Total posts: 1,014
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
You're not understanding. I notice that many people say that this or that is immoral or not because this person did or did not consent. I'm simply asking why we should accept consent as a first principle of morality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
But that doesn't explain why violation of consent is immoral. You're just accepting consent as the first principle, and reasoning from there.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Lol nah, but thanks
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
I'm asking why we should accept it as a first principle of morality
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Do you agree with the statement:"Pain and Pleasure are our sovereign masters."?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Lol, well that's not much of a justification. Self interest appeals to the egoists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Well in the case of lying, if we accept consent as the metaphysic of morality, then the act is immoral because the person being lied to did not consent to being mis/disinformed, or to the consequences of actions they will perform on the basis of that lie.
But that doesn't explain why consent should be the first principle of morality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Infinities do exist. And the aliens have utilized them
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Yeah they do, the aliens have them. Remember, they have a technological head start, so I can give them anything I can imagine
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Films ain't reality brother. In reality, bullets kill faster than a person can move. And alien bullets are gonna be faster with the tracer rockets they install on the backs to propel them faster.
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Lol dodging bullets. Have you ever read an account of wartime combat ?
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Nah bro, mirrors are impractical against their armor piercing bullets when their lasers are being countered.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Well, if we can accept that there are implicit contracts, like the social contract, then that defeats the idea that consent is a first principle of morality. Also, I consider lying to be immoral, not because it affects another moral actor, but because it can't be in line with a first principle of morality.
Created:
-->
@Benjamin
Yes, they could. They are indestructible living metal aliens with faster than light invisible ships with an infinite amount of destructive laser technology.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If that law was put into practice, then over 90% of sons back then would have gotten stoned to death, because every son rebelled against their parents at some point. I think that verse was twisted similar to how things are twisted in the game telephone. In the game telephone, one person deliberately messing up what was said or multiple people accidentally messing something up will lead to an inaccurate bible.
This is obviously an ad hoc rationalization, when your previous ad hoc rationalization was refuted In black and white text.
Honor your father and your mother. Punishment is up to 3 lashings if the parents desire this, but the maximum punishment must be used very rarely.
There are contemptible, abusive parents. Suppose there are two parents who have a child. The parents are drug addicts, and strike and curse their children. Then the children run away. They are recovered by the police. Under your law, those same parents could have the government lash their children for trying to escape the abuse.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Randomness played a huge role in who lived and who died. If you've ever listened to the stories of those who survived the holocaust, there are so many chance happenings that contribute. In one story I was listening to, she had been selected for the gas chamber multiple times, and she snuck out of the line. All it would have taken was a single guard to notice and she would've been shot on the spot. It was a random moment of compassion from an unexpected source that allowed her to get on the truck that took her to the factory work that let her regain some weight from higher rations. Randomness played a huge role in survival probability.
It is consistent with the old testament for god to order mass killings, but that contradicts the claim that he is all loving. The holocaust is just another, more modern example of why he couldn't possibly be all loving and capable of intervention.
It is consistent with the old testament for god to order mass killings, but that contradicts the claim that he is all loving. The holocaust is just another, more modern example of why he couldn't possibly be all loving and capable of intervention.
Created:
-->
@Athias
That could be very subjective, but for sake of discussion, let's suppose they reject it because their god cannot possibly be all loving, if he is capable of helping them when they need it most.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Not as strongly as they could argue that their survival was fundamentally random, because that would selectively ignore the majority that died
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
I've been having an issue occasionally where I'll get an email that I've forfeited a debate round, but when I check, it's not true. Happened twice now.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Also,
Deuteronomy 22:13-21
English Standard Version
Laws Concerning Sexual Immorality
13 “If any man takes a wife and (A)goes in to her and then hates her 14 and accuses her of misconduct and brings a bad name upon her, saying, ‘I took this woman, and when I came near her, I did not find in her evidence of virginity,’ 15 then the father of the young woman and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of her virginity to the elders of the city in the gate. 16 And the father of the young woman shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man to marry, and he hates her; 17 and behold, he has accused her of misconduct, saying, “I did not find in your daughter evidence of virginity.” And yet this is the evidence of my daughter's virginity.’ And they shall spread the cloak before the elders of the city. 18 Then the elders of that city shall take the man and whip[a] him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the father of the young woman, because he has brought a bad name upon a virgin[c] of Israel. And she shall be his wife. (B)He may not divorce her all his days. 20 But if the thing is true, that evidence of virginity was not found in the young woman, 21 then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and (C)the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones, because she has (D)done an outrageous thing in Israel by whoring in her father's house. (E)So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I think when the bible said that, they meant putting the idea of children disobeying their parents to death. Meaning, if a child disobeyed their parents, it was the parent's job to put the idea that the child had to death. Children in bible times were comparably rebellious to children today. If this verse was implemented literally, there would be a lot of dead kids back then.
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
English Standard Version
A Rebellious Son
18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 (A)Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. (B)So you shall purge the evil from your midst, (C)and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 (A)Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. (B)So you shall purge the evil from your midst, (C)and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Created:
-->
@Kadin
I believe I would have a moral obligation to stop the rapist. I do not believe the rapist's "free will" is more important than the victim's will. What I meant before is that if GOD did not give humans free will (the freedom to sin in big or small ways) it would change the entire scope of what it means to be human.
