User Controls
Thanked Posts by Obbe
-
2019-01-12 at 4:18 PM UTC in Captain Falcon is a ManwhoreThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2019-01-11 at 9:54 PM UTC in Unban infinityshockThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2019-01-07 at 10:42 PM UTC in If you own a baseball cap you are trash and I disavow you
Originally posted by ScarletLetter https://www.urbandictionary
*TOP DEFINITION
daf =
dumb as fuck
*That bitch is daf, fo real.
Kinda like daft.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-01-04 at 10:24 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by Lanny That wasn't what I asked you. Could you please re-read the post you were responding to and answer specifically the question I posed.
That is my answer specific to the question you asked me: you have not demonstrated any moral system exists beyond imagination. Your moral conclusions might logically follow your moral framework, but your moral framework is something you are imagining and so your conclusions are only regarding your imagined framework and tell us nothing about reality. If you imagine all cows are moral agents, and if you imagine killing moral agents is always immoral, the logical conclusion of that is that you imagine killing cows is always immoral. This doesn't tell us anything about reality though, it only tells us the logical conclusion of imagining that cows are moral agents while also imagining that killing moral agents is always immoral.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-01-04 at 10:40 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by
^ Looks like he's not the only one, so why don't you just take your hypocritical fail-ass out of the thread, stop harassing and chasing users off the site, and then go fuck yourself?
The oversocialized man has feelings of inferiority so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the oversocialized man. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself. He may claim that his activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, but compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for moralist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of moralist behavior; so is the drive for power.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-01-02 at 4:16 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by Lanny To summarize: I take issue with claims like "what is right(moral facts) is a matter of opinion" which you seem to champion here. This is a misunderstanding of what is meant by "right" or "moral facts". You can understand what is meant by the term without holding there are any true moral facts. By analogy, somebody might say "facts about phlogiston are a matter of opinion" and this would be a similar misunderstanding. Presumably we agree that there is no true positive fact as to the color of phlogiston, since it doesn't exist, but we can pretty easily say there is a truth value to statements like "phlogiston is green" or "phlogiston exists".
I don't ask that you agree that any particular moral fact is true, but there is no point trying to justify a particular moral fact (i.e. that we that shouldn't eat meat) if you refuse to acknowledge what the term "moral fact" signifies in any such justification.
I don't agree with labelling moral conclusions as "moral facts". I don't agree with labelling both true or false statements as "fact"; rather, a fact is true or it is not a fact at all. If Ubik does not exist it doesn't make sense to label the statement "Ubik is red" as a fact. Rather the statement "Ubik is red" is an expression of how the speaker imagines Ubik. It is their imagination, their opinion.
Statements like "X is immoral" are also not facts. The statement "X is immoral" may be consistent with the speakers moral framework, or not, but as long as morality is just something people imagine it has nothing to do with facts.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2019-01-01 at 1:11 AM UTC in ATTN: OBBE
-
2018-04-17 at 11:58 AM UTC in name a game more fun than GTA VMinecraftThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-25 at 2:02 PM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meatThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-23 at 5:40 AM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
Originally posted by Loing And whether people do what they feel like doing is completely irrelevant to whether they are doing what they should be doing, irrespective of their belief in it. That is what is being asserted. I can't believe you are so fucking retarded that this has to be explained this many times.
Everything from this point onwards in this post is strictly irrelevant, but I'm arguing it anyway because you're dumb:
Well no, that's just blatantly false. People make normative judgments completely independent of "the system maaan". Let me press your hand to a hot stove and hold it there while telling you your subjective judgment on the experience is irrelevant.
Jimmy, answer the following question:
How many vertices does a triangle have?
Yes duh, are you stupid? For any moral discussion to reach a conclusion, it will ultimately rely on us coming to terms on certain moral premises to start with.
This is why we can have practical moral discussions, as we do in many current events and political cases cases, because we can start from points of moral agreement (including articles of international law), without agreeing in ultimate moral truths or even our most basic axioms or systems.
So if I offer a trolley problem like postwar Hitler who was captured and given a full judicial trial and found guilty and admitted his own guilt vs 5000 newborn babies, most people will realistically opt to kill Hitler. Why? Because whether or not we all agree on the same ultimate moral authorities, we can still conduct moral discussions and come to moral agreements. We do this all the time. A Muslim and a Christian can both agree that murder is wrong.
