general
Discord ID: 634367565304561675
1,011,369 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 450/4046
| Next
I think Nerth might be a sperg fr.
Yup
<:powerful:639994936070242315>
I asked you how what you're saying solves is/ought
and you didn't answer
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
you said 'god'
ok
I don't know it seems to have come full circle in his argument.
that doesn't mean anything to me
I tried to define grounding after that to answer the question.
That's because you're a mutant Nerth
okay, well I don't agree that if your argument is grounded than its true then
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
I still am not certain what you mean by grounded
can I get a tldr of this "debate"
you just said 'its grounded by god'
Grounded means that there is something or someone the morality is ground in, enforcing it.
GO TO YOUR ROOM
"you dont convince me"nanananana im putting my fingers in my ears" - Nerthulas
YOU'RE GROUNDED
he needs to specify that as DNA lifeforms the matrix he speaks off is a result of genes and that variance even within human pop can lead to variance of perspective but i agree with nerths general points he's making i don't see what the arguments were just going on tangents about stuff
>So, grounded is something enforcing or justifying it.
<:powerful:639994936070242315>
So @Nerthulas are you arguing everything is objective, but our human minds are subjective and therefore morality is decided by subjectivity dispite our obility to quanify the objective world with our senses and record it then make abstract and practical evaluations of that?
Its not black and white
there is a difference between positive statements about what is true, which describe reality, and statements of preference - when you say grounded, do you mean that it is something which would make statements about preference/normative statements true, descriptors of reality @Hector
?
We have subjective and objective lived experience
I am sorry @Deleted User its gonna be hard to address your because @Nerthulas can't see you
if one statement can be true for two people its objective.
All you need to disprove his argument is prove that more than one person can share a truth
simply more than one.
Well of course more that one person can share a truth @Deleted User
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLdqKIj3-A0
I forgotted, there's good stuff on YT
Objective doesn't require universal agreement it requires agreement apart from the individual to more than one.
tbh, i behaved like an african my last year of trick-or-treating - 8th grade
i was better before that though, i swear
@StRexPowerColt I'm saying that the human perspective is the only one which can be taken, that there is no need to refer to a cosmic consciousness to explain the existence of numbers and patters, that reference to our own consciousnesses is the only thing which is required (and the only thing which can be said conclusively) as to why we observe these universal patterns
Thus objective can exist and coexist with the subjective.
Thats just not true @Nerthulas because if something besides humanity shared its perspective with us then what?
I don't think the best way to talk about morality is in terms of 'subjective vs objective' but 'normative vs positive'
@StRexPowerColt what do you mean, you mean like animals?
Universality is not a necessary trait of objectivism.... It can just be more than one person - there are degrees of objective.
the word is used different ways, yeah
Yes @Nerthulas or anything sentient that could communicate with us for that matter.
<:honkpilled:558686758875824130> <:Gun:639978512207314973> <:AngryNPC:639979462976602133>
HERRO
<:Banjod:639988401176707112>
<:powerful:639994936070242315>
ultimately we only have direct access to our own perspective, but we observe other things which we think function more or less like we do, on a continuum from animals to humans - what is the point of bringing this up?
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
<:Banjod:639988401176707112> <:Gun:639978512207314973> <:Str3tch:639979203890249758>
who's got the webm of the chink shaking at the arcade surrounded by females
@Nerthulas busy right now, can we continue this another time?
even acknowledging their existence can only be done from your perspective
sure, Helton
<:slav:640046833200267284>
hewwo
Do you recognize that other individuals exist and are sentient, as you are @Nerthulas
here you go billy
any coomers yet_
*Tips fedora*
tromm
<:steflol:561214382181318656>
not yet <:towelsweat:552805059042344960>
PPl need to understand that objectivity as a term is a a term that exists post conceding the fact that the thing labeled objective is perceived by you
how can you lose this fast
@StRexPowerColt yes, but you have a privileged perspective, you only have access to knowledge of their existence from your own - take this for instance - a cat can see and to some degree understand a human, but does not have a human perspective or information processing matrix
this is just
unless sexual emergency
discord autism
some say the first 3 days or so are the hardest
wait, who lost?
did somebody lose?
I think after the 7 day mark, its easy
yo mum is a sexual emergency
they are sayin gtrommm lost
<:dab:395562678153904128>
day 5 is the hardest for me
i did not lose
I always fail on day 5
of nofap
day 2
I'm on day 3
going strong
I started one day early
yes, once we get over the first week, we will be good
almost did it this morning
day 2 gang
prager jew
1 month is possible for you
it's a far str3tch ( <:vargsmug:639999539192922123> ) but it' spossible
heh
funni banjod
I use my high verbal iq allt he time for word jokings
I dl that asian vid and called it ChadChong
did people remove the jew moji?
@Nerthulas u agree>
I was gonna post it, but can't find
?
โ
<:kraut:389881471881576448>
this
<:spurdo:640003428290134026>
@Nerthulas thanks for tagging me
yw
<:mlady:389497741769703424>
did u read my tag
nerth
ffs
do u agree
yeah I agree, but at least Romulus was using it in a different way
he was using it to be intersubjective
but he was opening up like
a third argument which was totally tangential
ye he does that
idk why
I don't really even understand which one he was trying to respond to
i think it's like because he's trying to tie it into some other thing he believes
@Nerthulas Okay, you think that morality is subjective to the cats own perferences. Well I disagree, I think morality (assuming the cat is sentient and not just a flesh and bone robot ie Golem) for the cat would but subject to the limitations of what the cat is potentially capable of (at least in terms judging it) and the a human would be subject to morality as best as one is potentially capable of, but that morality is not subjective.
YASSSSS
wait how is the morality not subjective you didn't say why?
well we can describe the cat's preferences in positive (descriptive/'objective') terms, but the preferences themselves are normative (subjective)
if it's coming from these 2 sentient entities it's subjective to each
it could be positive/objective that the cat's preferences exist, and that they have x consequences
<:powerful:639994936070242315>
but the preference *itself* is normative/subjective
Sure, but I think ones preferences (Pathos, Feelings) have nothing to do wtih morality.
acts act on morality, but they are not capable of really using it
animals*
I think they're the same thing to different degrees
very tired
I think I meant cats
can't even remember what I thought 10 seconds ago
great sign
i don't agree banjod, morality is subjective and what constitutes morality varies between genetic groups, morality is merely the accumulation of positive behaviors stemming from genes allowing the group to exist in a cohesive fashion, why? because it is superior for the survival of the group and it's members
The cat essentially has its own morality that is not like our own and we can say it is inferior
I see what you are saying @Nerthulas but I disagree. My argument for why I disagree has to do with historical proof of a "God", but I don't have the kinda time for that right now, what say we reconvein if you wanna hear that some other time. I will be on later.
ok, sure
guys just accept
Disscussing it in voice chat later would make my life easier.
i am right you are wrong 24/7
this conversation is still going, dayum
why would you do that to a cat :(
cats will eat you when you die
Really? @Deleted User
@Deleted User perfect for my ECOFASH empire
really
<:cot:639989713599594526> torture
๐ฆ
Cat eat me so i torture cat guurrr
<:kekboi:417880491182653450>
somehow this man looks familiar
prob the face u see when ur phone goes on lock and ur taking a shit
Under the right circumstances any carnivorous (or omnivorous) animal will eat a human.
So technically....so would your dog
I'm not gonna argue morality now
but it's not just subjective garbage
Darwin called it Natural morality
survival
survival is just first order of business..
thus its the purest life/death existential basis for decisions
MASLOW's pyramid attempts to rationalize it
there's a critique that "self" should be at the top (individualist assumption)
maybe Family could be at the top , the order of the top 3 are obviously not as readily agreed on
that's great
but it doesn't get past is/ought
which is what we were arguing about
๐คท๐ป
what YOU were arguing aout
about
its a moral system which is composed of some central tendencies of living things
but it is what it is
lol and?
its not as if it could be justified over some other set of actions based on anything other than appeal to previously held values
is it moral to afghan men to fuck little boys
no
if you truly think morality is subjective, then you're not honest..
not to us
just because you can't exactly describe something doesn't make it not real
you already judge things on the daily basis
you know you are more moral than some guy pushing drugs on kids
@Deleted User Show up and I will pose what I promise will be an interesting argument to say the least regaurding this. Its 12:09 here now, what say we reconvine at 7:00.
Banjod, the position that moral preferences are not necessary in a metaphysical sense does not mean that there aren't central moral tendencies
of humans
I agree with you
I have my own morality
and it has causes
no
it's not just that
which make it similar to other people's
you have it because you know better
dealing with reality, pushing drugs on kids, in and of itself, is not a good thing
right?
you don't need to explain how you know
you know
and you know better than some idiot thinking otherwise
it is moral to them
your two opinions are not eqaul
I know you know that
Banjod I agree
but its not a metaphysical thing
maybe it is
I just prefer my own moral perspective
it's not about preference
it's about knowing what is what
but I can recognize that its an evolved/developed preference
I just have it
so what
that doesn't devalue it to me
it doesnt' change that you know
I don't disagree
so it's not just some evolutionary shit
you are developed enough to understand that
no one really believes the other, unless they are mentally ill or very wrong
but everyone outside, that knows better, knows it's wrong
and it's not a quesiton about it
again, you don't need to be able to explain it, to now it
know*
it's the same as meaning
I agree...
I think we agree...
good
1,011,369 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 450/4046
| Next