Total posts: 2,481
Posted in:
-->
@Username
but I also think that the state killing murderers, rapists, and pedophiles is wrong
Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
The state must harm some innocents by nature of its existence, but that doesn't give it the moral right to harm innocents in all cases.
But I don’t think sadolite was in favor of the state killing innocent people, only what he alluded to murderers, rapists, and pedophiles.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
But just because a state inevitably must harm some people to sustain itself does not mean that the state can do whatever it wants to its citizens in service of some greater benefit.
Assuming that we must harm innocent people then yes it means exactly just that, clearly you disagree so please explain the difference.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
But just because a state inevitably must harm some people
What do you mean by “some people” innocent people?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Being imprisoned is an inevitable consequence of living under a functioning government.
Not if it’s for a crime you didn’t commit, if anything that’s the literal definition of dysfunction.
It is also important to consider that if evidence ever comes out to suggest your innocence, you can go to trial again. You cannot un-die.
That’s all true but you still can never get that time back, also I’m sure some would prefer death over prison.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
I'm actually curious: If one day the state arrested you for a crime you didn't commit and then killed you, would you really accept your death as a necessary casualty for deterring crimes?
If I’m reading you correctly it seems to me the only fundamental difference in you and sadolites line of thinking is your stance on the death penalty because if you both agree regarding the continuation of prisons you can literally ask yourself the same question minus the death penalty point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
Even after they’ve already been killed?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
would you really accept your death as a necessary casualty for deterring crimes?
This assumes we’re capable of acceptance in death, which doesn’t sound very agnostic to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
The process of something occurring to me is completely random. I cannot control what occurs to me, that is the nature of something occurring.
You didn’t say this before, before you said
Premise 1 Every human choice or action is driven by past events.
So is it past events or randomness?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
If you were to give your business partner a hot beverage to hold as opposed to a cold one, they would more likely cooperate with you and when asked why they did what they did, they would usually, never say “well I was holding a coffee instead of a beer”.
I don’t see your point here, temperatures vary and so do people’s attitudes towards them (especially under given circumstances) so how can you possibly know this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
You had no say in you being born. It occurred because of something which happened in the past.
Thanks for bringing up my parents in their intimacy, that was a mental image I definitely needed lol, but anyway so what about that thing which happened in the past why did that occur? Because of free will.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
No, all actions occur because of something which happened in the past.
Prove it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I certainly remember you referring to me as a nihilist, for the above reason.
For what reason?
1. So are you saying that you are a nihilist, and that objective morality has all been a ruse?
No, but I’m arguing in favor as such.
2. And are you also saying that you are not always skirting around issues arising from the basis of your ideological conditioning?
What do you mean by this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
Premise 1 Every human choice or action is driven by past events.
Or free will?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
So what actually is your argument?
I told you already, I’m promoting nihilism.
I certainly remember you referring to me as a nihilist, for the above reason.
I did no such thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
This conversation is over until you answer my questions (message repeats)
On second thought, I take this as a concession on your part, so I’ll be the bigger person and stop the bleeding, feel free to say that same quote one last time, I already got my concession from you ✌🏾.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Is it? Is it really? Because I’ll get that message loud and clear once you stop prolonging a conversation with the same repeated message.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
You mean like how you answered mine? Oh wait you didn’t, you went ghost for so long that all I can say to that is the same thing I said to Theweakeredge
save yourself the trouble this time and feel free to not respond.
✌🏾
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Correct me if I am wrong.
Sure, I’m promoting nihilism.
And I see you are still promoting, the old nihilism chestnut.....Based upon Tarik's definition, that anyone who doesn't agree with Tarik's take on objective morality, is a nihilist.
Why do people always say that? That was never my argument to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
And thinking SPECIFICALLY that humans DON'T MATTER is being AGAINST THEM. There is NO DISTINCTION.
Yes there is, if something doesn’t matter to you then you won’t put any energy into caring as opposed to being against something which requires energy to care enough to oppose it, that’s the difference.
Answer all of the dropped points in your next response or you are going to be ignored.
...Like I care, wouldn’t be the first time you’ve ignored my argument (so much for answering all the points) you just have a tendency of reappearing out of nowhere, but save yourself the trouble this time and feel free to not respond.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Yes, existential nihilism is true.
So what’s the distinction between existential nihilism and other forms of nihilism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
That is an extremely BIASED definition there- as we are talking about Bias in a psychological framework
What other framework is there in regards to bias?
Also... .your claim is ENTIRELY false- let's say we accept your definition - saying that "NO HUMAN LIFE MATTERS" is clearly a PREJUDICE AGAINST A GROUP - the HUMAN RACE.
