and pleasure, there--and obviously, as an anti-natalist, do you think i'd have 100 people suffer the worst pain possible forever just to have a perfect society of people who feel constant orgasmic pleasure every day? no

it's important to make the scenario about life and death--not pleasure and suffering

i wouldn't keep a one rat alive to have a perfect society

Then what's the difference? In one scenario you're forcibly making a nonconsenting person die, in the other scenario you're forcibly making a nonconsenting person get tortured. Either way, you're making an imposition on someone who doesn't want it, for the good of society. Obviously an execution and prolonged torture are two different things, but the principle is identical. Someone is expected to give up their life for the lives of others. Regardless of the outcome, the means of the outcome are not morally sound whatsoever.

I have zero control over that.

But yeah, it's kinda bad having something from seven months ago still on there

this thread is directed at people with real power, not sympathy positions

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 07:37:07 AM

Quote from: Batch on April 19, 2016, 07:34:05 AM

They like places like Reddit to discuss. I dont know why company forums are generally so dead these days. Quite sad

I hate Reddit tbh

There's no personalities. There's no people, just comments.

I guess thats what they like, the discussion, or content more like, with the way the net is these days, it's all about making a popular imgur post, or showing your cool gif off. Not that much in making a name for yourself these days on a forum.

Yeah, exactly. People are obsessed with their internet points these days, I don't understand it.

lets just have NO taxes man, everything I have I earned myself no help at all, the government or my community had NO bearing on my success lol taxation more like FORCED CHARITY

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 08:01:32 AM

Quote from: Fedorekd on April 19, 2016, 07:59:24 AM

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 07:53:49 AM

Quote from: Fedorekd on April 19, 2016, 07:51:59 AM

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 07:48:44 AM

Quote from: Fedorekd on April 19, 2016, 07:39:14 AM

Pretty excited for Survival Mode tbh. Should completely change the game up.

I've been waiting so long for Survival to release on consoles; it looks outstanding.

Really jealous of PC users right now

Kinda iffy on the no-saving-aside-from-beds thing but I suppose it'll give the settlements more of a use now, acting as checkpoints during your travels. Also the lack of fast travel could make vertibirds a bit more useful.

Really? I love the idea. It actually gives death meaning, not just meaning you have to load a save from two minutes ago. That, along with the no fast travel, is going to make exploration so much more intense and exciting.

And really, exploration, not quests or combat, is the main draw of Fallout 4.

Yeah, the ideas are growing on me a bit when I think about it more. I do wish that companions could die, though, although I get that it's kind of not possible seeing as a few of them are essential to the main quest.

Yeah, that part bugs me too. Obviously Bethesda didn't write the main quest with killable companions in mind, but they should've. I liked New Vegas' model, where almost everyone could die, but you might just lock yourself out of certain questlines if you go around assassinating high profile targets.

New Vegas had it perfect. Only character who couldn't die was Yes Man, for obvious reasons. The earlier Fallout games have that, too.

Yes Man, Viktor, and children. I get the reasoning for all three. In a AAA game, you just can't have killable children, even if there's serious repercussions for doing so like in the first two Fallouts.

Quote from: ALIE on April 19, 2016, 07:48:44 AM

Quote from: Fedorekd on April 19, 2016, 07:39:14 AM

Pretty excited for Survival Mode tbh. Should completely change the game up.

I've been waiting so long for Survival to release on consoles; it looks outstanding.

Really jealous of PC users right now

Kinda iffy on the no-saving-aside-from-beds thing but I suppose it'll give the settlements more of a use now, acting as checkpoints during your travels. Also the lack of fast travel could make vertibirds a bit more useful.

Really? I love the idea. It actually gives death meaning, not just meaning you have to load a save from two minutes ago. That, along with the no fast travel, is going to make exploration so much more intense and exciting.

And really, exploration, not quests or combat, is the main draw of Fallout 4.

My point was he takes his place WAY too seriously, not that this site is the only thing causing him grief.

All your posts are irrelevant.

Well, he said he hates himself (not even relating to this forum) and your first reaction was to tell him he takes the site too seriously. That implies you thought this forum was the cause of his self-loathing.

A catalyst is an exacerbator. It causes a unstable compound to produce a reaction. Without the initial state of the compound, the catalyst does nothing.

I guess people just hate context these days. The "compound" has to be unstable itself before the catalyst can make a change in it.

That's what I don't like about Verbatim. He sees himself as this big intellectual, but then cherry picks comments apart to look right. Even though he knows exactly what you're talking about.

They like places like Reddit to discuss. I dont know why company forums are generally so dead these days. Quite sad

I hate Reddit tbh

There's no personalities. There's no people, just comments.