|
Lumpy the Cook posted:I don't hate everything- I love people, and want them freed. so you want them freed to be under putin's yoke? lmao you really must hate eastern europe to want to let the russians do whatever
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
Morality is an illusion. Rape and pillage as it pleases you for you are as expendable as the other man. Nothing matters. Trump 2020 seig heil *does MJ crotch grab*
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
That Robot posted:a pasta machine making GBS threads; an apt analogy ty bae
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
ha ha oh lordy these conferences are the bozo hour
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:i guess. what i see is moral compromise up and down. which is fine, because, as i understand the world, morality is a dimension superadded to material. there is nothing inherently moral in the material world. Well morality isn't inherent to anything yeah, but we have a lot of ideas and stuff that aren't inherent to anything that we've made up and called a civilization. I feel like it is a good thing to continue to fight for those things rather than surrender to our most base animal instincts. quote:i am willing to go along with whatever terms you want to set. so long as i understand them in advance. if day to day stuff is "better" in your book than corporate exploitation -- and i think that is a very "reasonable" position, for whatever reason is worth -- another decision we each must make -- then we can talk that talk. it helps me to understand you and the things that you say, to understand how you distribute your values and valuations. I'm proposing that we take a look at the state of various societies around the world and do a thought experiment. Real world stuff even, let's not get into hypothetical future societies. If you were being born and had to pick one to enter while knowing that your position in that society would be totally random, which would you pick? Would you pick America, where you have a drat good chance of being born into a poo poo life or would you pick somewhere else like some Nordic country where they obv still have people at the top and people at the bottom but even the lowliest worker is taken care of such that they aren't in poverty? With this thought experiment, we can assign a moral value to various societies based on how likely we are to pick them. For example, no one in their right mind wants to pick North Korea, so we could say they are at the extreme low end of the objective 'morality' scale. I mean yeah sure the USA is probably a great place to be relative to the developing or 3rd world but that's not saying that much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
That Robot posted:so you want them freed to be under putin's yoke? lmao No, freed from the hegemonic grip of all three military and financial superpowers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Well like, surely a society that has large swathes of its population in chattel slavery is not as morally good as one that doesn't? if something can be said to be "as much as" or "less than" or "more than," we're agreeing to a quantitative system. a rigorous quantitative system is a mathematics. morality, then, is a mathematics. depending on the rules of your mathematics, you can make all sorts of things true that, in the common sense world, are not true. for instance, as we alter the rules of euclidean geometry, all the conic sections become indistinguishable. quote:In the Euclidean plane, the conic sections appear to be quite different from one another, but share many properties. By extending the geometry to a projective plane (adding a line at infinity) this apparent difference vanishes, and the commonality becomes evident. Further extension, by expanding the real coordinates to admit complex coordinates, provides the means to see this unification algebraically. so you just need to tell me what rules you're operating by, and then these questions more or less solve themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:so you just need to tell me what rules you're operating by, and then these questions more or less solve themselves. We prolly posted past each other but look up a couple at my last post where I propose a method to more or less get an understanding of where various societies lie on such a scale. If you really want it to be quantitative you can pretend like "out of 100 people, how many would pick NK. How many would pick X, Y, or Z." Then the one with the most picks is the 'best' one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
EorayMel posted:Morality is an illusion. morality is not an illusion, it's not just inherent to the material world. so all the arguments that use it as bedrock are unstable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Nomad are you adderall posting again
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Do you think if Trump was put in an 8th grade math class he could pass it now?Sheep-Goats posted:Redo the election Billy Madison style imo I was also fond the pasta machine post 
EorayMel fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
EorayMel posted:Do you think if Trump was put in an 8th grade math class he could pass it now? Redo the election Billy Madison style imo
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
I dunno, math when my little sister was in school was pretty different than my math classes, I wonder if it's even more different now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:We prolly posted past each other but look up a couple at my last post. those weren't rules though, that was just a set of questions. you're asking me what i would prefer. the western world for sure. so would everyone else trying to get here. i don't see that as morally preferable, but materially preferable. everyone wants to get here so they can have a fridge and a TV. i can't necessarily say i'd prefer a nordic area because i don't honestly know enough. i do know they're about to have a huge influx of people with very different ideas of how to go about the business of living. that is going to cause instability. it could get pretty dicey. i also suspect the nordic states have been profiting off the global economy established by the US, so they're neither morally nor materially independent of the larger situation. i doubt whether such a society is plausible without being a client-state of something like the USA. but sure, i'll say a nordic state. now what?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Lumpy the Cook posted:No, freed from the hegemonic grip of all three military and financial superpowers.  Free to live in a world... for soldiers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
Lumpy the Cook posted:No, freed from the hegemonic grip of all three military and financial superpowers. so you want them to be able to be exploited by larger countries? is that what you're saying? lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:but sure, i'll say a nordic state. now what? Now we work to modify the place we actually live in to better reflect our ideal; in this case we picked a Nordic state so at the very least we can say "it is moral to have a healthcare system that takes care of everyone in place of this private health insurance shell game we have now." nomadologique posted:those weren't rules though, that was just a set of questions. you're asking me what i would prefer. the western world for sure. so would everyone else trying to get here. i don't see that as morally preferable, but materially preferable. everyone wants to get here so they can have a fridge and a TV. I don't think that is literally the only consideration that can be made though. Also you can say a basic level of income such that you can support yourself and enjoy your life is not only a material consideration but a general consideration for the well being of everyone in that society.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
