Total posts: 828
Posted in:
The animation, the action direction, the music, the voice acting, all of those are top notch, and I dare say perfect. When the anime aired, the manga sales skyrocketed, and demon slayer became a gigantic cultural phenomenon. The mugen train movie instantly became the highest grossing anime movie of all time. And the entire 2 next seasons were even better.
"But the story is boring mid trash"
Which makes it that much more impressive that the anime is so successfull. When the manga being adapted is nothing special, but the anime is great, the adaptation is excellent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No.
99.999999999% of crimes you either:
- didn't know about
- you could not have prevented anyways
- the effort and/or risk involved is unreasonable
But calling the police to prevent a murder is an example of a situation where none of these criteria apply. You have no excuse for actively chosing to allow a murder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I am talking morally speaking. If you could prevent a murder without incurring yourself harm, but CHOSE to be passive instead, then you are MORALLY CULPABLE in my view.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
you are NOT morally culpable for acts that you did not initiate
So if a stranger is getting murdered, and you did not call the police, then you are not morally culpable for the murder being successfull? I don't think so. Passivity is also a choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Craig literally said that the infants benefited from being bludgeoned to death on Gods orders. People will tolerate the excact same idea that I presented here if its in a holy book.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Hero_In_Instatute
How do you suggest I reword this? The idea that good people suffer in hell because they had wrong religion is hardly less disturbing than dead children getting solace in heaven. And this is not something I invented, nearly any religious person in the US will tell you that victims of school shootings are in heaven now, while their atheist parrents suffer in hell.
Anyone religious and insane enough will eventually come to the same conclusion on their own, and will justify it to themselves over time. But if they read this early on they might come to realize the insanity of the idea. By disallowing the mention of the logical next step, we would not protect any children, we would protect the idea from well-deserved scrutiny.
If you are going to censor certain opinions, real or troll, because they are "scary" then there are way better candidates on this site.
Created:
Posted in:
RM, are you projecting your own feelings? Was this argument convincing to you, and that is why you fear others will be convinced by it? Or are you just insulting everyone else on this site as being way less intelligent than you and thus unable to accomplish the easy task of seeing this text is meant to highlight the logical fallacies in pascals wager, not endorse it.
Not to mention calling me a "very potential terrorist" on literally no basis. If you really believe that then unblock me so we can talk about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
In dath vaders voice: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh, my clickbait title!
PS: Could you at least switch it to "Pascals school shooting"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Lmao. Imagine thinking pascals wager of all things will convince anyone to do anything, let alone shoot children. Tbf many christians would kill children if God told them to.
Funny enough, her legal defense was literally that following Gods command, that was not too disimilar from what we see in the Bible, was a form insanity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
A typo.
Option 1a: There is no God, and I don't do a school shooting. Result: finite gain.
Created:
Posted in:
This argument also applies to abortion. Every aborted child will go to heaven or simply stop existing while not a single aborted child will go to hell (otherwise wtf God).
Created:
Posted in:
Trigger Warning: If triggered by trigger warnings, you should stop reading prior to reading this trigger warning.
Trigger Warning: This tread, literally called "pascals school shooting," is indeed about pascals wager and school shootings.
Trigger Warning: Seriously, deep thoughts are ahead on a taboo subject.
My last thread got flooded with posts about irrelevant tangents instead of interacting with my main point. So now I have created a clickbait title and posted in philosophy instead.
So here you go:
I should go shoot up a school or kindergarden because doing so will actually benefit my victims as per the logic from pascals wager.
The argument
Option 1a: There is no God, and I do a school shooting. Result: Finite gain.
Option 1b: There is no God, and I do a school shooting. Result: Finite loss.
Option 2a: There is a God, and I don't do a school shooting. Result: Infinite loss.
Option 2b: There is a God, and I do a school shooting: Result: Infinite gain.
The math
100% of children go to heaven, but less than 100% of adults go to heaven. Having guaranteed infinite gain is infinitely better than having any ammount of finite gain + x% chance of infinite gain + 100-x% chance of infinite loss (hell). So even if 999 children that get shot would go to heaven anyways, the gain of the 1 that would have gone to hell had he grown up to reject God, is infinitely outweiging the finite loss the 999 children suffered from not being able to live on earth in addition to heaven. So shooting children is such an unlimited source of potential net positive that any non-zero chance of God existing would render school shootings a net positive even for those that don't believe in God.
