User Controls
Morality and Law
-
2015-09-25 at 3:15 AM UTC
Because that's how it is.
Lol, no it's just an unfalsifiable claim which makes it neither scientific nor rational.You might as well be asking why does anything exist. Why is there gravity?
I actually know why these things exists. Big Bang, mass, there are your answers.Maybe we don't need to ask what the reason for everything is.
If that is so why even bring determinism up then?Maybe the only reason we look for reasons and purposes is because we just happened to evolve an ability to think that way and question things and talk about stuff with each other.
I agree but don't see how it's relevant.Who cares?
You do since you felt it necessary to mention determinism.What's the point of life?
There is no point we just exist.What's the point of these forums?
Conversation.Maybe it doesn't matter what the point is.
It actually does, because i'm not going to waste any effort on a pointless endeavor i got better things to do.Maybe it's all relative.
Orly, does gravity strike you as relative? If i throw two rocks of a hill will one float away and one fall down? No, objective reality is objective reality.Maybe if you can't think of a counter argument, you could consider the possibility that my argument is just better.
You shouldn't flatter yourself, an unfalsifiable claim is by it's very nature not an argument.Why did you even mention it then? I'm actually familiar with UPB and freedomainradio.
Are you? You certainly seem to be missing the point.I'm already of the opinion that UPB is bullshit.
Ok so you're biased against it, fair enough but lets not call that an argument either.It's useless and not any better or different than our current system. Morality can never be anything other than subjective, and if there are universally preferable behaviors
Lol you've completely divorced yourself of reason by this point. All you're writing down are your personal opinions on the subject by now.they are meaningless because they don't change anything.
Ok let's accept that for a minute. Things that don't change anything are meaningless, you believe everything is deterministic, therefore it doesn't matter what you do it has already been predetermined for you, so by your own logic everything you do or will do is meaningless.Killers are still going to be killers.
Yup, and laws aren't going to be stopping them any more than any moral theory.Laws are still going to be opinions with guns. So what were you even thinking when you suggest UPB as some sort of alternative?
At least UPB does not rely on the initiation of force, to enforce the ideas espoused within that framework. Which makes it infinitely better than our current system.
-
2015-09-25 at 12 PM UTCWTF IS UPB?
-
2015-09-25 at 12:49 PM UTC
WTF IS UPB?
It's bullshit created by a bullshiter to trick people like sophie into thinking it's something revolutionary. His entire argument  for why it is better or different than our current system is that it doesn't rely on force, which is retarded because it must.  If someone was out there killing people,  you would still throw him in jail.  Telling him his behavior isn't universally preferred isn't going to stop him.  It's useless bullshit. -
2015-09-25 at 1:44 PM UTCSo UPB = Universally Preferred Behavior. If that had any shot at working it would already be working.
-
2015-09-25 at 2:34 PM UTC
It's bullshit created by a bullshiter to trick people like sophie into thinking it's something revolutionary.* His entire argument *for why it is better or different than our current system is that it doesn't rely on force, which is retarded because it must. *If someone was out there killing people, *you would still throw him in jail. *Telling him his behavior isn't universally preferred isn't going to stop him. *It's useless bullshit.
Lol you mad bro? -
2015-09-25 at 2:49 PM UTC
Lol you mad bro?
Why would I be? If anything, you should be mad that you swallowed Stefans UPB bullshit. -
2015-09-25 at 3:17 PM UTC
It's bullshit created by a bullshiter to trick people like sophie into thinking it's something revolutionary.* His entire argument *for why it is better or different than our current system is that it doesn't rely on force, which is retarded because it must. *If someone was out there killing people, *you would still throw him in jail. *Telling him his behavior isn't universally preferred isn't going to stop him. *It's useless bullshit.
Why would I be?
Strong language for a calm person bro.If anything, you should be mad that you swallowed Stefans UPB bullshit.
Except you haven't provided an argument against UPB just: Something something moral relativism, personal opinions, something something doesn't work so it's meaningless. Furthermore if you call a rational proof , which is logically consistent bullshit. Well, then i don't know what to say. Open Your Mind bro <3 -
2015-09-25 at 3:51 PM UTC
Strong language for a calm person bro.
Except you haven't provided an argument against UPB just: Something something moral relativism, personal opinions, something something doesn't work so it's meaningless. Furthermore if you call a rational proof , which is logically consistent bullshit. Well, then i don't know what to say. Open Your Mind bro <3
Strong language or not, you believing that Stefans bullshit is somehow better than the current system doesn't make me angry.
I have no obligation to make an actual arguement against UPB, seeing as you still haven't given us your position. You have refused to explain how UPB is better or different than the current system. You have refused to explain how it is useful. Therefore, I can only assume that you don't have an explanation. I am already familiar with UBP and it's simply useless bullshit. You've even admitted that it doesn't change anything, so it doesn't make sense why you would suggest that it is better than the current system in the first place. Unless you can explain why I'm wrong, you haven't given us any reason to take your position seriously.
Open your mind Sophie - Stefan is just talking bullshit. -
2015-09-25 at 6:02 PM UTCNo faggot. Burden of proof is on you. Soph gave his reasons and posted more worthwhile philosophy in this thread than I have ever seen come from you. So how about you stop being such a little bitch and stop your bullshit about how "you have no obligation to make an actual argument against UPB" because you dont even know what UPB is. You refuse to look into the matter and because of that you have no idea what the theory actually consists of. So if you want to have a serious conversation its time for you to Open Your Mind and have an actual conversation that doesnt consist of "lol I belif dertermined. Lol moral relativism. Lol I have no obligation to study what I consider bullshit even though I dont understand it. Lol criminals dont make the decision to commit crime because there are factors out of their control in life".
People like you are what is destroying the cultivation of philosophical conversation because you dont know how to actually think philosophically. You only know how to support your current viewpoint. -
2015-09-25 at 7:19 PM UTCOYM Is more of a sophist than i am. (Philosophy/username joke git rekt)
-
2015-09-25 at 7:23 PM UTC
No faggot. Burden of proof is on you. Soph gave his reasons and posted more worthwhile philosophy in this thread than I have ever seen come from you. So how about you stop being such a little bitch and stop your bullshit about how "you have no obligation to make an actual argument against UPB" because you dont even know what UPB is. You refuse to look into the matter and because of that you have no idea what the theory actually consists of. So if you want to have a serious conversation its time for you to Open Your Mind and have an actual conversation that doesnt consist of "lol I belif dertermined. Lol moral relativism. Lol I have no obligation to study what I consider bullshit even though I dont understand it. Lol criminals dont make the decision to commit crime because there are factors out of their control in life".
People like you are what is destroying the cultivation of philosophical conversation because you dont know how to actually think philosophically. You only know how to support your current viewpoint.
You're the gayest little nigger faggot I've seen on these forums so far. Sophies "reasons" were nothing substantial, just his claim that UPB is better than the current system and his refusal to explain why he believes that. I have looked into UPB, and it is useless. If you don't agree with that then explain your position. If you don't want to do that why are you here? Get back to talking about how horrible your life turned out and how drunk you were last night. -
2015-09-25 at 8:24 PM UTC
I have looked into UPB, and it is useless. If you don't agree with that then explain your position.
Its not that I dont agree with it or do agree with it. Its that I want you to explain your position as to why UPB is bullshit before explaining my position even though I already did that in my previous post in this thread. Bring something to the table other than namecalling because it shows how little you actually know about anything you are trying to talk about. Honestly its quite sad to see someone have a philisophical discussion and ignore what others are saying while refusing to state reasons for your position. Do you know what that is called? Ignorance.
If you want us "open our minds" you must open yours. From your username it implies that you think you know everything about everything and if we just listen to you our minds will miraculously open and we will be illuminated by you. This definitly isnt going to happen when 1. you dont know what you are talking about 2. you cant back up your position when contronted with someone elses position 3. upon being called out on it you resort to the behavior of a 14 year old by calling the opposition gay. 4. On top of it all you still actually believe your philosophical conviction is so far above us all that you need not provide proof nor support for any of your arguments.
How is adolescence treating you? -
2015-09-25 at 9:49 PM UTCTS;DR
-
2015-09-26 at 1:50 AM UTCI'm surprised to see Sophie arguing in favour of UPB. There's a reason professional philosophers, even libertarian ones, don't take it seriously.
https://mises.org/library/molyneux-problem -
2015-09-26 at 1:58 AM UTC
I'm surprised to see Sophie arguing in favour of UPB. There's a reason professional philosophers, even libertarian ones, don't take it seriously.
https://mises.org/library/molyneux-problem
In any case you actually provide something of substance to counter UPB instead of LOL ITS BULLSHIT, i'll give that article a read and if it's compelling adjust my position accordingly.
By the way i'll be needing that M_27.7z password of yours kthx. -
2015-09-26 at 2:29 AM UTCSophie, think about it without all the highbrow nonsense. If UPB was a viable option it would already be in place. The thing is this, the minute a person or group of people has a survival need that is not being met they are going to do whatever it takes to meet that need. It's hardwired into our predatory nature. UPB would say that if your children are starving or dying from an illness that you can't afford to treat you are going to take any action necessary to correct the situation which is causing that need to not be met. But let's flip this for a moment. What If you are the person on the receiving end of the persons who is ignoring UPB to meet their survival needs? Are you going to act according to UPB or are you going to defend yourself with lethal force if need be lying order to meet your need to survive?
-
2015-09-26 at 5:05 AM UTCSophie and littlenigglet are just members of the Stefan Molyneux fan club. Most people who aren't in the fan club don't buy into the bullshit.
Here's an article explaining why that is: http://www.fdrliberated.com/stefan-m...-story-part-1/Stefan Molyneux wrote a book. It was supposed to be his crowning achievement, THE definitive answer to “what is moral behavior?†The world’s first top-to-bottom system of philosophy, something philosophers have been unable to even attempt for the last 6,000 years. More important, it was suppose to establish Molyneux in the pantheon of thinkers he had studied in college. A position he might have established years earlier, if academia had not blindly rejected him. But all didn’t go according to plan. In fact, of all Molyneux enterprises, it might be said that UPB has had the*least*impact. Today, with his followers typically*unable to explain what UPB*is*(lol like Sophie earlier in this thread) even Molyneux is not able to respond in writing to inquiries on the subject. Recently, when someone asked for clarification on his forum, he gave the curt reply, “I have never seen a UPB discussion work out well on a Board, the concepts are too slippery for this format, and everyone always just ends up frustrated. I invite the OP to call into the Sunday show, 4pm EST, to ask these questions directly…†So what happened? How did the book that was intended to be the most clarifying writing on ethics in thousands of years become the book Molyneux himself can no longer write about with any clarity? This is the story.
-
2015-09-26 at 4:11 PM UTCAfter reading this load of egghead tripe (http://nullrefer.com/?http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/p/35016/270923.aspx) I'm more convinced than ever that common sense is more important than "higher learning".
Common sense dictates there is no such thing as UPB. If there was people would already be engaged in it without some butthurt braniac trying to write a book about just to show all those smarty pants professors how they undervalued his intellect. There are too many variables in the human condition for anything to be "universally preferred". In some people's minds it is preferable to make a safe room in their home to hole up in and wait for the cops in case of an intruder. In other people's minds this is an unthinkable option when you can simply use deadly force (lawfully) to eliminate the threat.
Even language has an effect on the way the mind thinks. Persons who are raised speaking different languages have different thought forms, different "preferences". There is no such thing as universal preference for anything including behavior. In a group of born again Christians is is preferable to turn the other cheek. In a group of 1% "outlaw" MC members it is preferable to smite the offender hip, thigh, and cheek as a reward for their transgressions.
In Las Vegas we had a saying, "You can even get two crops dealers to agree on what time it is". This idiom stemmed from the fact that you had 4 men on a crew with 3 positions on the table that were staffed at all times. You rotated positions every 20 minutes so the guy on break was relieving the guy who had worked 1 hour. This guy always thought it was 1 or 2 minutes later than real time and the guy coming off break always thought it was 1 or 2 minutes earlier. The point is preference is based on individual perceptions that meet the needs of the individual based on that person's needs in a particular situation.
-
2015-09-26 at 10:48 PM UTC
Thread summary:
I asked the forum if laws that enforce moral beliefs serve any significant purpose in modern times.
Sophie claims we should base laws on universally preferable behavior (UPB).
I ask Sophie to explain how that would be any better or different than the current system.
Sophie refuses to explain his position, instead posts a link to the UPB pdf.
I call UPB bullshit.
Sophie the UPB fanboy thinks I have an obligation to explain why it's bullshit.
I refuse to explain why it's bullshit until Sophie explains his own position.
Another member posts an article about why UPB is bullshit.
I cave and also post an article on why UPB is bullshit.
Sophie abandons thread.
LOL
-
2015-09-27 at 2:27 AM UTCyou surprise me sometimes dark rodent. actually making decent posts and such. you fuckin ewok fuck, you.
