If you're at the point of extremism, absolutism and dogmatism, then your beliefs are very well justified. Only one who are all these three could object to the subjectivity of morality.

But if you're all three of these, why bother conversating with others?

I was gonna say.

If you only see your own beliefs as true then what's the point.

@Memovita Its called enforcing my will on others

You are free to do so. But I wont convert to your way of thinking.

I never expected such

For anyone really

I just think if you believe in something you should seek to install those beliefs on society

In my opinion such strong beliefs simply make it easier to control and manipulate.

Enforcing your will on others is one unnecessary evil for most moralities.

no matter what they are

So you deem the need/will of a psychopath to instill their psychopathic beliefs on the society they lives in, as something good?

@Koninos Yes

Then there's no point in conversating with you.

LMAO I'm fucking with you

Lemme give you my real beliefs

Enforcing one's will for me means governing in accordance with your beliefs if you ever get into a position of power

Forcing people to comply with taxes is enforcing your will

Laws are enforcement of the will of someone or something

**@Traz** has been detained.

<@&682288520680964151> Daily Topic 📚

- Are highly intelligent people less happy than individuals with average intelligence?

I mean yes, most of the times. It really depends on the occasion though. Highly intelligent people can often understand deeper why and how X is a sad topic, while people with average intelligence can't. But, highly intelligent people can often understand deeper why Y is a happy topic, while people with average Intelligence, again, can't.

So it really depends on the occasion.

@21ooAB There's a difference between forcing people to comply with beliefs that are necessary for the functionality of the society, and forcing people to comply with beliefs such as religion or ideology.

@Maksim

Can I talk about military philosophy here

Yes.

@Philosophy Daily Topic 📚
-Should Diogenes be taken seriously?

Yes, but actually no.

<@&682288520680964151>

thanks

Yes, Diogenes should be taken seriously, no matter how much of a controversial figure he was. All philosophers must be taken seriously, and all views of people on the world should be taken into consideration.

The thing with Diogenes actually, is how against nature and the Athenian society he was. After being banished from Sinope, he settled in Athens, and without being an educated man, yet a very intelligent one, he criticized the Athenian society, calling it corrupt and confused. The thing is, he was often thought to be a madman. He was often seen carrying a lamp in the daylight and so on, but all these "stupid" things that he did, they had a symbolic meaning. The lamp in the daylight clearly meant how we need to be bright (mentally) both in the day and in the night - both when it's dangerous and when it's not dangerous.

What's also very interesting about him is how he was against nature, and was the definition of muh (((degeneracy))), sleeping with women, drinking, and spending his incredibly few money to whores.

He also mocked Alexander the Great right in front of him in Corinth I believe, after being captured by pirates and turned to a slave; his slavers brought him to Corinth for an auction.

However, despite what many would describe as "madness," Diogenes was actually very intelligent, a degenerate indeed, if you want, but he was quite the figure.

i like diogenes

he was one with nature but in a different way, a more primal way

"All philosophers must be taken seriously".
- Diogenes left the chat
- Diogenes came back, with a rubber chicken, a sinister grin and is heading to @Koninos

Diogenes was the original shitposter