No, there was no position because there was no debate

His position was very clear

Hop off of Ducc's dick

"iN yOuR mInD"

You claimed the debate was already settled

But it wasn't

It is if it's one-sided

What is one-sided?

Rartar

imagine being such a subjectivist you think that your own solipsistic willpower can *a posteriori* respark a discussion that was never actually had.

You were the only one willing to start shit

That's what's going on right now

Imagine claiming that objective moral standards exist without any objections

@𝕷𝖊𝖛𝖎𝖆𝖙𝖍𝖆𝖓

That was only ever your claim, dipfuck.

I "started shit" by questioning your thesis hahaha

You want to go on about benevolence and malevolence?

My thesis wasn't about objective standards, shitass.

Cosmic good and evil?

Fuck off.

Yes it was

My thesis was about tolerance as a false-virtue.

https://gyazo.com/a9a1ab61bd2aed7da4abbde9cb646026

That discussion has long concluded.

That is a small part of the *second* point.

That isn't even the thesis.

"The false-virtue of tolerance is absence of objective moral standards"

Thesis

**The whole point of the discussion is in 1.**

Objective is objective as a concept

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/633967804483371009/646092552847622164/1548635753410.jpg

Your whole argument will be considered, not only your main argument

Because it's a word, it is subjective

To at least some extent

And if I don't wish to have this conversation with somebody who initiates it in such grossly bad faith?

Then say that instead of saying "there is no debate"

That is the same point, niggroid.

No it's not

You claimed I'm the only one who objects

Stop trying to debate semantics rather than concepts

There is no debate because the point of the prior debate has been made, and all parties have dismissed. You were never a fucking party.