@Nerthulas ever heard of propertarianism?

@Nerthulas there is a discrepancy between moral intuitions and and actual morality

Regardless punishing individuals because their private interests violate the short term interests of the collective
Will impose an indirect cost on everyone,
as it infringed upon the foundational principle of private property

> there is no such thing as actual morality what the fuck are you talking about
@Nerthulas
There is an empirically verifiable and finite set of actions through which we can increase the probability of a preferable outcome, in accordance with each individuals relative values respectively

The fact that something is debatable doesn't mean it's unanswerable @WonderNab(Copepilled)

> @Ed why is maximizing the fulfilment of people's values the most important thing?

@Nerthulas

It simply is
By definition of importance and by definition of fulfillment

We are all naturally born with preferences and that is simply the case

> ok dude
@Nerthulas
Bruh
It's true by definition

You want what you want

You desire what you desire

You are fulfilled by what you find fulfilling

> @Ed
>
> desire is just a word, what the word means is what is important.
>
> what we want is adjusted by reality..
> Unless you sit in a basement and just fantasy
> as if you where the king of the universal base!
@virtue
I understand that values are relative and alterable

> first of all, the fact that I want something, and that that thing would satiate me or whatever has no moral implications, those are just facts, second of all, people have contradictory and mutually exclusive values, third of all, there is no way at present to calculate a course of action which would result in the fulfillment of all desires, the equation is too large
@Nerthulas
That depends on how you define the word "ought"

If you refuse to define the word ought in functional terms
You'll never bridge the is-ought distinction
And you'll end up saying everything is A-moral

> the equation is too large
@Nerthulas
If you can't immediately figure out the theory of everything, you don't just give up on physics

You can dissect moral quandaries into smaller problems and work your way up to a plan of action

> oh yes of course, you can't bridge the is-ought gap, and there is no objective morality
@Nerthulas
You can't bridge the gap simply because of all the semantic sophistry(pilpul) that you're using to avoid dissecting the word "ought" into it's functional definition

Prescriptive statements devolve into descriptive statements about the desires of moral agents

Desires are relative and alterable

I am not arguing against that

You don't

I am not saying that

It's really just a matter of promoting the imposition of social standards that increase the probability of outcomes in concordance with your relative value

People can have more than value
Some of which contradict one another

The logical thing to do is to recognise the most valuable value within your heirarchy of values

Then prioritise the imposition of social standards in accordance with that value

People have a set of values that they (by definition) want to satiate
TO DIFFERING DEGREES

That develops a heirarchy of values

You can have a heirarchy of hierarchies

Which will lead to you facing the consequences of those problems

I don't understand
What am I missing? @virtue

> the way I see it, there are multiple vectors, and they overlap to form a window - if you overextend some at the expense of others, you're going to get different results, which may be distasteful
@Nerthulas

If you care about 2 different things and you follow a plan of action that destroys one of the things you highly value to preserve something else you value a little less

You can do a cost-benifit analysis

And develop a new plan of action accordingly

It's a never ending process that is (at least seems to be) progressing towards an ideal that we'll never fully actualize

Where all our values are satiated

But if I define it's value by how much I care about it then that problem is averted

Value isn't an intrinsic property of a substance

It's a superimposed abstraction that I use to articulate my relationship with things

> @Nerthulas
>
> social values require at least two people
> who negotiate or interact about their personal desires
@virtue

Social values are an emergent phenomenon from personal desires

I agree

> let me show the problem
>
> if you care less about Charity than Honesty..
> and you care less say 50% of Charity and 100% of Honesty.
>
> Then you get the opportunity to be dishonest
> and at the same time 200% as Charitable as normal.
>
> what is 50% of 200%?
@virtue
No problem there as far as I can tell

It's moral to lie in that case, in a vacuum

But once you include the fact that you exist in a social structure that provides you with other things you value and requires the honoring of contracts(honesty) to do so

(the social structure also imposes costs on individuals that are caught lying)
Then that 3rd variable has to be taken into account in your cost benefit analysis

Yes it does
In a vacuum

Although I still don't understand how you can put %s to such abstract ideas

I understand the quantitative difference you're eluding to

No, you can recognise which value you care about the most at that moment

And make a decision on the basis of that

Social context would increase the cost of dishonesty

Hold up what do you mean 200 points of charity

Or 0 points of honesty

Ahh OK
So the fact that the moral dilemma involves variation in more than 1 dimension of value
And the different dimensions of value are not collapsible into 1
Will eventually pose a practical challenge in decision making

Then there must be a heirarchy between the different axis of values
that qualitatively determines which is more important in that situation
Charity or honesty

You need a qualitative destinction

Because you can't compare honesty and charity

They're each on independant axis

Situational ethics?

Idk honestly my autism needs to recharge

Yeah even better

I enjoyed it

> my dick is throbbing
@21ooAB
That escalated fairly quickly

@Weaboo Kempeitai God is not an actual being but rather an archatype passed down through generations to represent the ideals that we must strive towards but never fully actualize

Regardless I still find it dishonest when people define omnipotence as the ability to do anything at all, even if it's inherently incoherent

God can't make a square circle

He looks like a tit

As I understand it, a currency is inflated when the same amount of labour is represented in more notes

Inflation can be useful to resolve liquidity issues

It's not always bad

No?

> Inflation drives growth
@Daddy
If it corresponds to an increase in productivity

> If not Ed it’s called stagflation
@Daddy
OK then we both are saying the same thing but you're using different words

It is necessary to print more notes to resolve liquidity issues

What you're saying only works with fiat currency

That's not by accident

OK once again I am technically not disagreeing with you
my word choice is off though

It works @virtue

But they will inevitably breed too fast

It delays the inevitable

Western society thrived because it culled the underclass

> All inflation in America comes from the fractional reserve system
@Daddy

And that particular model of inflating the currency is not sustainable in the long term without causing depressions

> we didn't cull the underclass. we controlled them
@virtue
Through force

They either stopped looting and breaking the rules
Or got killed or imprisoned

Given the low ability to delay gratification
Death or imprisonment was the norm past a certain IQ threshold

Nah I am the psychopath

He didn't want to straight out kill low IQ folks

Instead he chose to design a system of incentives that prohibits them from being too parasytic

Conformity is the ability to profess and act out the ideology of the majority irrespective of truth

Inequality wouldn't be a problem in a rational world

@virtue I think your system works under 2 conditions
1-the producers outnumber the consumers(or produce enough to satisfy everyone's needs)
2-the majority of producers are willing to sacrifice a portion of their wealth for the sake of security

That only works past a certain IQ threshold though @virtue

Both the soft socialism model and the capitalist model can work if you have enough high IQ folks

> ..there has to be somesort of appeasement!
@virtue
Or just shoot the violent low IQ folks

Absolute poverty doesn't correlate with crime as much as relative poverty

> And thinks like a Jew
@Daddy
You're being delusional if you don't acknowledge that the less fortunate envy those more fortunate than themselves

Once you acknowledge that

You're left with 2 options to resolve the situation

1- non-violent means of resolution: appeasement through some form of welfare and ideological subversion to minimise contempt of the ruling class(producers)

2- violent means : imprisonment or death

It does exist
That why politicians are throwing money at minorities

The "Hate whitey" narrative is just an expression of envy that they dress up in racial term to defame anyone who rejects it

They don't physically attack you
Coz the cops do the work for them

That's a bit parasitic if you ask me

Although I am not one to judge

It's an understandable reaction to a system that inevitably exploits you once you attempt to be productive

OK that's psychopathic 100%

Parasitic behaviour
Anger management issues and probably grandiose narcissism if he never thinks he's wrong

Jordan has got a lot of tourism sites

Although it can get pretty fucking hot in the summers

Marrow isn't bad

That's gotta suck

And the vegans

Their tears I mean

The left didn't win elections by actually subverting a sufficient number whites to vote against their own interests

It simply imported voters that are de-facto beneficiaries of the the disingenuous denial of divergent evolution in humans

Don't be overwhelmed by the small minority of "white" traitors whose voices are being magnified by the corporate media

But they hold no power as they are a minority

Even in the retarded system of full-franchise democracy
Where parasites can vote to steal money from the producing class

True

They control a significant subset of the channels of information(universities, schools, news broadcasting agencies, social media platforms)

Which informs the decisions of normal whites

> Can I be a landlord in america
@virtue

Just on paper

Property taxes=renting land from the government

> maybe I should try a 30 day water fast
@Nerthulas
You're not a plant my dude