Message from @Sorghagtani Beki
Discord ID: 324803768463917057
why not? wouldn't societal emotion dictate law and order, as well as simple beliefs, morals?
Sure but are you saying animals don't give thought?
Emotion informs the subject matter of debate. It does matter.
No you determine what is best for society as a whole in moral debates
Not on emotions
I think some animals do, such as a dog that lets its owner put a biscuit on its nose
For example law and order
That's good for society as a whole
That takes some willpower, you know
what makes law and order good
Ok but that's not free will
Why not?
I think it's a scale, it's not like binary
Law and order is good because humans who did not care about being civil did not cooperate well with each other
And they died
A dog has less free will than you or me, but it does make decisions based on it's consciousness
*its
so those who felt it was important to care established standards
it seems incorrect to exclude emotion from a moral debate
but i can see why you might disagree
Someone gets emotional and says it should not happen because human rights bla bla
I say it should happen to a mob boss because he'll operate within prison anyways
So might as well give him the syringe
Which choice is better for society as a whole
I think it's moral if the guilt is proven beyond any doubt
Yes of course
In cases of unforgivable violence
You don't kill maybe innocent people
well there were numerous debates on death penalties around the world and it was found that many people are disgusted by it, so it became law that the practice was no longer enacted
Look everyone is going to use emotions in a debate regardless unless they're psychopaths and cannot feel emotion. However, You cannot make pure emotional statements with nothing to back its utility
Yeah that's retarded
Some people have to die
@מוות שחור#2673 There is a difference between something able to exist, and something being able to be argued for. Obviously, existence precedes reason. And reason never reaches infallible conclusions, it is relative to previous ones, and therefore can at once be totally wrong. Reason and debate exists on a lesser level than emotion: both produce our motivations in the world, but in terms of truth, the comprehension through emotion is capable of a higher level of understanding because it has the capacity to comprehend that which is yet unproven.
Like mob bosses and gang leaders who can operate within prisons
No emotion cannot comprehend what is yet unproven it *assumes* the unproven is proven
That's what makes it retarded
It *assumes* truth
You can assume truth on literally anything
A Muslim can assume truth
A Christian can assume truth