Again, I cannot believe I am having this autistic never-took-a-phil-class discussion with someone who claims to have been interested in philosophy for so many years.
You're assuming there is something people should be doing. There isn't. There is only what people do, what people think they should do, and what the system compels people to do.
Originally posted by Lanny That's not common usage, that's not what you'll find in the dictionary, and that's not how the term has been used in this thread. You are wrong on every level it is possible to be wrong about the meaning of a word.
I made no effort to explain that because I don't think that's the case and never said it was, you mentally deficient cunt.
When a physicist says "an electron has less mass than a proton" they are, in some sense, saying "I think that <an electron has less mass than a proto>" and in that same sense when I say things about moral obligations I'm also expressing my opinions, but whether my opinions are correct or not, there is a fact to the matter. I'm sorry that you've been offended by the ever so pretentious claim that there are true and false statements about the world but uhh, that's kinda not my problem?
Opinions about morality cannot be true, only consistent with the moral framework they emerge from. If I don't share your moral framework I won't share your moral conclusions. The mass of that proton on the other hand is something that is consistently demonstrateable whether I acknowledge it or not. If I feel something is right or wrong, and you feel the opposite, that doesn't tell us anything about reality, that only tells us about how each of us feel about something.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-12-22 at 7:16 PM UTC in In the Bible, what is "God"The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-21 at 2:25 AM UTC in We have a moral obligation to stop eating meatThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-18 at 12:17 AM UTC in Santa Claus should be gender neutral
Originally posted by GGG Women need a strong female role model.
If that's true (why do women need a strong female role model?), why do you suggest a gender neutral role model instead of a strong female one?
Also, why would you take away a male role model from boys? Do they not need role models?
Originally posted by GGG Santa is a dude.
Santa is imaginary.
Originally posted by GGG Little girls have NOBODY to look up to during the holidays.
Why not Santa?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-12-08 at 3:20 PM UTC in Cohen, Trump's former lawyer, has admitted to setting up an illegal meeting with PutinThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-03 at 7:24 PM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs AttentionReality is not physical. Everything in this universe is made up of smaller components; organs, cells, molecules, elements, and atoms etc, but atoms are mostly empty space! Just a few small protons and neutrons, well, one proton at least, encompassed by a (relatively) massive probability cloud/standing wave function of potential energy, which is "the electron" (a "fundamental particle" which, like light, acts as both a wave and a particle, depending on the situation). The proton is a tiny little "ball" of energy. Current mainstream scientific models refer to it as a "particle", though they recognise that it's not actually physical, and also that it is composed of smaller "particles" aka quarks.
It's energy vibrating at a particular frequency within the various fields that occupy the universe to produce an interference pattern in the fabric of space-time that reflects its "appearance" (note: it doesn't have an actual appearance that we could see via the visible light spectrum, but it would be based in the electromagnetic spectrum so at some frequency it could be measured. And we always have 2d graphs and 3d models to help us visualise interference patterns). This interference pattern has certain properties that we can see and measure, like mass and charge.
When multiple interference patterns are within vicinity of one another, like a proton and a neutron, they superimpose, and produce a new interference pattern as their waves mutually constructively and destructively interfere. The quarks that make up protons are smaller interference patterns that produce the interference pattern of the proton through their respective superposition. The atoms come together to form elements, and molecules, and cells, and so forth, and it's all just interference patterns! None of this is "physical", it's just that these bodies we currently occupy and their sensory organs operate within certain frequency bandwidths due to their respective interference patterns, and so the particular interference patterns within the certain frequency bandwidths across the electromagnetic spectrum that our sensory organs (skin, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, stomach, brain, heart, liver etc) "tune into", or resonate with, are the ones that we see and call "reality". But it's not "reality". It's just our shared little radio station, or stations, in space-time.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-11-27 at 10:48 PM UTC in What's the best way to weigh your penis?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-12-03 at 1:35 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-11-20 at 12 AM UTC in Share one good quality about yourself.People seem to confide in me fairly often. I also have nice eyes.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-11-25 at 3:28 PM UTC in Why do you post here?Sometimes I want to be heard:
Heard: be aware of; know of the existence of.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-11-19 at 11:36 PM UTC in Just legalized weed, ffsIt is legal.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
