User Controls
We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
-
2018-06-27 at 11:08 PM UTC
-
2018-06-27 at 11:10 PM UTC
-
2018-06-27 at 11:13 PM UTCI mean, wanting something seems like a pretty subjective judgement. What desires of yours should you or should you not act upon?
I've given you what is ostensibly an easy example, no? I mean, we are talking about the destruction of humanity. -
2018-06-27 at 11:17 PM UTCI just think the answer is obvious. If their desire for survial is greater than their desire for meat, that's what they would do.
-
2018-06-27 at 11:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I just think the answer is obvious. If their desire for survial is greater than their desire for meat, that's what they would do.
Nobody cares about "would". If someone wants to murder you, they will do that too. The question is why they should or shouldn't. Again, you're not answering the question, just evading it by posing your irrational conclusion as part of your premise.
You have a thought in your brain. What justification do you have for pursuing it? Is it because doing what you want to do feels good or what? A thought is just a thought. There is no inherent need to act on it. We ignore thoughts all the time. -
2018-06-27 at 11:26 PM UTC
-
2018-06-27 at 11:31 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Nobody cares about "would". If someone wants to murder you, they will do that too. The question is why they should. Again, you're not answering the question, just evading it by posing your irrational conclusion as part of your premise.
You have a thought in your brain. What justification do you have for pursuing it?
are you actually retarded? Who has to justify "pursuing their own thoughts"? That's nonsense. -
2018-06-27 at 11:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe are you actually retarded? Who has to justify "pursuing their own thoughts"? That's nonsense.
That's not an answer. You're not providing any objective A/B connection here. You have and reject a lot of thoughts on a daily basis. On what basis do you give preference to one idea over the other and decide whether or not to act on it?
I can ask this questions in many different ways but you're going to have to acknowledge that you are assigning a normative value to pursuing any particular desire and then somehow comparing them and making a decision on which decision you are going to make. -
2018-06-28 at 12:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain That's not an answer. You're not providing any objective A/B connection here. You have and reject a lot of thoughts on a daily basis. On what basis do you give preference to one idea over the other and decide whether or not to act on it?
I can ask this questions in many different ways but you're going to have to acknowledge that you are assigning a normative value to pursuing any particular desire and then somehow comparing them and making a decision on which decision you are going to make.
I don't "reject thoughts" or "give preference to one idea over another". You're not making sense. If I desire something more strongly than I desire something else, I'm going to end up thinking about and pursuing the thing I most desire. How are you even asking these questions? -
2018-06-28 at 2:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I don't "reject thoughts" or "give preference to one idea over another". You're not making sense. If I desire something more strongly than I desire something else, I'm going to end up thinking about and pursuing the thing I most desire.
Are you predestined by god to devolve into shitty semantic fallback arguments when you can't admit you're wrong? If you choose not to do something, you are rejecting the proposition of doing that thing in favour of something else. Either way, it doesn't change the question, you're just really shit at actually even avoiding the question.
And the question is simple , but I'll boil it down even further: what is the unit of measure of the "strength" of your desire? What objective source do you derive the conclusion that you like one thing more than the other from?How are you even asking these questions?
I don't know dude, apparently I have a much better grasp of the English language than you do. -
2018-06-28 at 11:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Are you predestined by god to devolve into shitty semantic fallback arguments when you can't admit you're wrong? If you choose not to do something, you are rejecting the proposition of doing that thing in favour of something else. Either way, it doesn't change the question, you're just really shit at actually even avoiding the question.
And the question is simple , but I'll boil it down even further: what is the unit of measure of the "strength" of your desire? What objective source do you derive the conclusion that you like one thing more than the other from?
I don't know dude, apparently I have a much better grasp of the English language than you do.
I don't measure the "strength of my desire". I don't "conclude" that I like one thing more than another, I just like what I like. I don't believe any of this has anything to do with morality any more. You're just being stupid. -
2018-06-28 at 11:50 AM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I don't measure the "strength of my desire". I don't "conclude" that I like one thing more than another, I just like what I like. I don't believe any of this has anything to do with morality any more. You're just being stupid.
Do you think that is an objective basis for your behaviour? -
2018-06-28 at 12:50 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Do you think that is an objective basis for your behaviour?
Yes, I think my desires and behaviors are simply my genes interacting with the environment.
If you have a point I think you could have made it like 6 posts ago. Say what you want to say instead of asking me an endless line of dumb questions. -
2018-06-28 at 12:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe Yes, I think my desires and behaviors are simply my genes interacting with the environment.
So?If you have a point I think you could have made it like 6 posts ago. Say what you want to say instead of asking me an endless line of dumb questions.
I've already said what I want to say. You are simply acting mentally retarded. You don't actually know what it means for something to be subjective or objective, you have no justification for why you think it's meaningless, and you're also making blatantly retarded statements like what should be "legal" even though you are basing it on a normative judgement.
You have jack shit. You have no point, no argument, and ironically you seem to be responding purely for the purpose of I haling your own farts rather than making any coherent point.
Tl;Dr: kill yourself. -
2018-06-28 at 1:01 PM UTCI have not been interested in what you've been saying this entire time. I'm just waiting for Lanny to reply to me.
-
2018-06-28 at 1:26 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I have not been interested in what you've been saying this entire time. I'm just waiting for Lanny to reply to me.
You asked a question borne of your belief. Your belief holds zero merit and is demonstrably false. Lanny tried to respond to you but you are retarded and can't understand the basic use of language. You're not waiting for jack shit. -
2018-06-28 at 2:31 PM UTCI guess I just don't understand.
-
2018-06-28 at 6:16 PM UTCthe morality of rats and flies.
-
2018-06-28 at 6:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe I don't measure the "strength of my desire". I don't "conclude" that I like one thing more than another, I just like what I like. I don't believe any of this has anything to do with morality any more. You're just being stupid.
these are processes that happen involuntarily - you 'like what you like', but if you inspect your thought processes more closely you can come to understand why you like it. -
2018-06-28 at 6:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe Yes, I think my desires and behaviors are simply my genes interacting with the environment.
If you have a point I think you could have made it like 6 posts ago. Say what you want to say instead of asking me an endless line of dumb questions.
Be fair, you've characterized his method of inquiry in a way that sounds eerily familiar, and I don't think he strayed from the discussion in trying to disrobe your argument. I think it should be clear why we're looking at you for a decision-making process within your ethics: it's because you're so eager to decry ours as faulty, while apparently holding no position of your own regarding how it should work. You make moral judgments all the time, so you may as well tell us how a subjectively moral being accomplishes that. I know you said before that you'd look for objective facts to supplement your ethics to this end, but what do you do in the likely everyday case when you don't have those?
