Message from @Thomas the Sowell Train [USA]

Discord ID: 544637073907253249


2019-02-11 21:22:40 UTC  

What is God then?

2019-02-11 21:26:04 UTC  

That's a question that has been explored for millennia. That answer can only be truly sought in a personal relationship with God. Now, that isn't to say that morality is subjective because one's relationship with God is personal. The relationship is individual, but that to which you are relating is unchanging.

2019-02-11 21:26:29 UTC  

Though I generally like to refer to God as the higher moral order.

2019-02-11 21:31:21 UTC  

That sounds pretty fucking subjective to me.

2019-02-11 21:33:22 UTC  

It means that you have to overcome your subjective tendencies as a human being to understand something which is not subjective.

2019-02-11 21:35:41 UTC  

A personal relationship doesn't mean you get to decide whatever you want.

2019-02-11 21:36:48 UTC  

Something being subjective doesn't mean you get to decide either. Value is subjective but people don't choose their values.

2019-02-11 21:37:41 UTC  

Subjective means taking place solely within one's own mind, but the relationship is a relationship to that which is outside of the individual.

2019-02-11 21:38:36 UTC  

That's why they say "let God into your heart"

2019-02-11 21:40:41 UTC  

If I value an object, but the object exists outside of my mind, does that make the value objective?

2019-02-11 21:41:53 UTC  

The point is that you can have a subjective view of the higher moral order, but that doesn't mean the higher moral order itself is subjective.

2019-02-11 21:44:28 UTC  

What do you mean by "the higher moral order"?

2019-02-11 21:45:31 UTC  

God

2019-02-11 21:45:32 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/509549100061163520/544635123358892047/Dyx27vHWwAEzBUV.jpeg

2019-02-11 21:45:52 UTC  

What do you mean by "God"?

2019-02-11 21:47:01 UTC  

that's quite a straw man

2019-02-11 21:48:17 UTC  

>flag
>God

can you spot the difference? 🤔 🤔 🤔

2019-02-11 21:48:56 UTC  

What do you mean by "God"?

2019-02-11 21:49:53 UTC  

I already answered that question. Read the Bible if you want to know.

2019-02-11 21:50:42 UTC  

Circular reasoning bruh.

2019-02-11 21:53:17 UTC  

>What is this rock?
limestone
>what is limestone?
a type of rock
>What is this rock?
limestone
>Circular reasoning!

... what did you expect from circular questioning?

2019-02-11 21:56:10 UTC  

Going full postmodernist on me doesn't help your argument that morality is objective.

2019-02-11 21:56:54 UTC  

I'm going full postmodernist? This really isn't a genuine discussion anymore.

2019-02-11 21:58:04 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/509549100061163520/544638277546934283/images_11.jpeg

2019-02-11 21:58:22 UTC  

I never understood why I had to pledge to the flag every morning. Did my allegiance expire over night?

2019-02-11 22:01:33 UTC  

it's a picture of a pipe, not a pipe. halfthink btfo

2019-02-11 22:10:51 UTC  

@H3llbender I don't really get the difference between NIT and UBI. That said, all conservatives I've talked over the internet call me a commie for supporting NIT/UBI... even though Finnish ancaps (reluctantly) support NIT/UBI because why it's not go-die-in-the-gutter welfare model, it's the closes to that that there could be.

2019-02-11 22:11:04 UTC  

Still too socialist for Tim Pool.

2019-02-11 22:12:37 UTC  

I guess it's the idea of paying even the people unwilling to work that grinds the gears the most, despite existing welfare systems also paying to the unwilling, as long as you play the system correctly and pretend to be willing. UBI is openly OK with unwilling to work getting paid, which causes moral outrage.

2019-02-11 22:13:22 UTC  

@whiic NIT is friedman's version of UBI, i.e. All NITs are UBIs but not all UBIs are NITs.

2019-02-11 22:13:37 UTC  

Also you need to find a higher quality of conservative

2019-02-11 22:14:59 UTC  

Leftists propose UBIs as solutions to automation, Libertarians propose NITs as solutions to welfare

2019-02-11 22:15:21 UTC  

Usually leftwingers oppose UBI, though because a non-automated income redestribution is more "caring" and has more "heart". Because UBI cannot intervene if you use your money on drugs, etc. Basically, leftwingers want a nanny state where the state pays directly to the housing company, directly to the grocery store, etc. via means like food stamps.

2019-02-11 22:15:36 UTC  

Basically, left wing thinks that bureaucracy is love.

2019-02-11 22:16:01 UTC  

UBI will only increase automation.

2019-02-11 22:16:03 UTC  

If min wage is a price floor then a NIT would be a subsidy is the idea really.

2019-02-11 22:16:40 UTC  

The ultimate goal is UBI/Star Trek society, I think we’re just pushing it too quickly.

2019-02-11 22:17:03 UTC  

Like generations too soon, and resources way too soon.

2019-02-11 22:17:05 UTC  

And the (low quality, emotions before facts type) conservative on the other hand opposes NIT/UBI because "you shouldn't have a welfare system at all". And they ignore that there **already is one**, and UBI would be to **replace** the ineffective old system.

2019-02-11 22:17:35 UTC  

But they treat it in vacuum: because UBI is not full ancap mode, they reject it. They only accept total abandonment of welfare.

2019-02-11 22:18:20 UTC  

The welfare system kills personal ambition, IMO. There’s not enough wealth (in any measure) to make everyone comfortable and also nurture ambition.