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 - Pendulate
Pages: 1 ... 101112 1314 ... 16
331
« on: May 29, 2015, 07:14:25 AM »
wait...
so the police came because he was suicidal and threatening to harm himself, so they shot him
okay
Apparently he ran at them with the knife. Tbh I thought the article was satire at first.
332
« on: May 28, 2015, 07:09:12 PM »
You started off the post by saying "pedophilia isn't wrong, but neither is killing someone". That is an extremely nihilistic point No, it isn't, which is why I made the distinction between being inherently wrong and prima facie wrong. Killing is generally wrong but there are situations where it may be morally permissible; so it cannot be inherently wrong.
I really don't have any patience for reading an entire argument when I already know where you're going with it from the first sentence.
Well, clearly you don't know, because I made a substantial defense for why child molestation is immoral, which has nothing to do with nihilism.
I find your active refusal to consider different viewpoints very puzzling. Though it looks as though the discussion would have been fruitless anyway.
I see what you were saying now. Sometimes I get into these situations, I am in such a state of mind, I am just basically registering everything that comes my way as basically an attack. So I basically read you argument as that because I didn't expect it to actually come from a neutral place. I will go back and read it, sorry for the misunderstanding.
That's refreshing to see.
333
« on: May 28, 2015, 06:47:46 PM »
You started off the post by saying "pedophilia isn't wrong, but neither is killing someone". That is an extremely nihilistic point No, it isn't, which is why I made the distinction between being inherently wrong and prima facie wrong. Killing is generally wrong but there are situations where it may be morally permissible; so it cannot be inherently wrong. I really don't have any patience for reading an entire argument when I already know where you're going with it from the first sentence.
Well, clearly you don't know, because I made a substantial defense for why child molestation is immoral, which has nothing to do with nihilism. I find your active refusal to consider different viewpoints very puzzling. Though it looks as though the discussion would have been fruitless anyway.
334
« on: May 28, 2015, 06:28:51 PM »
Yeah not reading all that. I am looking at things from a moral perspective, not a nihilistic perspective. You missed my point.
... My post had nothing to do with nihilism, and everything to do with morals.
335
« on: May 28, 2015, 06:15:29 PM »
You're comparing killing people to having sex with children, when sex isn't even inherently bad.
To be fair that was his point. Killing isn't inherently bad. Both are prima facie bad, though (child molestation and killing) which is where you need to start. Why is child molestation prima facie bad? Well, the most obvious factor is that it manipulates the autonomy of the child (autonomy which is underdeveloped, too) and to such a degree that it usually causes long-term damage to them -- compared to other manipulative acts, like grounding them for misbehaving. This is not only due to the social stigma of pedophilia; it's due to the social (perhaps innate) value we place on sex in general. Sex has a big effect on people. Regarding nature vs nurture I'm not sure how the scales tip, but either way your problem would have to be with sex as a whole, not just pedophilia. And even if the child enjoys it at the time, as they mature and reflect on it they are almost certainly going to suffer, from the realization that they were violated on such a personal level. You say the moral gravity of molestation has been blown out of proportion. Perhaps you are right, but that doesn't make it any more morally acceptable -- it just means we are failing to criticize other equally immoral acts.
336
« on: May 28, 2015, 05:34:28 PM »
I mean, how many people actually look at the moral reason for why something is wrong There are reasons, though.
337
« on: May 27, 2015, 08:12:03 AM »
Facts are descriptive, not prescriptive
338
« on: May 27, 2015, 08:07:32 AM »
But it is a fact, as per the thread rules
339
« on: May 27, 2015, 07:59:23 AM »
I don't think it's forced at all, and there's a reason it's hailed as one of the best comedies of the decade
US office is good by typical US sitcom standards -- very good, even -- but it's a lot broader and lacks the subtlety of the british version
Plus it jumped the shark. If anything's forced it's a show forcing itself past its prime
340
« on: May 27, 2015, 07:50:22 AM »
341
« on: May 27, 2015, 07:49:17 AM »
UK office > US office.
UK Office is really forced and cringey
It's supposed to be cringey.
342
« on: May 27, 2015, 07:40:20 AM »
UK office > US office.
343
« on: May 27, 2015, 06:29:47 AM »
It is up there, yes. I don't think death is the start of some new adventure. It's just the end of everything we ever had, could and knew. It is the end of our existence. There are no second chances, repeats or a "tomorrow".
But, there are situations where you're probably better off dead. Insufferable and incurable pain that makes any sort of quality living impossible, for one.
It would only be a bad thing if we could be deprived of existence, which is logically impossible.
344
« on: May 27, 2015, 01:20:59 AM »
No. Death itself cannot be a harm. It can, however, produce harmful consequences.
*It can occur in the presence of harm too, but this does not make it intrisically harmful
**This is not to say that killing or suicide are morally acceptable, either
345
« on: May 25, 2015, 07:54:30 PM »
Well then why should we be agnostic about it when it's fixed from both ways? I don't understand how this symmetry "softens" a deterministic point of view, unless I am misunderstanding something.
The point of the paper is to refute the downward causality argued by hard determinists -- our intentions are determined by past events that could not have been any other way. Instead of our intentions being determined strictly by the past (outward-in) our intentions arise from themselves and affect the world around us (inward-out). This is by no means unanimously agreed upon and I don't think the blog was advocating it more than simply an interesting theory. And it would still leave no room for free will. "Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills."
