Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
They are remaking Links Awakening for the Switch. I've almost beat Links Awakening DX on my Odroid Go.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2019-02-15 at 9:54 PM UTC
in
Should I get a real doll?
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
If real dolls become life-like to the point where it is nearly impossible to tell the difference between a living person and a doll, unless you scan their barcode or something like that, and could mimic sentience, would it become wrong to act out you sick and twisted sexual urges on them? Like if a doll could deny Bill Krozby sexual consent, is it still rape if uses the doll for sex anyway? Is it better for him to rape a doll vs a person?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
It already happened. An alien AI has been sending a signal to earth that has affected our perception of reality and our thought processes effectively putting us in a matrix and compelling us to destroy our planet.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Lanny
I don't know, I don't have the blueprint for anarchist revolution. Maybe you disseminate martial power or something? Or install a minimalist state whose function is basically to prevent the formation of a more expansive state?
I'm not actually trying to defend anarchy/minarchy. I just think it's kind of funny how little my life has changed in the apparent absence of a federal government.
Did you hear about the damage caused to Joshua Tree during the shutdown that will take nature about 300 years to recover from?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Long time ago my old roommate's brother came over. Strange guy, very paranoid, carried nunchucks around with him. He got drunk on some cider and we gave him a little acid. It was his first trip and he didn't handle it well. I remember the sound of him throwing up into a plastic bag because he couldn't go to the bathroom for some reason, and the sound of the vomit sloshing around in the bag.
Also back before we were roommate's back in highschool we are some magic mushrooms and at one point decided to go get some pizza. I guess he hadn't eaten very much all day, and while we were in line at the pizza place he just all the sudden passed out, got super disoriented and didn't know what was going on. Me and my other buddy had to drag him outside because everyone in the pizza place was eyeballing us.
Same guy had the strangest reactions to salvia... most people I knew would basically become zombified for the duration of the trip. This guy just laughed, constantly, uncontrollably the whole time he was tripping.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by CASPER
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe life has inherent value
I don't believe value or meaning is something the world inherently has. I think value/meaning is something humans apply to the world, and different people will apply different values or meanings to life.
Also the world will eventually take everything from you and it will eat you, so you might as well take a bite out of the world too.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
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!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING IV: The Flower of Death and The Crystal of Life
If you want a stupid thing then you are evil.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING IV: The Flower of Death and The Crystal of Life
Did you just say you can't tell a good generator from a bad one, then outline exactly how you could?
That makes no sense. I believe can definitely all agree what is a good generator and what is a bad one - even aliens would be able to do this.
As such we are evaluating designs, so ideas, so there exist good ideas - which help you achieve your goals and are life affirming - and bad ideas.
What Terry Davis would call divine intellect vs thinking like a fucking nigger.
I told you that if a generator is performing the way you want it to you might consider that generator to be good. But someone who, for example, is against the usage of the type of fuel your generator requires would consider your generator to be bad, even if it is working fine. Are you paying attention? Goodness and badness is not something we can objectively measure. Different people can look at the exact same objective data and arrive at completely opposite conclusions about the goodness or badness of that data.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Lanny
I just told you two things that we can measure fairly objectively to tell us how good acts are though.
Those things are objective measurements, but not objective measurements of goodness or badness. One measurement you mentioned tells us objectively how many "quality adjusted years of human life (an action) produced/reduced". That doesn't tell us objectively how good or bad that action is, it only tells us objectively how many years of human life is produced or reduced. Whether or not that is good or bad is not objective. It might be good for a human, but what is good for a human is not neccessarily objectively or inherently good. Your other example is the same.
Yes, Lanny liking spinach is an objective statement. Lanny liking spinach might be good for a spinach salesman, but we have no way of knowing Lanny liking spinach is objectively or inherently good.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING IV: The Flower of Death and The Crystal of Life
Is there an objective force that we can measure that tells you how good a generator is, with 100 being the best machine possible, and 0 being a pile of rust?
No?
But some machines are better than others. Not different, but better.
You cannot objectively measure how "morally good" a generator is. That is exactly what I'm saying. We cannot objectively measure goodness or badness.
However, we can objectively measure electrical potential and efficiency. If your generator is generating the electrical potential you require at an efficient rate, it is an effective generator and definitely is not a pile of rust. And if an effective generator is what I need I might say that is good, but that doesn't mean it is objectively or inherently good.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING IV: The Flower of Death and The Crystal of Life
Does a generator objectively exist as such?
All a generator is is an idea and a bunch of atoms.
Does structured matter exist beyond just being matter?
Oh, I agree we can have ideas and make them a reality.
But do you believe there is an objective force we can measure to determine how much goodness or badness specific actions or behaviors have?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING IV: The Flower of Death and The Crystal of Life
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?
Ideas exists as ideas, not as objective properties of our reality. Something is good because I imagine it is good, not because there is some objective force that makes it good.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
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!
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!
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!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by Zanick
He keeps a lot of secrets like this place and his drugs and they're all self-destructive for him, excuse me if I don't respect his stupid privacy and excuse me for being concerned.
Gee, I wonder why he doesn't like you. Maybe if you were a better sister he wouldn't have become a drug addicted recluse whose only friends are weird internet people.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Obbe
Alan What?
[annoy my right-angled speediness]
Originally posted by mmQ
Why don't you?
Because there is no way to objectively measure the amount goodness or badness we imagine specific actions have. If everyone were to agree to share the same moral theory we would all imagine the same moral conclusions, but even if we did, that wouldn't tell us anything about the real world. When two people with different moral frameworks reach two different moral conclusions about a specific action there is no way for us to measure who if either of them is objectively correct.
Why would anyone believe morality is objective?
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!