That Robot posted:so you want them to be able to be exploited by larger countries? is that what you're saying? lol "If we don't exploit them, They will!" Isn't a valid argument
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:our ideal okay, so what i am asking is this: what is the basis of the valuations you are making? it is just human preference? without you being able to define why people prefer this or that? or is there something else, besides?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:what is the basis of the valuations you are making? it is just human preference? without you being able to define why people prefer this or that? or is there something else, besides? Well what everyone wants is going to be slightly different but idk man for the purposes of argument let's say the most ideal society is one that provides conditions such that the maximum amount of citizens are going to get a good way through 'Mazlow's Hierarchy of Needs.' Without getting all utilitarian "if this person dies then 100 will be better off so it is a moral good to kill this person" about it imo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
okay, so the bases of your valuations are the (i am assuming) inherent values of "physiological needs-meeting, safety, feelings of love/belonging, esteem, and avenues of self actualization" ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Trump status: not actually hosed
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Is that a trap designed to end with "ahh but there is no inherent value of any of those things either!" You can't mathematically quantify everything man, that doesn't mean things that can't be precisely quantified don't have value. What is the inherent value of watching a nice sunset with a loved one? There isn't any. Most people can agree that it is a good thing, though, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Yo it ain't hard to understand that good stuff happening to people is better than bad stuff ya fuckin dork. How do you valuate your belief that asking less and less relevant questions and avoiding all answers makes any sense?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
also, this is as an aside, and not meant as a comment on the conversation we're having but:quote:Maslow studied what he called exemplary people such as Albert Einstein, Jane Addams, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Frederick Douglass rather than mentally ill or neurotic people, writing that "the study of crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy."[3]:236
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
TheSpamalope posted:Yo it ain't hard to understand that good stuff happening to people is better than bad stuff ya fuckin dork. How do you valuate your belief that asking less and less relevant questions and avoiding all answers makes any sense? i answered pretty much every question asked of me. that's not hard to understand, it's by definition that good is better and bad is worse. i'm trying to figure out how we decide what is good and what is bad. because there are a lot of opinions out there about it, and i don't take any of them for granted. nomadologique fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Feb 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Poetic Justice posted:http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing drat that was fast
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Poetic Justice posted:http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/15/515437291/intelligence-official-transcripts-of-flynns-calls-dont-show-criminal-wrongdoing Anyone with a brain could figure this out with how vague the stories being run were. This poo poo would have gone into orbit way sooner if there was actually proof of anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
So... is America Great Again or: Who does a guy gotta piss on to get a wall building job
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
You must first solve the problem of other minds before i can speak with you on economic matters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:also, this is as an aside, and not meant as a comment on the conversation we're having but: I mean it's from the 50s iirc.  There are probably better things out there that I'm not familiar with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:i answered pretty much every question asked of me. Lol tell this to the globally poor lacking basic necessities you tried to throw at me a few pages ago. Is there a point to your semi-detached diatribe?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Hmm yes well the question of wealth distribution is interesting but i suspect you must first prove that I indeed experience material reality and not just something which seems like it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
ya, i've made that pretty clear. most people believe and act from a position of moral superiority without having any.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
To be clear Trump very much IS hosed, in the head, but many are correct when they state he will face no consequences for his poor governance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
nomadologique posted:ya, i've made that pretty clear. most people believe and act from a position of moral superiority without having any. Well again I don't think I need to quantify all morality to state that I think I'm a better person than Alice Walton by virtue of the fact that I haven't killed anyone through my own selfish negligence. tao of lmao posted:To be clear Trump very much IS hosed, in the head, but many are correct when they state he will face no consequences for his poor governance. prolly yeah lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
TheSpamalope posted:Hmm yes well the question of wealth distribution is interesting but i suspect you must first prove that I indeed experience material reality and not just something which seems like it. you're on your own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Oh ok thanks for letting everyone know what you proved to us good job i guess
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Well again I don't think I need to quantify all morality to state that I think I'm a better person than Alice Walton by virtue of the fact that I haven't killed anyone through my own selfish negligence. i'm not asking you to, i'm asking you to tell me how you came to that statement. i don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like you're saying "because killing anyone through my own selfish negligence is wrong." then i have to ask you why it's wrong. then you say something like "because there is an inherent value to human life." okay now we're getting somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2017 20:54
|
|