In the situation of rape, one individual is using their free will to take away the free will of another individual. This forces a choice between which will is more important to preserve in the eyes of the witness with the power to intervene. If you do nothing, you are choosing, by virtue of inaction, the free will of the rapist to rape, over the free will of the victim to not be raped.
Created:
-->
@Kadin
For God to intervene and prevent humans from catastrophic mistakes and tragedies, He would have to take away their free will. This would undercut the most significant thing about being human. It is not that God "chose the free will of the Nazis" over anyone else; it's that He chose to provide humans with free will in general. Allowing humans freedom comes with the potential for many horrific negatives, but the alternative would be no freedom and no free will which is worse. Nobody wants to be a slave, mental or otherwise.
God had no problem taking away the free will of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea when they were coming to attack the Hebrews. This is a situation where there is a clear cost-benefit ratio.
Either:
1. Limit the free will of a handful of evil men by preventing their conceiving and execution of the Final Solution
2. Allow, by virtue of inaction, the total destruction of millions of lives and therefore, millions of wills.
We agree that one has a moral obligation to attempt to stop wrongdoing, such as rape, even if the attempt may not succeed. God, being all powerful, could only succeed. He is therefore, morally obligated to intervene.
This "free will defense" is a complete joke, bordering on insult, in it's level of vacuous reasoning.
Created:
-->
@Timid8967
Unless god is really ALLAH. And then perhaps he might have. with delight.
Funnily enough, the islamic Egyptian Government protected known Nazi war criminals. And to my understanding, in an official government report stated that the holocaust helped with the palestine problem
Created:
-->
@Lemming
No I have not read that book.
Created:
-->
@Kadin
If you saw a woman being raped (as many women in the camps were), do you have a moral obligation to attempt to stop the rapist? Is the free will of the rapist more important than the free will of the raped?
Created:
-->
@Kadin
A camp inmate had no free will to decide to be in a concentration camp. Therefore, god chose the free will of the Nazis over the free will of his chosen people, and the other victims of the Nazi Regime.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kadin
Psalm 38:7
King James Version
7 For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease: and there is no soundness in my flesh.
Created:
Suppose you are talking to a Holocaust survivor that renounced their faith after their time in Auschwitz. How would you go about trying to reconvince them that there is a god, or that this god loves them?
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
@Theweakeredge
"5. Honor your father and your mother."You do realize that biblically - this leads to parents getting away with abuse?...
This is a good point. There are parents that deserve contempt and ostracization. Not to mention that the biblical punishment for disobedient children was death. Hardly a standard for modern legal justice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
I don't need to rationalize it independent of my mind, it is necessary for my mind to have thoughts at all. These are things we can know A Priori as necessary preconditions for a mind to exist or have thoughts at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
It is implicit in the concept of "mind" that there is a space within which it must exist and time within which it may think. Even if this illusion cannot interact with the real space and time, and my mind is projecting this reality as the grand illusion, that doesn't take away from the fact that there is necessarily a space and time external to my mind, within which it can have thoughts at all. Even if I'm a brain in a vat, that necessitates the space of a vat, and time within which to have the thoughts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
You're applying circular reasoning. Your premise is the same as your conclusion.
Time and space are things we can know to exist A Priori, as necessary for a mind to even exist and have thoughts in the first place. Therefore, if I have a mind, and I know that I am having thoughts, then I know that I am having thoughts within space and time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
It's not stupid, dmt could very well be the explanation for NDEs
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
If a nation can effectively field a volunteer army, that is the desired. However, a nation fighting for it's very existence may need to conscript. It really comes down to if the national government is fighting a just war, or if it is not a just war. If it is a just war, such as a war of defence against invasion, then it may become necessary for the survival of the entire nation.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
ln order to be a prophecy, it has to have a deadline, otherwise given enough time, anything can happen. The ancients typically used a lunar calendar that they had to readjust every few years or so. So these were not prochecies, just vague predictions. If Tyre had just gotten old after a couple thousand years and crumbled into the sea yesterday, you would draw a bullseye around that and say it was the prophecy being fulfilled.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
1. Messianic prophecies
Of course the guy the book is about is going to fulfill the narrative laid out for him earlier in the book.
2. Tyre
All of these "prophecies" lack one crucial thing, an expiration date. So they aren't actually prochecies. Neb did not sack Tyre as you pointed out, he sacked the former city.
Also, suppose all of these are true for a moment, that would only prove the Bible has made predictions without an expiration date, about things that could be vaguely attributed to it's predictions. None of these indicate in any way that a god exists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
That's what happens when you drop your parrying hand and try to counter straight punches with a hook.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Well, the sport isn't for everyone. But there's a science to it, and it's extremely deep. It's really a lot more entertaining when you understand somewhat what the fighters are trying to do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
The exciting strikers that get popularized are always crowd favorites, but I bet the vegas odds will be against him on fight night.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
Usman is gonna drag him down and beat him up. I mean you saw what he did to tyron woodley.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
But how do you know that you chose for your arm to press a particular button as opposed to the other button? What is the connection between the strength of your arm to press either button, and your choice to press one over another not being an illusion?
How do you know your choice was free?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
But how do you know you could've pressed the other button. Youre just assuming you could, but you aren't justifying why you assume that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
How do you know you could've chosen otherwise than you did?
Created: