Never forget: They want you dead and your children raped, and they think its funny
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (45)
sorted by:
Then, by all means, please show the class the natural law, constant, or substance from which we can derive or observe objective morality.
Or, you know, don't, and just call me evil and pat yourself on the back because, goddamn, did you tell me, and isn't it obvious, you definitely know it when you see it, and what sort of terrible person would ever approve of things that give you the bad ick feeling, they must be evil. Besides, god told me this was good when he passed his commands down to a group of illiterate goat fuckers a few thousand years ago, and made them promise really hard not to forget or change any of his rules, which conveniently involved a lot of things that were moderately useful for groups of illiterate goat fuckers and didn't really include silly things like arithmetic, germ theory, or electricity, because that would be silly.
t. the objective morally evil
Wow, you sure told me.
Anyway, off to Bible story time.
spergs out about religion
responds with bitchy sarcasm
r/lostredditors
Mate, fuck off. If I spend time and effort on a comment, it's sperging out. If I don't bother with too much effort, it's "bitchy sarcasm".
Its a catch fucking 22, and it always is with you god buggerers. The only viewpoint your ilk ever accepts is full capitulation.
“From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!”
You know you're right when the only thing you have to add is a quote from a children's movie.
And people accuse leftists of being the only people to derive morality from fiction.
I'll add that you're a huge faggot, which is an original comment.
Sure, toss an ad hominem on the pile. Those always pair well with any serious and legitimate argument.
Here goes a good faith reply.
With morality you really only have three broad choices.
The first: There is no morality. All systems of ethics in an uncaring universe are absurd. Depending on your take on that you get either Nihilism or Absurdism.
The second: Morality is relative to the situation and only occurs within a context. This is moral relativism.
The third: Morality is absolute, but complex, because the world is complex.
Let's look at the practically of these approaches.
The first fails because you can't build a society without a system of morality. Even if the universe is infinite and uncaring, we must still live.with other men. There must be some system that judges and governs interactions between men, or groups can not function. Even if it is: "Do as I say or I will be at you with a club." That is still a (basic, broken) morality.
The second: Moral Relativism can be used to justify absolutely any behavior, no matter how base or depraved. The simplest level of moral sophistication is to act morally out of fear of the consequences. See the aforementioned guy with a club.
At this level of moral sophistication (which exists all over the world) it is moral to do anything at all, as long as you don't get caught. Raping babies..Eating babies. Worse. It all happens, and to the moral relativist in the right context it isn't wrong.
So that leaves is worth the third: Absolute Morality. A morality that exists independently of context and situation. An absolute morality can be as complex as required, as long as (once defined) it doesn't change because circumstances change.
In your own obtuse way you are claiming that there can be no absolute morality without a supreme being to define one.
This is called the Euthyphro Dilemma. It was the subject of one of Plato's Dialogues.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma
The short answer is that you can have an absolute morality without God, but it undermines God's position in the universe because the morality is separate to God.
With these assumptions, if God tells you to eat a baby, then it is still wrong.
Morality is complicated, because morality exists on several levels at once. By this I mean that the morality of the indoor, the morality of the family and the morality of the community all exist at the same time. They can even conflict, and these conflicts must be resolved separately so a solution is acceptable to all levels.
It just so happens that particular flavors of Christianity have been the most successful (historically) at building strong individuals and successful,. prosperous communities. I don't deny that other.compex moral system might work just as well; they just haven't.
So there you go. A good faith response and a place to start your journey into philosophical inquiry.
FYI, I have no interest in arguing with you. If you feel the urge, go argue with a chatbot.
Well, let me keep this short then.
First, I want to thank you for making an actual good faith reply. Even if the actual thrust of your statement is "fuck you, I'm right, and I don't want to discuss it any further" because, quite frankly, that is the general quality of the people left around here, I do believe any throwback to the behaviors and manners of the good internet of old should be recognized and applauded. So, thank you for taking the time.
That being said, and recognizing that you're quite satisfied at having dropped your truth bomb and fucked off, I just want to end the conversation by saying that you've merely served to prove my point. The only acceptable view here is complete philosophical capitulation to your belief in an absolute truth you can neither derive nor discover, only divine from whole cloth. And it's never some humanistic cloth, either; it's always from some fictional or historical manuscript, and you are vehemently opposed to people and belief systems that divine their absolute truth from a different fictional or historical document, as they are to you.
And it seems like you will never stop. It almost makes one have to conclude there must actually be something that created humanity to be a servant race somewhere, because the overwhelming majority of the species is so absolutely ready to fall to their knees and worship SOMETHING, regardless of if it's a religion, a children's book series, or a government.
You guys have some sort of "dominate me daddy" mold deep in your cognition, waiting for something to come fill it.
And that's sad.
Guy, you came here explicitly to shit on theists, specifically Christians.
My position doesn't rely on divine revelation, nor a supreme being. You don't give a toss. Anything handed to us from our ancestors is wrong.
You haven't even engaged with any of the points I raised. You have just patted yourself on the back for confirming your biases and you are done.
Here is one for you. When KiA first started it was almost entirely Atheist. Since that time, many, including myself have seen the value in the traditions.of our grandfather's, including Christianity.
Perhaps there is no God. It doesn't matter to me. There isn't a nation built that is better, wealthier or more free than those built on the foundation of Christianity, specifically Protestant Christianity.
Perhaps Bhuddist nations? But of those only Japan is really first world, and they are at least as.much Shinto as Bhuddist.
So go too, guy. Take your real, free thinking truth and your moral Relativism and fuck off to the perfect Atheist Utopia with all your intolerant Atheist buddies. Oh wait, there is no such place. Sweden might have been close, but after they gave up Christian practice they instantly fucked their country forever.
Fuck, you haven't even read your Nietzsche.
Bullshit KiA started as athiest and "saw the light". The board was flooded with religious fuckwits as they were driven out of other communities, and the Johnny come lately-s simpliy outnumber the core old guard.
But that's not the point. The point is a simple discussion of morals, which for you and apparently many others seem to only come from religion, and yet you fucking dive headfirst into preference utilitarianism for WHICH religion produced the society YOU think is best, and yet you SOMEHOW have the fuckall brain capacity that can't connect these two dots, separated as they are by the grand gulf of a few millimeters, that there aren't objective morals, but rather systems of morsl frameworks that prioritize different things and lead to different outcomes.
You can judge the relative morals on whatever criteria you want, and make declarations on whether a system meets your criteria or not, but you cannot point to a system that generates objective and correct morals, EVEN WHEN you dig through your scrapbook of gods and churches.
And kindly go fuck yourself with a hand grenade whose pin is removed and which has been slathered in bullet ants when you say I don't respect the value of old traditions. I am more traditionalist then half this fucking board at this stage, except in the religion thing, and that's mostly because my ancestors live in eastern Europe and don't have much truck with gods and churches. Tradition is the answer our great grandparents came up with for questions we've forgotten how to even ask, certainly, but not EVERY tradition was the CORRECT answer. Deriving morality from ancient fiction is no more correct then leaving out an offering of milk for the fae so they don't sour the rest of your stock. You can pull some useful morals from any religious text, because so much of it is tied to the human condition, but to tie those useful facts to the fiction of gods and talking snakes and split oceans is retarded.
And stick another hand grenade up there for saying I'm here specifically to shit on Christians. You guys are retarded, but you've been relatively harmless for a few decades. I'll go back to you once the mudslime and jew questions have been answered, and even then only if your start regaining institutional power. I lived through the moral panics of the 80s and 90s by the christian right, and I'll be damned before I see that power returned to you.
Grab a third one for suggesting I, or anyone, read Nietzsche. The man was a hack.
Wall of text level: average leftist meme
Its one an a quarter paragraphs, you absolute ham sandwich. If that's a "wall of text" to you, you're as bright as the leftists you mock.
And I refuse to entertain criticsm from anyone whose username contains any form of "send feet pics" besides. You people are as creepy as the furries, yet somehow more brazen.