Why these results?
The triomni singular creator God that the classical Pascals wager assumes is literally defined as good and just. That would logically entail, and most Christians would agree with me here, that ALL children go to heaven. If you don't buy this, just swap out school with kindergarden, or abortion clinic, or whatever. The point is, the option of going to hell is not open right from the start of life, rather it is UNLOCKED at some stage of moral development or after a milestone autonomous decision that can be effectively classified as sin. Otherwise, that infants die all the time, and that God in the various holy books orders and indeed himselfs commits on numerous occasions the slaughter of babies, would imply that some people are BORN IN HELL, figuratively speaking, since they got born on the train to auswitch with no chance to jump off or avoid hell. If God exists, being shot as a child guarantees you heaven.In conclusion, since we cannot disprove God, both God and the derrivative infinite good of school shootings COULD exist, so school shootings are justified utilitaristically.
Created:
Posted in:
Cuba has a better healthcare system than the US: https://www.debateart.com/debates/5314-cuba-has-a-better-healthcare-system-than-the-us
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RaymondSheen
I wasn't responding to you with that post, it was just something I wrote before you posted. And I am not trying to disprove God. Here is my actual response:
Biblically, 100% of people, adult and children, go to hell. That's because hell is the grave.
So hell as a type of afterlife doesn't exist, got it.
144,000 to be exact.
This is 12x12x1000, a very round and symbolic number. But the Bible never states that there is a hard cap on who can get into heaven, and definitely doesn't specify how many.
We wouldn't want to go to heaven.
Any place we wouldn't want to be in, you could not call heaven, as the word is DEFINED as the place you want to go to. But sure. Then are the 144.000 taken against their will?
Created:
Posted in:
Paul of the Bible said this:
For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race [Romans 9.3]
A noble sentiment. Even if God himself told you not to shoot up a school, and that you would go to hell for it, doing it would still be a good thing, sacrificing your heaven for theirs.
Created:
Posted in:
Trigger Warning: If triggered by trigger warnings, you should stop reading prior to reading this trigger warning.
Trigger Warning: This tread, literally called "pascals school shooting," is indeed about pascals wager and school shootings.
Trigger Warning: Seriously, deep thoughts are ahead on a taboo subject.
You have all heard Pascals wager, but here is an insidious twist on the conclusion to the argument.
The options
Option 1a: There is no God, and you do a school shooting. Result: Finite gain.
Option 1b: There is no God, and you do a school shooting. Result: Finite loss.
Option 2a: There is a God, and you don't do a school shooting. Result: Infinite loss.
Option 2b: There is a God, and you do a school shooting: Result: Infinite gain.
The math
100% of children go to heaven, but less than 100% of adults go to heaven. Having guaranteed infinite gain is infinitely better than having any ammount of finite gain + x% chance of infinite gain + 100-x% chance of infinite loss (hell). So even if 999 children that get shot would go to heaven anyways, the gain of the 1 that would have gone to hell had he grown up to reject God, is infinitely outweiging the finite loss the 999 children suffered from not being able to live on earth in addition to heaven. So shooting children is such an unlimited source of potential net positive that any non-zero chance of God existing would render school shootings a net positive even for those that don't believe in God.
Why these results?
The triomni singular creator God that the classical Pascals wager assumes is literally defined as good and just. That would logically entail, and most Christians would agree with me here, that ALL children go to heaven. If you don't buy this, just swap out school with kindergarden, or abortion clinic, or whatever. The point is, the option of going to hell is not open right from the start of life, rather it is UNLOCKED at some stage of moral development or after a milestone autonomous decision that can be effectively classified as sin. Otherwise, that infants die all the time, and that God in the various holy books orders and indeed himselfs commits on numerous occasions the slaughter of babies, would imply that some people are BORN IN HELL, figuratively speaking, since they got born on the train to auswitch with no chance to jump off or avoid hell. If God exists, being shot as a child guarantees you heaven.
In conclusion, since we cannot disprove God, both him and the infinite good of school shootings COULD exist, so school shootings are justified utilitaristically.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
I will admit @RM you were actually completely right about Huemer not being able to properly respond to our questions. I found Dr. Huemers answers profoundly unsatisfying:
4. Any given community would presumably have disputes with other communities, not only with lowlife criminals and small terrorist groups. So you'd need a standing army to defend your community, unless you first eradicated war entirely, which somehow sounds far more implausible than even anancap. Now then, having standing armies around, or else be occupied by the standing armies of other communities, what is going to prevent them from ending the anarchy by pulling out a little something called a military coup for their own benefit?I have never had a dispute with another community. I have lived in several different neighborhoods in my life. None of them has ever had a dispute with another neighborhood. I am not sure what sort of dispute this question is imagining. However, if your HOA somehow has a dispute with another HOA, they would resolve that by going to arbitration, just as in the case of any other dispute. They would not raise an army and declare a war. If my HOA board somehow gets filled with crazy people and declares that we're going to attack the condominium building across the street, I am not joining that war. And neither, I believe, will any of my neighbors.
Just because Huemer himself cannot personally remember any of his own communities going to war, or imagine such a scenario, is a very poor rebuttal anyways. My question literally adresses the possibility of this kind of rebuttal: "You'd need a standing army, unless you first eradicate war entirely, which somehow sounds far more implausible" which he apparently ignored entirely. So he failed to even acknowledge my valid concern that this ancap peace is hard to believe would be sustainable or achievable.
His premise that HOA's don't get into armed conflicts with each other is a moot point anyways, given that he himself admitted that they have never existed on a large scale. The reason HOA's don't get into armed conflict is rather obvious, they have nothing to fight over. Violent conflict is not going to attract more homeowners, nor is increasing the number of homeowners necesarily beneficial. Real armed conflicts happen between groups that have conflicting interests that, crucially, are enforcable through violence. So even if every function of society was divided up to HOA siced communities, those that relate to resources worth fighting over are definitely going to fight. RationalMadman pointed out that armed disputed between city or even district level communities happen all the time, they are called gang wars, so this optimism from Huemer about anarcho-capitalism being stable is entirely unwaranted and historically unprecedented.
But he also claimed that communities in conflict would just get arbitration firms. Somebody else raised the good objection that this won't work because you can't have a market of courts. Both parties would always try to cherry pick the courts that are most likely to vote in their favor, either because of historically proven bias or because they are easily manipulated or bribed. Getting two parties to even sign up for a private trial, much less accept and abide by their rulings, would be a herculean task. Especially when you are talking about poor individuals wronged by a powerfull corporation. All of this is assuming that corporations stay excactly as weak as they are today. But they will definitely grow more powerfull because of lack of antitrust laws and there being a market rather than state monopoly of well-trained violence groups. A court that controls the police is basically a state. But on the other hand, a private court whith no controll of police is totally teethless, as it cannot enforce its rulings, and any rich corporation could just pick
A court that needs to INCENTIVISE powerfull corporations to consent to being tried and BID for police to enforce rulings, is absurdly unreliable. Here I agree 100% with RM.
Created:
Literally everything that Gojo has screams overpowered.
Reverse cursed energy:
- Gojo can take the effect of cursed energy and techniques, and reverse it.
- Healing: basically 100 sealing jutsu, in that Gojo can heal from any injury, so long as his entire head is not destroyed in one attack.
The six eyes:
- Allows the user to perceive everything around them, just like a byakugan, except constantly active and with no blind spot
- It also allows him to keep track of way faster opponents, and see through illusions, genjutsu and shaddow clones just like a sharingan
- Makes it so that you have perfect perception and controll over cursed energy on a molecular level.
- This precision allows him to spend only an infinitesimal ammount of cursed energy, so he never runs out of juice, he can spam his arsenal for days.
Infinity:
- Gojo constantly creates infinite distance between himself and everything else. Essentially, all attacks with finite speed can never hit him.