346
« on: May 25, 2015, 07:10:46 PM »
Well there is some kind of fragmented logic to it.
Yeah, fragmented logic that barely makes sense.
Practically, no. Objecting to the glorification of guns does hold some weight in principle.
347
« on: May 25, 2015, 07:07:44 PM »
http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/handy-dandy-guide-for-skeptic-of.html?m=1
Good read for hard determinists. I lean towards soft determinism myself.
Thank you, that was interesting, i just have an issue when he says "the “laws” of physics treat time as symmetrical, which means that the present and the future “fix” the past just in the same way in which the past “fixes” the present and the future. No particular area of the time axis has priority over the others." If he's trying to make a case for the existence of free will, why does he cite this claim? If things are symmetrically fixed, then isn't hard determinism further proven?
He's not making a case for free will. He doesn't believe it exists (or, to be foward, he accepts that it cannot exist). He's arguing against the hard causality of determinism, or that we should at least be agnostic about it. Bear in mind that a chaotic universe still wouldn't result in free will.
348
« on: May 25, 2015, 06:48:12 PM »
Well there is some kind of fragmented logic to it.
349
« on: May 25, 2015, 06:18:12 PM »
*So few by so many
Or am I missing something
350
« on: May 25, 2015, 05:57:20 PM »
351
« on: May 25, 2015, 06:32:18 AM »
It's one of my favorites. Wes Anderson is the master of whimsy, so you should check out his other films as well.
He uses the same actors throughout them so part of the joy is waiting to see the ridiculous characters they play.
352
« on: May 25, 2015, 12:59:07 AM »
How are there 21 likes from the same user?
353
« on: May 24, 2015, 08:46:35 PM »
The problem with inmendham is that his arguments are swathed in so much abuse and resentment that I can't imagine many people being swayed by them, even when they are (often) totally sound. It's a shame that such a rational guy is preaching to the choir most of the time. His opinions are worth listening to, but man, is listening to him exhausting.
He doesn't need to pause the videos he's addressing every 5 seconds either. He always ends up repeating himself and dragging his videos out longer than necessary.
I guess he would respond to this with something along the lines of not giving a fuck what other people think... but that is clearly a silly mindset when the persuasiveness of your arguments is crucial to making others behave in morally significant ways.
I'll watch the video.
354
« on: May 24, 2015, 08:28:38 PM »
so, did you watch it?
fucking beautiful, right?
I watched maybe 15 minutes then had to pause it and finish an assignment. I'll post my thoughts here when I get through the rest.
355
« on: May 24, 2015, 08:35:44 AM »
I only recently found out it's apparently pronounced "verb-ay-tim" in English. Strange things indeed.
It will always be ver-buh-tim in my head.
356
« on: May 23, 2015, 11:58:55 PM »
Is white sugar not vegan? I can't say I actively avoid it, but I don't really know how much I consume, if any at all. I'm also not sure what you mean by suspicious numbers.
I'm strict in the sense that it extends beyond my diet. I also wear vegan clothes and have vegan furniture.
It's commonly refined with bone char. I used to avoid it, but then I realized it's just an economically viable byproduct and animals aren't being farmed for it directly. (I think). I use raw sugar for coffee but I don't bend over backwards to avoid foods that just have "sugar" in the ingredients By numbers I mean preservative 402e and stuff like that. Again there are some vegans who are very strict about this stuff but I don't see any practical benefit for animals if the main culprits are meat, dairy and eggs. The moment you're getting a magnifying glass out in the supermarket, you've gone too far imo. Doesn't really paint veganism as an appealing and/or maintainable lifestyle either.
357
« on: May 23, 2015, 11:50:53 PM »
Bon Iver
Sigur Ros
sleepmakeswaves
Tycho
Explosions in the Sky
All I'm really listening to atm
358
« on: May 23, 2015, 11:41:40 PM »
It's hard for me, because I'm an extremely picky eater, but yeah.
How strict of a vegan are you? Do you avoid white sugar and foods with suspicious numbers in the ingredients?
359
« on: May 23, 2015, 11:12:25 PM »
Yeah, a lot of those guys (Repzion, AmazingAtheist, Thunderfoot) irritate me. They're more concerned with jumping on the latest bandwagon instead of discussing issues that are actually worth discussing. Okay, so Anita Sarkeesian made a new video on sexism in Flappy bird. Big fucking deal.
Interestingly Repzion was challenged to a debate by VeganAtheist a few months back on his highly irrational views and declined. But of course the moment he spots an easy target like Freelee's video he'll use her as a platform on which to contrast his own views and make them seem more reasonable than they actually are. Probably gets him a few subscribers to boot.
I haven't watched inmendham for a long time because his unflinching pessimism was starting to get me down. And his videos are about 45 minutes long. But I'll give this one a go.
360
« on: May 23, 2015, 08:56:08 PM »
No one knows what ad hominem is, either. A lot of people just think it's a generic insult, but it's not.
I basically view any insult as ad hominem, even when it's coupled with a fleshed out argument. It's still a cheap attempt to smear your opponent, blight their argument before they make it, and prop your own up on a pedestal. The whole point of an ad hominem is to manipulate people who are susceptible to ad hominems. It may not strictly be fallacious, but it's always an intellectually dishonest move.
Pages: 1 ... 101112 1314 ... 16
|
Show Posts