2019-01-16 at 2:45 AM UTC
Originally posted by omn5;pvl
We have a moral obligation to reject all goods and services produced by capitalists
hmm it really presents quite the dilemma doesn't it?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 2:47 AM UTC
We have a moral obligation to stop posting in this thread. Eat more cows.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 2:49 AM UTC
GGG
victim of incest
[my veinlike two-fold aepyornidae]
Originally posted by Erekshun
We have a moral obligation to stop posting in this thread. Eat more cows.
Eat more chikin
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 2:56 AM UTC
If that's what you want. no guilt!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 4:34 AM UTC
Lanny, you need to answer my question for this discussion to move.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 11:51 AM UTC
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Lanny
There's lots of ways. A common one is "quality adjusted years of human life produced/reduced". Another is more binary: "does this action fulfill or violate my moral obligations". These things are about as measurable as any output of actuarial science, which no one claims is mere subjective opinion.
Neither of those are an objective measurement of goodness or badness.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 11:59 AM UTC
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Why does Lanny believe human life is objectively good? Obviously human life is good from the perspective of a human, but what makes it objectively good?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 12:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by omn5;pvl
Read Das Kapital and learn how those goods are produced through exploitation of labour, you will come to realize that there's no such thing as ethical consumption under captialism
Just about everything is immoral, an infringement of your rights, victimisation of the innocent and exploitation if you think about it.
Pointing out asymetries of power like that is how feminism, communism, libertarianism, grievance studies etc. work.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 2:13 PM UTC
give^ a better example.🤟
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-16 at 2:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny
Which question is that?
Why do you believe morality is universal as opposed to referential?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-17 at 5:31 AM UTC
I'm not really sure what you mean by "referential". I think there some actions that are good or bad, and that saying so is more than a mere statement of opinion.
Why are they universally so?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by Lanny
On the contrary, they seem to measure goodness or badness in about the same way as the reading of a voltmeter measures voltage across a circuit. It's true you need some kind of justification that the measure actually reflects the thing measured, but you should at least see that if such a justification is compelling then we have reason to believe in an "objective" morality.
again.
theres no such thing as good, goodness or bad or badness.
good, or the ness of it are just the things that the mob found acceptable or favorable and bad, and the ness of it are just the things that the mob found to be unacceptable.
while 5 volts give an electrical push and pull of 5 volts in strength everywhere in the universe except in singularity, goodness and badness are measured differently between cultures and civilizations.
also, child brides and lolitas are good. very good. in some places.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-17 at 11:13 AM UTC
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Lanny
On the contrary, they seem to measure goodness or badness in about the same way as the reading of a voltmeter measures voltage across a circuit. It's true you need some kind of justification that the measure actually reflects the thing measured, but you should at least see that if such a justification is compelling then we have reason to believe in an "objective" morality.
I'm not really sure what you mean by "referential". I think there some actions that are good or bad, and that saying so is more than a mere statement of opinion.
Electrical potential is electrical potential, whether we refer to it as a "volt" or anything else doesn't matter. There is actually a force that we are measuring, no matter what we call it.
Human life is only good if you imagine it is good. There is no measurent we can make that will tell us objectively how good it is. There is nothing to be measured.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-17 at 11:31 AM UTC
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Lanny
But an instrument with a numeric display isn't electrical potential, it's a way of measuring electrical potential. We have no independent, direct, objective access to electrical potential, we need a story about how the reading on the face of a voltmeter is a measurement of an underlying reality. Likewise with morality, we don't have direct access to it but that doesn't mean it's a mere matter of opinion any more than electrical potential is.
Incorrect. Your light needs a specific voltage to function properly. Whether we refer to this force as 120 volts or 500 Ubik doesn't really matter. There is a force that objectively exists and we can all see that when your light turns on. On the contrary, human life is only good if you imagine it is good. The exact same life could be imagined as either good or bad depending on the imagination of the person making that judgement, but there doesn't seem to be anything objective we can measure to tell us how good or bad that life actually is.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-17 at 11:35 AM UTC
GGG
victim of incest
[my veinlike two-fold aepyornidae]
Make turnips great again
Originally posted by Obbe
Incorrect. Your light needs a specific voltage to function properly. Whether we refer to this force as 120 volts or 500 Ubik doesn't really matter. There is a force that objectively exists and we can all see that when your light turns on. On the contrary, human life is only good if you imagine it is good. The exact same life could be imagined as either good or bad depending on the imagination of the person making that judgement, but there doesn't seem to be anything objective we can measure to tell us how good or bad that life actually is.
Wrong. There's not much to say about this but I think it's worth the effort.
You don't wanna make it look better than what you're looking for someone to practice. If you want to see for yourself, then you can get names on the right and the best way to get a lower dose of your weight loss is to make sure you are the most important person in your life. You can send pictures and photos from your wedding day.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-01-17 at 11:45 AM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe
Your light needs a specific voltage to function properly. Whether we refer to this force as 120 volts or 500 Ubik doesn't really matter. There is a force that objectively exists and we can all see that when your light turns on.
Lights require lots of different quantum phenomena, like surface effect, to work.
That means that the universe is governed by invisible rules and effects that we can't see (as they have no material reality) and can't predict without recourse to mathematical probability.
The idea that the universe is objective is wrong, but I don't understand, are you saying ideas don't real or what?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