- For comparison, Obito has a similarly effective defense, where attacked parts of his body teleport to another dimension. This single ability makes him formidable.
- Gojo can increase his speed exponentially and even teleport. He reduces the distance between himself and where he wants to be to 0, and moves instantly between locations.
- For comparison, Minato is one of the strongest fighters in Naruto, solely because of his ability to teleport. And unlike Gojo, he can only teleport to premarked locations.
- Oh yeah, and Gojo can fly.
Limitless attacks:
- Blue:
- Nothing too special by Naruto standards. It is a mini-black hole that he can controll that drags everything around into it.
- Red:
- A reversal of blue. Basically a ball that is in a state of constant explosions that pushes everythign away.
- Hollow purple:
- This is the important part. Purple is a combination of Blue and Red. Purple is a sphere of controllable size which turns all matter into nonexistence.
- For comparison, the Tsuchikage is the most powerfull living kage in Naruto Shippuden, only because he has a nerfed version of this power.
- Atomic dismantling jutsu turns enemies into individual atoms. But hollow purple does that but also removes those atoms.
- Regardless, both attacks straight up ignore durability. Toji, the most durable guy in JJK, tanked blue and red, but purple slized through him.
Unlimited void:
- The ultimate genjutsu. This domain expansion will create a sphere with a radius of 200 meters. Everyone inside will be trapped and flooded with infinite information.
- Normal people will be hospitalized and extremely strong opponents capable of leveling cities will be frozen for minutes after only experiencing unlimited void for 0.2 seconds.
- Literally any enemy who gets trapped in this attack is going to die, either from the information itself, or from being blasted with hollow purple while unconscious.
- For comparison, Itachi is the strongest genjutsu user in Naruto, and he can hospitalize only one person and only if they look in his eyes, and it will still drain him.
- But Gojo can spam this AoE genjutsu as long as he wants.
Hands:
- This is Gojo holding back against the strongest hand to hand fighter the enemy has. Nothing more needs to be said.
What if he was in Naruto
The number of Naruto characters that has even the slightest chance of beating Saturo Gojo can be counted on one hand:
- Kakashi could send Gojo to another dimension where there is the slightest chance he might not be able to teleport away from.
- 10-tails Madara has limbo clones that could kill Gojo because he has no way of detecting them.
- Itachi could maybe hit him with his occular genjutsu. We know this is effective even against strong willed people, but Gojo rarely uncovers his eyes.
- Naruto and Sasuke with sage of six paths powers could potentially seal him away just like they did Kagya, because we know Gojo is weak to sealing techniques.
Anyone else has minimal chances against him. Even the nukes that dominate the 4th shinobi war won't phase a man with teleportation like Minato and hax defence like Obito.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
I am not sure, because I have never been in that situation. But on principle and in a vacum, killing 12 nazis is more immoral than killing a toddler, regardless of how you feel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Strictly ethically speaking, their lives have the same significance as mine, or maybe slightly less since they are actively making society a far worse place for others, unlike me.
But my personal actions are controlled by my emotions. I am not sure that I would have enough sympathy for nazis to sacrifice my own child for them, regardless of ethical analysis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
That depends. If they look european, then they are probably neonazis, which would eliminate any sympathy I have for them. But if they are hindus, they are good and normal people.
Created:
-->
@Bones
@Savant
Created:
@RM
I am not an ancap guy, far from it. But even I can see that it's not that there are holes in your argument, rather, your entire argument is the hole.
Anarchy = no laws
That is kindergarden logic.
Created:
-->
@Bones
What you said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Otherwise, we have the very random one from ebuc.
But that perfectly encapsulates the spirit of this thread, right?
Created:
-->
@Savant
Any given community would presumably have disputes with other communities, not only with lowlife criminals and small terrorist groups. So you'd need a standing army to defend your community, unless you first eradicated war entirely, which somehow sounds far more implausible than even anancap. Now then, having standing armies around, or else be occupied by the standing armies of other communites, what is going to prevent them from ending the anarchy by pulling out a little something called a military coup for their own benefit?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
True I guess. But we could just have earth execute me specifically for genocide and have the justice broadcast to them before they have time to build interstellar balistic misiles.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Even then, accelleration to even 20% of lightspeed would take a lot of time, more than what you have on a 4 lightyear journey, and they'd have to decellerate as well.
Plus, any space fleet they managed to transport to our system, we could easily double given that we have double the people and a lot of time to prepare while they travel.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Well even if they were on the closest star, only 4 lightyears away, it would still take 100.000 years to travel to us with current rocket technology.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Who do you think will win. Humanity, or aliens that were equal to humanity but were cut in half. 1 vs 0.5, not a battle the aliens want. Plus the thousand lightyears distance aswell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
ending systemic classism
Amazing!
A communist revolution that purpotedly killed like a gazillion people worldwide failed to eliminate systemic classism. And you offer it removed in return for only 1 million lives?
Thats a steal. I would take that easily. Systemic classism kills way more people over the long run anyways, and it makes society shitty as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
I know what is the right thing to do but I don't know if I have the strenght to do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
I have never heard a convincing argument that 1 infant is worth more than 1 adult, not to mention multiple.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
1 < 12
12 dead infants is worse than 1 dead infant. Unless that 1 infant has exponentially more ethical importance, but that was not specified in the scenario you gave me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@cristo71
Tis but a joke.
After birth its no longer abortion. But yes 1 infant is less morally valuable than 12 people of any age.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
If everything is equal then its a no brainer. I don't want to lose my family. Plus, they won't be able to retaliate if we are twice as strong as them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
How many aliens are there? I mean, I will prioritize humans of course, but a trillion aliens on each planet in an entire galaxy, is probably more important than everyone on earth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Is it too late for me to get one?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@JoeBob
Violence isn't the answer. It's the question. And the answer is yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Oh and also, the fly will have already collided with each of the trolleys and infinite number of times and survived before they collide with each other, so props to the fly I guess.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
The trolleys will meet after 1 hour. So the fly will have flown 75 kilometers in that time. But if it was a smart fly it would probably fly to the side to avoid certain death.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I save the 10000 ugly autistic men, and now they owe me their life. Now I have an army of slaves who can help me get rich and get even better girls.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@JoeBob
I won't chose either one, but hide and do nothing, let the track decide. The survivor should not feel any guilt from knowing that their life came at somebody else's expense.
Created:
Posted in:
Give me your best and hardest trolley problems, and I will give you my solution to them.
Created:
So basically your verdict is that I am wrong. Okay, I can live with that. Even if Israel is not commitng a genocide in the full technical meaning of the word, they are still damn close.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
your arguments are usually so good that I doubt my own deeply hekd beliefs.
- Do you have some specific examples of good arguments or debates I had that challenged you?
- What makes my arguments in that specific debate so much worse in your eyes than those ones?
Created:
By the way if you don't want to have a conversation on discord I would still like to hear your in-depth takedowns of my R2 and R3.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
Weird you would say I "refused" to debate you because I "know" that you are correct when accepting the debate with David literally proves I am not afraid to debate the topic.
1. A few years back I was pro-Israel and read pro-israel books like "The Case for Israel by Alan M. Dershowitz" so I have in fact looked at the conflict from both sides.
2. I do condemn the warcrimes of Hamas. Just because I didn't go out of my way to critique them in the debate for obvious reasons doesn't mean I support them.
3. Saying I have emotional investment is really weird since I live in Norway and there is no information available on the internet to suggest that I have any emotional investment.
4. You seem to have a really weird standard where you expect every single piece of evidence to directly prove the resolution even without the surrounding context.
- Thats not really how evidence works nor is that how you construct good arguments. If you want I can explain why in great detail.
5. Even if we accept your very bold claim that my sources and arguments are mostly garbage, you still needed a 50 minute video to refute my opening argument.
- So saying your video shows how to counter my case and win the debate is not really true even if you have the correct opinions and I have the wrong ones.
- And it definitely is not a general guide on how you can destroy better debate opponents. Not that I ever claimed to be better than David anyways.
But yeah, we can have a talk about the arguments and sources on discord if you want.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Bloodbath? Isn't that when Biden swims in the pool filled with the blood of Palestinian children?
Created: