Best.Korea

"bliss is synonymous with happiness and when you Google the definition of happy good is among the synonyms"

If you define "good" as "happy", then:

Happiness is your feeling. Your morality is based on your feelings.

Same way someone finds eternal happiness in murdering someone.

So murder is objectively good?

"No, because murder doesn’t lead to (what I referenced before) eternal bliss."

Again, "eternal bliss = good" is your opinion. A person who thinks "murder = good" and doesnt share your opinion would have no objective reason to think that murder is objectively wrong.

"Objective- (of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts."

Again, the value "eternal bliss = good" is your feeling and opinion. And the example that you provided depends on it. So your morality is influenced by your opinion that you have in your head. There is nothing objective about it.

If values in the brain are objective, then all morality is objective.

So if someone has value "murder = good", then murder is objectively good by your standards.

If the value is in your brain, it is not objective.

Objectivity is not influenced by feelings or opinions.

"Somebody that lives a life that leads to eternal bliss is an example of objective morality."

"Eternal bliss = good" is the value located in your brain.

If you cannot demonstrate objective morality with an example, then there is no reason to believe it exists.

Go ahead then and demonstrate objective morality.

"Truth cannot be opinionated"

Morality is always opinionated.

"there must be truth to everything. Which means there must be a true morality"

Or the truth could be that there is no objective morality. Truth could be that morality is an opinion.

You can observe "1 + 1 = 2".

So "1 + 1 = 2" is right.

You can also observe torture. Does that mean torture is right?

When choosing which action to perform, you need values that exist in your head.

You cant find a value "torture = bad" anywhere outside of the brain.

You also cant find it in every brain. Some people think that "torture = good".

So morality is not like "1 + 1 = 2". Different people have different morality.

Necessity is a value related to survival. One must value survival for there to be a necessity.

Also, one must value limiting himself to survival, if he is to live a life of within that which is necessity.

All moral systems could be described as groups of values. This is where humans give values to actions and non-actions. Some actions have greater value in our brains, so our brains prefer certain actions over others.

By choice, I usually mean values inside the head.

Hungry = bad

Eating burger = stops hunger

Stopping hunger = good

Eating burger = good

I dont believe in free will.  When I speak of choices, I dont believe people made those choices out of nothing.

Right and wrong values dont exist outside of our heads.

For example, we think that being alive is good. This value only exists in our heads.

Even if we think that its the right value, its still just our opinion.

Someone else could have different values in his head.

Someone else doesnt value life at all.

There are no correct ones or wrong ones.

Morality depends on values.

Values are located in our brains and are subject to our opinion.

So people can have different moral systems based on what they value, be it life, health, joy or none of those.

Morality is a matter of an opinion.

Some people prefer to live shorter if it means they enjoy life.

"What crimes would the bullied be more likely to commit?"

Well, I am not sure. I would guess they are more likely to commit crimes like theft and rape.

"What form of bullying is taking place?"

There are many forms of bullying. There is even non-violent bullying where no one wants to be friends with certain kid and everyone gives him weird looks so the certain kid feels like crap.

And thats the soft bullying. If on top of that they insult him and beat him up, it is likely the kid will be messed up.

I am just wondering what happens if a person really wants the surgery to alter his/her body, but society doesnt allow it.

"Treat the mental illness."

What if it cant be treated? Do we let them transition? I am just curious about your view.

What do we do with those who want to transition?

What is the difference between "government censoring information" and "private companies censoring information"?

And its not like the government cant pay  the media to censor or promote certain news.

Like, the basic rule of government is media control. If its hidden control, even better.

Its very naive to think that you have free speech, let alone free speech on the internet.

This is especially so when observing promotion patterns. Then you see that each media is promoting someone and each media is condemning someone.

CNN spent 4 years constantly spewing hate against Trump. Thats not "media seeking truth". Thats "media seeking to impose its own views on audience".

Sadly, majority of the people blindly believe the media.

So if media controls the people, then he who controls the media controls the people.

"But surely no one controls the media" is exactly what they want you to think.

Yes, there is a difference between:

what you want for your body to be,

and

what your body currently is.

Hence, the term "trans".

Even with all the surgeries, its not really possible for a woman to become 100% man.

Maybe 50% man, 80% man...ect.

I am not sure about exact number, since there is a terrible disagreement on what man is.

"Nope. Only one thing. The movement of the Earth around the Sun."

Thats how humans on Earth measure it.

"Time having a beginning does not mean that anything caused it"

Time is movement.

There is no proper definition of time, other than that it is movement.

Time is measured by continious movement of certain things.

If there is movement, there is time.

Can God live outside of time? If he exists and moves, he cant.

We came from God's asshole.

300 posts and counting. 

Yes, Church needs to turn satanic in order to profit.

The original Church described in the Bible was a community of hard working people. Everyone had to work, grow food... 

Today's Church is the opposite of that. It depends on donations.

"I totally get it, but that is not what you said due to the simplicity of your statement."

If you cant understand simple sentences like: do not kill = increase the amount of life, then its good that I didnt use anything more complicated on a retard like you.

If someone diminishes the amount of human life, he stops being human and is treated like wild animal that needs to be put down.

"Plenty of humans do not benefit human life"

Human life = humans

To say that plenty of humans dont benefit human life, when their mere existence contributes to the amount of human life, is too stupid to even read.

Better luck next time.

" a choice that can end someone's life."

If such choice increases life by saving life of you and others, then its allowed. Get it??????

"The same applies to your redundant organs and someone else's life"

Read again my previous post. I wont repeat just because you have autism. Personally, I hate disabled and retarded people, but at least we have something to laugh at when bored.

"No more self defense, eh?"

Sorry, what? How do you even reach this conclusion? If self defense increases amount of life, its obvious that it is allowed. Why do I have to explain such simple things to you?

"Also, someone needs your kidney, lung, and some of your liver..."

Well, if your previous line was dumb, this one is retarded.

The organs are supposed to be harvested from the deceased and the old.

How can you not know this?

Is there some part of your brain working to think of the dumbest possible answers in history?

Go ahead, tell us more about how you think choice>life, so that we can laugh at you.

A person is anything that is human and that benefits existence of human life.

You dont get it? Go back to school and learn biology.

If abortion is not killing of a human, then pregnancy is not needed for humans to exist.

However, the history tells us that human can only exist if fetus wasnt destroyed.

If fetus is not destroyed, then human lives.

If fetus is destroyed, then human doesnt live.

Sadly, the abortionists cant understand this simple logic. Their brains are only tuned to whatever the media tells them.

Since you are a bible dummy, let me quote you the Bible:

"Thou shall not kill"

Do you oppose to the Bible?

"And I do not believe abortion is slavery"

Abortion is not really slavery in a strict sense.

Its murder. Its killing of an innocent human.

And since:

someone's life >  your choice about your body

It follows that you are a terrible person.

"I volunteer at the red cross frequently, even while I'll probably never meet the people I help."

Stop bragging. Nobody cares. You write these things everywhere. Even on your profile.

I dont know who that person is, sorry.

Trump wants to be friends with North Korea.

Are we having a girl or an abortion?

Thats a cool profile pic.

And yes, about the debate:

Masturbation is murder. Like, there are all these dudes in your balls and you just shoot them out in the toilet and then they are gone forever. Not cool man.

"Even domesticated plants such as potatoes and peppers have poisonous leaves and stalks"

Yes, those would be plants with poisonous parts. So it is helpful to have knowledge of poisonous plants.

For beginners, its best to learn first about non-poisonous plants.

As long as you are sure the plant is not poisonous, you can eat its leaves, stems and flowers. Even if certain parts dont contain as much nutrients as other parts, eating them wont harm you.

To identify poisonous plant, check if it has thorns or milky liquid when you break its stem.

There are exceptions to these rules. So the best thing is to learn about most common edible plants in your area.

'It would be better to advise people to just buy a book on this, even if they don't read it until they need it, they'll have it."

The easiest way for someone to learn is to remember common wild plants that are edible.

Buying a book and using it when in emergency could have downsides.

First, the book needs to be about plants in your area.

If the book talks about plants that are rare in your area, its pretty much useless.

So if someone is to buy a book, he should make sure its about his area, and the book must have clear pictures.

Pictures are whats difficult about learning from books. Plants in nature dont always look like they are in a picture.

For a begginer, it would be best if he took time to be in nature and observe and find the common edibles. Having a guide would be good too, but there are also plenty of videos on youtube explaining difference between edible plants and the poisonous that look similar to them.

"The current plan is to avoid 'the bad scenario"

Yes. If you can, avoid it. If you cant avoid it, then adapt.

"I don't actually know what part of the plant is edible"

Stinging nettle has edible leaves and stem and flowers.

Usually edible plants have edible leaves and flowers and stems. So you cant really go wrong, as long as the plant is edible and not poisonous.

"I'm not even a hundred percent sure I could identify one in the wild"

Stinging nettle sometimes stings you when you touch it. Hence, its name.

Its available for most of the year.

Well, the best way is to go to a nearby forest. Also, to read on characteristics of poisonous plants.

And the next problem:

"Most people (55% of the world and 83% of Americans) live in urban areas"

Yes, if there is no forest or river or grassland, foraging food is almost impossible.

So a person must see if there are forests nearby his city, or if there are rivers, and if they contain enough for survival.

If someone lives far from nature, his only food is the one delivered to him from far away. So if that supply disappears, there wont be much a person can do. At best, he could hope to travel to nearest source of food.

And yes, the population density could be a problem. The 400 people per square mile is a lot. They would need as much food as they can get. If there is a nuclear war, most people would die from nukes alone. The remaining would need to focus on survival, and they need the knowledge for that.

Our ancestors taught their children a lot about survival, but our society doesnt do the same. Like, what is their plan if the bad scenario happens? Fighting over the last supplies in the stores? And what when those run out?

I have my phone. I paid for it about 150$.

I bought it years ago.

The battery is still good and I only charge it like once a day.

I see a lot of people complaining about their 1000$ phones as not being good enough.

So, I can be satisfied with a 150$ phone, but you cant be satisfied with a 1000$ phone?

To this, many will say: "its because you are so poor XD"

Well, I may be poor, but lets face it. If you had my 150$ phone and not your fancy phone, you wouldnt last 3 days.

But lets forget about that, and lets talk survival.

Many people are terrible at survival.

For example, talk about dandelion.

Most people know that dandelion is a flower.

However, almost no one knows its edible and contains more calories than spinach.

So in a survival situation, most people wouldnt know what to eat and what not.

To make matters worse, most people wouldnt even know how to make a shelter or storage for food.

The ability to forage food or to grow food is severely diminished at most humans.

Most humans, if lost in nature, would most likely starve or be poisoned due to inability to identify poisonous plants.

For example, most people would assume that stinging nettle is poisonous or unfit for consumption.

The truth is that stinging nettle is perfectly safe for consumption and contains calories and vitamins. Also,  there is usually a lot of it in forests.

Most people dont know that pine cones contain seeds that have plenty of calories. Very useful if lost in a pine tree forest.

Most people are also repulsed by eating insects. Despite that insect farms would benefit humanity more than cow farms, people still prefer to eat a cow and not an insect.

If you were lost in a forest with no equipment, eating insects would greatly increase your chances of survival. They can be easily found everywhere, and some are easily caught like earthworms.

Cambium from trees can be grinded into flour or tiny parts and consumed.

There are many fun tactics you can use in a forest, such as following a squirrel to her nest and stealing her nuts.

Or finding bird's nest and stealing eggs.

Now lets move on to the topic of water. If there is no clean water, you cant survive properly.

Sadly, humans have polluted some rivers.

So in a way, humans have diminished their ability to survive.

But this is not necessairly a game changer if you find yourself without clean water. You can still use the rain, assuming there is plenty of it. If not, then I would suggest eating more plants, since they contain some water.

There are many ways to process water, like boiling it or letting it pass through soil.

However, it is still the best if you have clean river.

Most people would go and drink filthy water due to thirst. However, its not a good idea unless there is no better option.

If there is enough fish in the river, you could potentially increase your survival by fishing. For fishing, you just need fishing rod and a bait.

Sadly, many people probably wouldnt have fishing rod with them when they find themselves in a survival situation.

Most people also overestimate their hunting abilities. For successful hunting, you need guns and bullets and a knife and maybe pot to cook the meat in. Fire starter is also an important tool here.

Now, shelter is where people fail badly. If you are lucky enough to have a tent with you or natural shelter like cave, you are fine. If not, then you have to make a shelter and that is not easy.

There are underground and above ground shelters.

Most people choose above ground, however, digging into the ground and making an underground room is more effective during winter, and can be used as a storage too.

You could potentially make shelter from animal skin assuming you can hunt enough animals.

Making shelter from big leaves, branches and hay is almost useless, but better than nothing.

When in nature in a survival situation, you shouldnt be drinking too much water. Most people dont understand this. Drinking too much water can help losing weight. In a survival situation, losing weight is not something you want.

Most people would not be able to survive simply because they lack the knowledge about plants and animals, and they refuse to learn.

In an event of a nuclear war, in case you get cut off from civilization, ask yourself how would you survive.

I have already insulted you before, so I will skip on this one.

There is reality and there is the brain.

There are those who deny reality and those who deny the brain.

Values in the brain are used to weight reality and make decisions.

These values are as real as reality itself, based on observation. We feel them.

Only by denying reality, would we be able to deny the brain.

If we do that, then we have nothing to draw conclusions from.

Blocking information is one version of autism, yes.

"but you didn't mean that"

As I said, droids fail to receive information.

This is why they assume things that werent claimed.

They have autism.

"Autistic people are very good at receiving information, if you present it logically and coherently."

I am still trying to find a way to make autistic droids receive information. Sadly, no matter how simple I explain it, they fail to receive a point.

"Stop your high horse shit and fuck off dissing autism. I don't give a fuck what your trolling is, I am sick of people using autism to mean 'stupid' and backing out later when called out, that's coward nonsense."

Well, I understand that having autism is difficult for you. Dont worry. I am working on a cure.

"Your OP seems schizophrenic."

As I said, droids have autism: failure to receive information.