User Controls
Regarding my son
-
2018-01-18 at 6:20 AM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 6:22 AM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 6:43 AM UTC
Originally posted by Marcos Aurelius 1337 admitted he precummed around you irl, ghostemane.
Admitted? lol that's fucking rich. If that is true, that he said he had any sort of sexual contact with me IRL, then he's lying and trolling you fucks good. He's been my friend for a while now, but yeah, he's not my type, not in the least. -
2018-01-18 at 7:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice I’m challenging the idea that creating beings that can experience happiness and pleasure is a positive act. It isn’t. Sentient existence is not a positive thing. It is needless and guarantees suffering. Those beings don’t exist.
Fine, but that's an entirely different issue than Parfit's "repugnant conclusion" argument.
And it brings us back to the issue I posed to you in my first post: what principal justifies the avoidance of suffering which doesn't justify the pursuit of happiness?
Originally posted by Sophie Ok but if it's not about policy it's certainly about adhering to a moral principle. That being whether it is good or bad to bring new life into this world. If we say it's good then that has to be the principle to adhere to but then we must define by what metric we decide what "good" entails.
The point wasn't exactly to explain what I consider correct moral action either. I was simply demonstrating that a specific argument against utilitarianism fails when we decouple "life worth living" from "life someone elects to live".
In fact the entire shift to a discussing of utilitarianism is a bit off point too, I started by pointing out what I think is an issue with Malice's "needs where none need to exist" slogan (the above: finding a principal that makes generating suffering or needs unjustifiable which doesn't justify fulfilling lives), the diversion to utilitarianism and he "repugnant conclusion" critique was just a segue. -
2018-01-18 at 7:23 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny The point wasn't exactly to explain what I consider correct moral action either. I was simply demonstrating that a specific argument against utilitarianism fails when we decouple "life worth living" from "life someone elects to live".
In fact the entire shift to a discussing of utilitarianism is a bit off point too, I started by pointing out what I think is an issue with Malice's "needs where none need to exist" slogan (the above: finding a principal that makes generating suffering or needs unjustifiable which doesn't justify fulfilling lives), the diversion to utilitarianism and he "repugnant conclusion" critique was just a segue.
Right. It's probably my fault for jumping in half-way. But i think the overall theme of the discussion surrounding this should be trying to figure out what is indeed morally correct. To anti-natalism or not to anti-natalism so to speak. -
2018-01-18 at 7:43 AM UTC
Originally posted by hydromorphone Admitted? lol that's fucking rich. If that is true, that he said he had any sort of sexual contact with me IRL, then he's lying and trolling you fucks good. He's been my friend for a while now, but yeah, he's not my type, not in the least.
Dude you're a $50 hooker in a rural area lmaoThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-01-18 at 8:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by mmQ I want to have at least one stupid fucking kid. Wanna try to make him cool. Or her. It's a neat project probably the highest risk/reward project you can undertake. May as well. But just one. The multiple kids are the real problem.
so its all about you you you you you with you isnt it ??? -
2018-01-18 at 8:18 AM UTC
Originally posted by 哈哈你看不懂中文 Every thread lanny posts on devolves to philosophy
becos philosophy is interesting.
you can be a village idiot and formulate your thoughts on how one should feel about having a penis up in their ass and it'll be philosophy ....
or you can be a well read professor and having expressed no feelings of your own other then regurgitating a compendium of what other well read ''professors'' wrote about how one should feel when having a penis up their asses ... and it still be philosophy.
its a game anyone can play with no objective right or wrong or left. -
2018-01-18 at 8:22 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny And it brings us back to the issue I posed to you in my first post: what principal justifies the avoidance of suffering which doesn't justify the pursuit of happiness?
You’re attempting to justify the creation of a being who has a need to pursue happiness. There isn’t necessarily anything wrong with pursuing happiness for already existing beings. No amount of suffering should justify that, it being needless.
There are countless problems with the creation of life and existence and refraining from procreating avoids all of them. -
2018-01-18 at 8:27 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice You’re attempting to justify the creation of a being who has a need to pursue happiness.
No, I'm not. You seem to be missing the point, I'm not telling you anything about ethics, not trying to justify anything here. I'm challenging your position, my beliefs have nothing to do with it.
You would affirm the statement "it is wrong to induce suffering" (as in the case of giving birth to a child who will suffer) but deny the statement "it is right to induce fulfillment" (as in the case of giving birth to a child who will have a fulfilling life) would you not? I'm asking you for some moral principal which supports both these positions. -
2018-01-18 at 8:31 AM UTCThe prevention of suffering should be prioritized over the creation of pleasure when deciding whether or not to create new lives. The say to prevent it for certain is to refrain from creating lives. I have seen no convincing argument for why eventual extinction would be a negative event.
-
2018-01-18 at 8:46 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice The prevention of suffering should be prioritized over the creation of pleasure when deciding whether or not to create new lives. The say to prevent it for certain is to refrain from creating lives. I have seen no convincing argument for why eventual extinction would be a negative event.
Creating life is a gift, you have access to the wonder of the internet and basically effortless survival and unlimited food if you live in a first world country. If that's suffering then you must be pretty ungrateful. -
2018-01-18 at 9:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Marcos Aurelius Dude you're a $50 hooker in a rural area lmao
What exactly does being a $50 whore have to do with anything in the current discussion? I'm also not in a rural area anymore, unfortunately. I live not far outside a pretty big city on the east coast these days.
Originally posted by SpectraL- Creating life is a gift, you have access to the wonder of the internet and basically effortless survival and unlimited food if you live in a first world country. If that's suffering then you must be pretty ungrateful.
Suffering isn't just about not having basic needs met. Some people struggle with crippling illness be it mental or physical that makes living in even the best of life shitty. Life can be a gift, and so can death, depending on your specific circumstances. -
2018-01-18 at 9:44 AM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 9:44 AM UTCAlso hydro that's fake spectral, he's probably just trolling the threadThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-01-18 at 9:46 AM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 11:03 AM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 1:52 PM UTC
Originally posted by hydromorphone What exactly does being a $50 whore have to do with anything in the current discussion? I'm also not in a rural area anymore, unfortunately. I live not far outside a pretty big city on the east coast these days.
It means you're not discerning and 🎵 you ain't got no type. 🎵 Feeling 1337's clydesdale precum in your unprotected trough was something you wanted cause other than that you feel old blue collar hands choking you out for $50. -
2018-01-18 at 2:17 PM UTC
-
2018-01-18 at 4:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by SpectraL- Creating life is a gift, you hav
what if the life you created happens to be a pedophile ???
what if it was a r@ygold ??
what if it was a hussyfan ??
what if it was a nablot ???
what if it was richard huckle ???
what if your creations got turned into siberian mouse ???
what then ... if that still a gift ???
