You have no real reason to beleive any of your values except it just so happens to stroke your ego and your political position right now, because it helps your "opinion"

I was more asking why you believe your values, which are typically conservative. What is the 'scientific truth' of being pro-gun, or conservative, etc. And how do you hold them as Judeo-Christian views if they existed before Judea did?

My paragraphs above were answering someone else's assertions.

Is not the position that the state is not larger than the individual a statement of truth? @Ape

You seem to want a simple, STRONG declaration of truth and principle. IS that to say some truth is more true than others? My ultimate question is, if a stance is true, cannot a belief be legitimately based upon it?

He's basically making a bunch of baseless assertions about our movement and arguing from personal incredulity. The fact that he doesn't understand liberal values does not invalidate liberal values.

What I want to know is what he means by truth. Does he mean that our principles are based in falsehoods? Or that they are based in half-truths, as opposed to an ultimate truth

I just meant that in the discussion him and Aydin kept demanding 'scientific truths' then stating it was all Judeo-Christian principles without providing direct examples.

I wasn't sure if it was an attempt to discredit, ofr a false equivalency, or a form of projection.

So what principle of his own is a 'scientific truth'?

Any example would clarify.

It's false equivalence imho, @Hellstorme.
He really doesn't seem to understand that facts and values are different categories. We get the same fallacious argument from the alt-right all the time. I don't think that its malicious in his case, just a complete lack of comprehension when it comes to such things.

Also, I don't think he's a conservative. He seems more like an authoritarian traditionalist to me, but I don't know that much about him so that's just a conclusion I came to from watching that one stream.

I see no difference between types of truth. Truth is truth, whether scientific or moral or whatever else.

And if something is true, it can have a legitimate belief based on it

the supposed "strength" of the truth doesn't matter. If a belief is true, it is true, and presumabely better and preferable to a belief that is false

That's not what I mean, @AmericanRaven.
For example a person could hold either equality of opportunity or equality of outcome as their highest value. Neither of them is 'the truth' because values hold no truth claim; only a value judgement.

I wasn't really responding to you, just the idea that he wants "scientific truth"

I was just carrying on with what I was saying earlier

sorry for the confusion

No problem.

I just don't think there's much constructive conversation to be had with people who confuse facts and values.

dang I wish I had thought of this during the stream sunday

writing it out is far different than having to generate it on command and verbalize it.

its an entirely seperate skill set

I know

plus I've been listening to The Republic by Plato, so I was feeling inspired

It wasn't a fair statement to debunk on command, either. It would have lead to a slap-fight that would have gotten you shouted down.

Not every day someone equates freedom of religion to the conquests of the Judeans over the pagan Cannanites.

🗑 🔫

(*get it? rim shot?*)

SOME statement of truth would be good. ANY statement of truth. Where do you arrive at the idea that liberal values are the best values? Is it an objective truth? No, it's just your fucking feefees which is sad and pathetic.

My conservativism comes from natural law morality, there's a good book about it called "After Virtue"

We arrive at the idea that liberal values are the best values based on the extensive precedent set by hundreds of years of successful countries with liberal values, the United States especially. Even over the past 100 years, nations based on liberal values have generally succeeded, while those without them have generally failed.

closer adoption of liberal values creates prosperity

Communist China for example, upon allowing their economy to operate more like a free market, had a massive boom in economic power. Japan was an economic miracle upon westernization after WW2.

So the alt-right screech "read siege" at us for months, and now this Ape person comes with his own anti-enlightenment literature everyone should add to their reading list. At first glance it seems like a pre-modernist trying to attribute the catastrophic consequences of post-modernism to modernism.
I'll add the book somewhere on my reading list, but I have other books, and a life, which take priority right now. If I ever need to talk a legitimate pre-modernist who understands the difference between facts and values I'll probably bump it so I'm familiar with the strongest arguments they could bring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXv4T80Y5Ls

What is that, @Radical Ryzen?

Hey was that Naked Ape?

Kinda typed like him