There’s a difference between saying something doesn’t matter and being against something, you knowing this is essential not pedantic.
Recall: That my argument is that NIHILISM CAN ONLY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THOSE WITHOUT BIAS - therefore - if there is a group that can NOT HAVE BIAS - then they are NIHILISTS
And my argument is you haven’t proven that group is solely mentally ill people.
Finally NO - you are false - your gotchas are only focused on a SINGLE PART OF MY ARGUMENT, not my foundations nor my conclusions - they aren't even SEQUITURS.
Assuming your right that they aren’t sequiturs (which you’re not) then by definition they aren’t “gotchas”.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
In this article, we explore why nihilism can be a constructive mental attitude to free our mind from invisible cultural impositions, and look at reality and at our personal life for what they truly are.
So in other words nihilism is true?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I AM ARGUING THAT LOGIC MITIGATES BIAS - that is MY ARGUMENT.
That’s simply not true.
Bias- Inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair.
There is no inclination or prejudice in regards to the position that human life doesn’t matter so that’s not a biased position.
To "prove" my argument which is actually against yours - [LINK]
Nowhere in that link does it say anything about nihilism and even if it did that doesn’t mean they’re the only group of people that are nihilists, not to mention the fact that people don’t believe anything when they’re hallucinating which contradicts the definition you provided, nihilism is the belief that all values are baseless.
I DEMONSTRATED this previously in post #639.
No you didn’t, all you did was make a bunch of baseless claims.
Because of how psychology works - specifically bias. I want to answer your question, but it has to do what you view morals are specifically - so to lay the groundwork - would you agree to this definition?Morals - "standards for good or bad character and behavior:"
Sure although I’d say it’s a bit vague in determining what form morality takes.
You have continuously tried to play around, and have failed to stay on topic - I have EVIDENCE that you are being pedantic, not answering questions, ignoring a bulk of the points in my argument, only interested in gotcha's, etc.
The numerous times I actually “gotcha” crumples your whole argument so I wouldn’t call that pedantic, also the other things you mentioned has nothing to do with being pedantic just dismissive which you have been as well, difference is I attempt to at least right the wrong (like eventually answering your question in regards to the definition of morals).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
No - because unlike you - I am acutely aware of what Nihilism is - namely:
Even if that is true (which it isn’t) then that’s even more reason to discuss it, so that I can be aware.
You have an extremely BIASED perspective of what Nihilism is.
Unless you have a direct quote from me I haven’t discussed with you my perspective (as far as I know).
You are being PEDANTIC - how do you not understand these simple things? I know -it's because you're obsessed with gotchas, dropping them, or presenting red herrings as soon as anyone cares to engage long enough.
What I do understand is unless you can prove these claims to be true with quotes from me then they mean nothing, although it may seem that I’m obsessed with gotchas considering that I “gotcha” so many times already.
The fact of the matter is that NIHLISTS are not any of the usual population because everyone has VALUES whether they realize it or not. This ENTIRE little conversation was about people who are mentally ill are the EXCEPTION TO THE RULE
Nothing in any of the links you’ve provided says this, so unless you have any adequate proof then again it’s nothing more than a baseless claim.
Appeals to emotion have NO logic or ATTEMPT TO MITIGATE bias.
If you have to lie on my behalf to feel like you’ve gotten ahead in this discussion then your pathetic, nowhere in my argument did I say appeal of emotion mitigates bias in fact I argued the contrary by saying the position that human life doesn’t matter shows no emotional appeal for human life therefore it can’t be biased.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
How mentally ill people develop nihilism
Don’t you think we need to discuss what nihilism is first before we can discuss anything further concerning it? Which is what I was doing when I made my previous responses.
How biases are in everyone
...Another cognitive dissonance, the first point that I “ignored” discusses nihilists and the second touches on how nobody can be one because there’s biases in everyone, which one is it dude? You’re not making any sense.
But even your one point was so blatantly wrong, all you have you do to correct it is READ THE ENTIRE SENTENCE. Believing that human life doesn't matter is A BIAS - and ISN'T NIHILISM.
So in what instance is it not bias? Because to me the position that human life matters is the biased position because theirs an emotional appeal for human life which is biased, the belief that it doesn’t matter means there is no appeal of emotion (at least in that regard). Lastly I never said that nihilism was defined by that alone, in fact I believe nihilism is much more complex than that and defining it by that alone is an oversimplified understatement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
...Now you’re just lying because that was never my point to begin with, anyway you still didn’t answer my question
How does that support the claim that only mentally ill people are capable of nihilism?
That is unless YOU want to drop that “point”.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Nope...Misinterpretation.
