Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 324805077162262528
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
An atheist can assume truth
Assuming things exist is literally retarded
It resembles truth because you want to believe it does
It makes you happy
It helps you cope
Retarded line of logic
It says nothing about *truth*
Simply what YOU want truth to be
Do you understand?
truth seems to be an unrelated topic
No it's not
We're talking about the effectiveness of emotion in debates
In this case the existence of god
It is utterly useless
but im not talking about god
w t f
Then get out of the conversation
???
I'm not arguing two people on different topics at the same time
Wait your turn
I am stating that sometimes people believe in something before is has been 'proven' by reason. It is therefore possible to resemble truth through emotion, a hypothesis formed by intuition.