User Controls
Posts by Meikai
-
2021-11-03 at 5:11 AM UTC in Glenn Youngkin has a double digit lead with 71% reported.Nobody wants to be associated with a man covered in poo. Covering yourself in poo and then allying yourself with people you don't want to win is actually 5D chess.
-
2021-11-03 at 5:09 AM UTC in Glenn Youngkin has a double digit lead with 71% reported.Seriously though, doing a false flag and then admitting you did a false flag to benefit one candidate like a day before the election? Sure, you can chalk that up to political incompetence, but by the same token you don't have to be terribly clever to understand that's going to backfire for the candidate you're supposedly "supporting". If, say, you wanted Youngkin to win, that'd be a great way to help while still maintaining the thin veneer of your #resistance grift. 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
-
2021-11-03 at 4:36 AM UTC in Glenn Youngkin has a double digit lead with 71% reported.
-
2021-11-03 at 4:19 AM UTC in Glenn Youngkin has a double digit lead with 71% reported.
-
2021-11-03 at 2:13 AM UTC in Let's Go Brandon is now "A violent threat against president Joe Biden".
-
2021-11-02 at 10:10 PM UTC in Killing myself soonsame tho
-
2021-11-02 at 8:58 AM UTC in Do circles objectively exist?but actually ACKSHUALLY the interdimensional vibrations caused by god stroking his cosmic stiffy are merely causing the illusion of those gravitational waves, and spacetime is a jedi myth perpetuated by a cousinfucking lunatic who was too mentally deranged to comb his hair
-
2021-11-02 at 8:56 AM UTC in Do circles objectively exist?ACKSHUALLY gravitational waves are constantly warping spacetime by a minute amount so all measurements are completely meaningless since the amount of space between any two points is never fixed and therefore all measurements are subjective and nothing in reality objectively exists haha i am very smart
-
2021-11-01 at 8:07 PM UTC in Lanny is philosophically retarded
-
2021-11-01 at 5:41 PM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by Lanny The relation exists by fiat, because you set those conditions for receiving compensation. That makes you the psychopath because you could as easily improve someone else's condition without any need for asshole stabbing. Unlike children, where there's just no way to make a kid without them having to endure some level of negative utility. I'm sure if parents had some way to have children such that they'd never have to suffer most parents would elect to do that, but they don't, so it becomes _necessary_ to hazard suffering for a life worth living. It is not necessary to stab someone in the asshole in order to give them a billion dollars.
Wrong. Again, see medical interventions that carry risk of injury, you may injure someone but if it's actually necessary in order to deliver the intervention then we consider it permissible. What's not OK is saving someone's life and then hacking off a limb because hey, losing a limb is better than dying. The difference is whether or not you have agency in dealing the injury in the process of perusing that person's welfare.
Further, re: the gum case, there's a difference between legal systems and moral judgements. Yes the legal system will (or at least should, by its own principles) prosecute petty theft carried out by large scale philanthropists, not because it passes judgement on the total moral person of the philanthropist, but because uniformity of prosecution is necessary to the penal system being an effective deterrent to crime. Many people would agree that, be it via utility calculus or the tally of St. Peter, significant acts of good do ameliorate wrongdoing to some extent. There are other cases, e.g. theft of food to feed one's family, where nearly everyone would agree the outcome (family not starving) softens the severity of the crime. And again, agreement is broader there exactly because in such cases theft may be necessary to sustaining ones family.
Who is this directed at? I agreed with you a post or two ago that many lives are not worth living. There absolutely is a level of suffering at which point the potential rewards of life are simply not commensurate. The idea of yours I take issue with is that _any_ amount of suffering makes a life not worth living, or indicts parents as a category.
-
2021-11-01 at 5:39 PM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by Lanny She typed "sublimed" instead of "sublimated". Opinion discarded.
I actually didn't mean sublimated! I chose "sublimed" specifically to avoid confusion with "sublimation"! I swears it. I meant like... metaphorically the horrible act of childbirth and the suffering inherent to life are transmuted into a clean slate by society, without any intermediate phase of repentance. Like dry ice turning into gas and blowing away, the cruelty is forgiven. -
2021-11-01 at 10:25 AM UTC in You would be happier with kids
-
2021-11-01 at 9:32 AM UTC in SAMSUNG GO FUCK YOURSELFFirmware fuckups? Flash failures? What does that even mean? SSDs just work.
Stop "flashing" your hard-drives and touching their "firmware" you perv. Feel like there's some user error here, because I've never had a problem with my shitty 860 evo and somehow every Samsung drive you've touched has decided to commit suicide. Can't be a coincidence. -
2021-11-01 at 3:13 AM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by Donald Trump Why not?
You place a lot of much significance on your own survival instinct and desire to avoid suffering, but in reality neither of those things matters to anyone else. So why does it matter to you?
Survival instinct is just as meaningful as reproductive instinct, the only difference is survival instinct only pertains to me whereas people's reproductive instinct pertains not just to themselves, but also to the new fucking life they're creating without consent. smh
-
2021-11-01 at 2:42 AM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Maybe every life has the right to choose for themselves whether they will live or not, and the choice isn't up to some third party with no skin in the game.
"Oh, this unmade being that has a clear revealed preference for not being alive on account of the fact that it's not alive yet... well, it deserves to choose if it wants to be alive or not. So lets force it to be alive, and then force it to choose whether or not to die."
Retard. -
2021-11-01 at 2:38 AM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by Lanny Poor analogy because there's no necessary relation between the billion dollars and the asshole stabbing.
Better analogy: medical intervention in the case where consent can't be obtained, e.g. delivering CPR to an unconscious person. Yes, there's risk of injury but the risk is _necessary_ for the intervention. Same with kids, it's not some arbitrary desire to inflict suffering on children that's justified by them potentially having a worthwhile life, it's that suffering is a necessary risk that bound up in the possibility of having a good life.
If you want to argue that most net effects of most children is negative then I'll agree with you. But it's disingenuous to completely ignore the potential positive outcomes, both for the given child and society at large, when considering if having kids is justified.
There's a necessary relation - you don't get the billion dollars if you don't get stabbed in the asshole. It is a transaction. The exact same kind of transaction used to justify childbirth - "oh, it'll be bad at times, but the good outweighs the bad so the suffering we're inflicting doesn't actually matter". If it's a bad analogy, it's a bad analogy because childbirth is possibly the only example of an act of cruelty which can be completely sublimed and washed clean from one's slate. Bad things have infinite value in all other transactions. For every other act of cruelty, every other negativity we inflict upon another, there is no amount of good which society accepts as completely absolving one of that cruelty. Steal a stick of gum and donate a billion dollars to charity? You still stole that gum. Create a being so it can suffer immeasurably and also possibly experience all the joys of life? WELL, you see, the joys of life completely justify whatever happens. If even 1% of that child's life is happy, it doesn't matter if you birthed a soul who will get nuggetized and raped for 40 years before having their throat slit. -
2021-11-01 at 2:26 AM UTC in You would be happier with kids
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ A better analogy would be people who embrace depopulation, but would be the last ones to step up to volunteer to be depopulated.
An antinatalist clinging to life is less hypocritical than you imply. Being born is cruel in part specifically because you die (or possibly don't die - you could be immortal, but that's equally or more horrifying). Nobody wants to die. Nobody wants to have to worry about dying. And the only way to avoid existential crises pursuant to mortality? Not being born in the first place. Death is cruel, and death is a part of life. Anything you give life must necessarily die (or not, and that's arguably worse). Life is a catch 22, and 'making babies" is plucking souls from the aether and forcing that catch 22 upon them.
Trash. Horrible. Worst species. We are aware of this, and yet still cannot see far enough past our base animal instincts to avoid perpetuating this endless cycle of suffering. -
2021-10-31 at 2 PM UTC in Opinion……How will this end?The very fabric of reality itself is crying out for a great leader. A conqueror who will gather the disaffected incels and chad trad preppers into a magnificent fighting force, to forge a new nation with a new destiny to manifest. Our NEET Rudolf von Goldenbaum will arise, and wielding the equivalent of a small nation's economy (in the form of diligently mined and hodl'd shitcoins/NFTs of rat anuses) he will lead the revolution. If I don't see the foundation of a new imperial dynasty within my lifetime, I will be shocked and disappointed.
-
2021-10-31 at 1:50 PM UTC in Opinion……How will this end?In all seriousness though, either it goes full 1776 (yes, America, that was a civil war) or it just... persists and mutates. I know which of those two I'd prefer, but I suspect it'll end with Elon Musk installing brain chips in all the kids and taking over the world and/or corporations gaining sovereignty/corporate extraterritoriality and everyone becoming subservient neon-colored cyberserfs laboring under brutal tech CEO leiges and professional managerial class burghers.
-
2021-10-31 at 1:44 PM UTC in Opinion……How will this end?>how will this end
>end
What a grand and intoxicating innocence. How could you be so naive? There is no escape. No Recall or Intervention can work in this place.