I didn’t misinterpret jack, I literally asked you for clarification and you hit me back with
And so.
so man up and stop looking for bs excuses because that’s elementary dude.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
You purposefully find contradiction where none exists....For the sake of argument, I assume.
Do you even know what a contradiction is? It’s when you go against your word by saying the opposite which is exactly what you did when saying you can’t accept morality and in the next breath (unintentionally) spoke about those who do, your not making any sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
...So according to you, you living by a code of conduct is also you accepting a code of conduct ergo morality, that contradicts earlier when you said
People neither accept nor reject morality
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
No - you simply tried to set up a gotcha - you did not respond to a SINGLE point I made.
Well if the gotcha was successful (which I don’t expect you to view as such but that’s why we’re here) then that would resonate as a sufficient response to your so called “point” I would say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
If you’re gonna attempt to use my words against me then at the very least be specific as to what your referring to because right now you haven’t made a point. So far I was mainly the one that provided support (the definition of nihilism that lead to you dropping your argument is an example of this, how can you forget?) for my claims, considering that’s how proper argument structure works (although I don’t expect you to know anything about that).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
You completely ignored the bulk of my point, I find myself disappointed. I said, "Even the position that human life doesn't matter is a moral view." is a bias, so... please actually read.
I did, just because I paraphrased to show emphasis doesn’t mean it changed the whole meaning of the quote.
Respond to my questioning and the ENTIRETY of my argument or else you will receive no further responses.
So what? It wouldn’t be the first time, every time we get into it you go ghost for a little while and pop back into the blue as if you’re gonna be a difference maker. What you fail to understand is if I’m right in the “point” I did respond to then the “ENTIRETY” of your argument falls apart completely just based on that alone, so miss me with your hypocrisy and telling me how to argue (which I told you about before).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
In order for someone to not have this, they would have to be swayed by something other than bias.
I sense a cognitive dissonance here because if something other than bias is what your looking for then your quote before the one above
the position that human life doesn't matter
represents just that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Mentally ill people being capable of being chemically opposite to this is the only reason why one can be a nihilist practically speaking.
And you know this how?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
If you don't know what a sociopath is you wouldn't bring them up so much.
Well, if you know as much as you claim to then provide support for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Don’t change the subject, answer my question.
How does that support the claim that only mentally ill people are capable of nihilism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Because humans haven't gone extinct.
How does that support the claim that only mentally ill people are capable of nihilism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Rejection of all moral principles is effectively impossible. They only people who arguably are able to do so are mentally ill.
And you know this how?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Don’t change the subject, if nihilism is rational and morality as you see it isn’t, then why aren’t you a nihilist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Rejectung a claim that cannot be demonstrated is neither correct nor incorrect it is just prudent skepticism.
That’s an understatement, it’s over and beyond that, it’s prudent logic and rationality, which you admitted that morality as you saw it wasn’t.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I’m not going in circles with you, I prefer to move in a straight line, and fact of the matter is we discussed that already however you didn’t answer the real argument which is
By that logic nihilism is correct.
Lastly you don’t get to pick and choose when it’s a red herring when it suits you, because you had no problem saying things about nihilism before it’s only when I provided support you wanna change the subject, miss me with that I’m on to your stupid little game that your playing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I don't actually think you can speak for nihilists anyway if there even are any which I doubt.
That’s besides the point, fact of the matter is the meaning of the word itself (which was my argument and yours until I provided support for mine) I can speak on, so how about you ACTUALLY ENGAGE and address that rather than concerning yourself with things you don’t know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
On a last note, the fact that you’re now asking me questions I now take it as your deferring to me in regards to nihilism, so I refer you back to what I said before
By that logic nihilism is correct.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
You are not arguing from a nihilist perspective or at least you are doing a poor job.
Look. Do nihilists believe stuff or not?
Boy have the tables turned, one minute your telling me what nihilism is and the next your asking me questions, but to answer your question (because I’m such a nice guy) I guess that depends on what stuff your talking about.
On a last note, the fact that you’re now asking me questions I now take it as your deferring to me in regards to nihilism, so I refer you back to what I said before
By that logic nihilism is correct.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Also also if you "believe" that it was more "correct" to reject morality than to play along than you would have a belief and couldn't be a nihilist.
Nihilism- The rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the BELIEF that life is meaningless.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
People neither accept nor reject morality....People live by an acquired code of conduct
I thought it was all the same to you, if I’m not mistaken didn’t you include a code of conduct in the definition of morality?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
It isnot a belief or a claim it is the absence of them.
Or the rejection of them either way it’s correct to reject morality as you see it, which is what nihilism at its core really is, a rejection of morality, look it up wise guy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Until we agree on a common goal it is.
By that logic nihilism is correct.
Created: