Some discussion about American foreign policy...

[spice]

more brain here than you're qualified to deal with,ellis.

 

[Guest]

“Where you see valid achievements or virtue being attacked, it's by someone viewing them as a mirror of their own inadequacy instead of an inspiring beacon for excellence.

 

[Guest]

stfu

 

[Guest]

more brain here than you're qualified to deal with,ellis.

I can tell by your choice for avatar.

 

[Forkbender]

Kill someone and go to court and say i killed him but i dont think its wrong so i`m not guilty . Then say there were no witnesses = no one to say/think it was wrong so i`m not guilty . You would be found guilty and probably land in a psychiatric prison .

Why would I want to do that?
You said yourself that right and wrong cannot be controlled by law, so why would this hypothetical situation proof anything?

Those things are what they are if we are there or not . We give them names , but the fact that we give them names or do or dont use those names doesnt mean that they dont exist .

People say its a fact , reality that the earth moves round the sun . The way you are talking implys that those words are human concepts = if we werent watching it isnt a fact and isnt reality . Just like a child we covers his eyes and thinks no one can see him .

You are misrepresenting my point again. I'm not a solipsist like you claim here. Just because right/wrong are concepts of the mind, doesn't mean that they are not real. People act as if they are real, so they must have some influence.

All your talking about is ego , playing god and putting humans at the center of the universe .

I'm trying to decenter humans instead of putting them in the centre of the universe. I'm showing that the human (or western) idea of reality/facts/right/wrong isn't necessarily the only idea, that there are other possible ideas, because humans haven't reached objectivity in these matters. I open up the world for other possibilities instead of closing it down and restricting it to just one right idea about factual reality.

There are facts , reality and right and wrong even if humanity didnt exist . Its called universal facts and reality .

We probably wouldn't call it facts, reality and right and wrong, but I agree with this, although I don't think these are universal or absolute.

All I stand for is pluralism in morality. There are diverse moral systems that work and that don't agree on fundamental points. I think we agree that one should think for him/herself and shouldn't copy moral laws without critical judgment. I just think that this critical judgment should extend to all of morality, while you seem to believe that there are certain actions that are necessarily, in and of themselves, right or wrong and exist outside of any moral judgment. I in turn say that there is no possible proof for this and you have failed to provide it after I asked for it. I don't care if I am wrong on this, but I need proof before I change my mind.

I understood the term rubber words. I like it.
Please point out when and where I am playing word games (Be specific!), i.e. where I change the meaning of words without saying, otherwise refrain from saying I am playing word games, because then you are just blackballing me. You can keep calling me lawless or an anarchist, I don't care much for that.

 

[Forkbender]

Really, because I think it is far more difficult to accept that there are no hard and fast rules for right and wrong, and that you have to think for yourself in every case rather than rely on some code of morals. It is self-empowering and gratifying to feel that one is right, especially if you can find enough people who agree with you. It's why conservatives have such a hard time grasping ambiguities in the world, they want everything laid out in simple black and white. Being in the right is all about ego... hence we can say this board has lots of ego stroking haha

To be fair though, I do hate it personally when moral relativism is taken to its extreme. For example, "it is ok when a despotic regime tramples on the rights of its citizens.. because their culture has a different concept of human rights than we do"

Well said.

 

[Guest]

You guys are too much. Maybe I'll switch from psychedelics to crystal meth, then think more like you. As we say in America, "Audios!" :wink:

 

[spice]

As I say down here,

" Don't let the door hit you in the ass" :!:

 

[restin]

I won't read the posts of Ellis anymore...no constructivity....maybe if he gets to crystal meth he'll be broke and have to sell his computer...??

What I want to say is that "good" and "evil" are not just random words given by crazy ancestors, they have a history as old as humanity. E.g. the Ten Commandments existed very similar in ancient egypt. Murder is a crime since stone age. And just because some mad nazis began to build an evil system, it doesn't mean we have to question Ethics.

To refute Ethics because a person or group broke it is 2D-thinking as well. For example being in the Agent State makes it easier to commit a crime. Or if you give responsibility to an authority. There are 1000 of reasons why "bad" was done. Read Zimbargo or Milgrain. This is a topic MUCH larger than this board.

So if a judge sends a murderer to prison, he is applying the law that is (usually) based on Ethics. Of course, he is reflecting on his own moral principles. But this is no argument to refute it. This argument has no point. The universe may not know good and bad but humans certainly do.

 

[????????]

and not to forget that the brain makes a quick "good" or "bad" emotional colorization of everything that comes from the senses (I think by the amygdala), so this dualist classifying is ingrained in all of us. BUT this is so because we evolved to pass quick judgment on things in order to be efficient, as in "tiger near and showing teeth = BAD", but complex issues don't come in black and white flavors, like ethics... for instance, yes, obviously, we can all here agree that murder is bad , but we, as society, murder our own by capital punishment... so what is it??

GOD: do you see my point or you insist that there is indeed a universal good and bad?

I hold my position that context is necessary to pass any judgment...

 

[Guest]

As I say down here,

" My knees hurt and I see balls" :!:

:wink:

 

[GOD]

I`m waiting for Fork to stop talking round things , to stop dodging answering my questions . I understand what he is saying ....... and he understands me ....... or he wouldnt be using dumb tricks and avoiding my questions . The argument is a very old one . But all Fork has iis theory and no proof . i have more = concret examples .

Theoreticaly , if there are no aliens and animals have no sense of right or wrong then right or wrong has to have human participation . The universe and the things that happen in it are not right or wrong . Part of what Fork is dodging is that its not just a mater of personal opinion , its also participation/doing/action and mass concensus .

= For something wrong to happen a human must do something , and its not just a matter of how that person stands to what he has done , or what witnesses think . What wrong is was/is decided by the mass of people throughout history . Giving right and wrong more substance than just his stupid philosophical semantic explenation that it doesnt realy exist .

If you look Fork is using exactly the same argumentative tactic as Ellis .

Recent experiments seem to show that some apes have an understanding of what is right and wrong , know what cheating is and get a guilty conscience about some things they have done , They even seem to apease/ apologise sometimes .

= I´m more right than Fork is and hes more wrong than i am ............

 

[Forkbender]

I`m waiting for Fork to stop talking round things , to stop dodging answering my questions . I understand what he is saying ....... and he understands me ....... or he wouldnt be using dumb tricks and avoiding my questions . The argument is a very old one . But all Fork has iis theory and no proof . i have more = concret examples .

You haven't given one concrete example. And please show my dumb tricks, you only said there were dumb tricks and rubber words without pointing it out. Be specific! What questions have you asked, btw?

Part of what Fork is dodging is that its not just a mater of personal opinion , its also participation/doing/action and mass concensus .

I never said there was no mass consensus/mass opinion. Plus I refered to actions from the beginning. Read back my posts and prove me wrong if you can.

= For something wrong to happen a human must do something , and its not just a matter of how that person stands to what he has done , or what witnesses think . What wrong is was/is decided by the mass of people throughout history . Giving right and wrong more substance than just his stupid philosophical semantic explenation that it doesnt realy exist .

Again I never said it didn't exist. I said it was subjective and not based on facts & evidence, that it depends on the group you refer to and that it therefore is not objectifiable. If you would read my posts you would know that.

If you look Fork is using exactly the same argumentative tactic as Ellis .

And that is?

Stop playing games, GOD, you are the one avoiding questions. Show me were I'm wrong, the mistakes in my argument.

 

[Guest]

I`m waiting for Fork to stop talking round things , to stop dodging answering my questions . I understand what he is saying ....... and he understands me ....... or he wouldnt be using dumb tricks and avoiding my questions . The argument is a very old one . But all Fork has iis theory and no proof . i have more = concret examples .

You haven't given one concrete example. And please show my dumb tricks, you only said there were dumb tricks and rubber words without pointing it out. Be specific! What questions have you asked, btw?

Part of what Fork is dodging is that its not just a mater of personal opinion , its also participation/doing/action and mass concensus .

I never said there was no mass consensus/mass opinion. Plus I refered to actions from the beginning. Read back my posts and prove me wrong if you can.

[quote:3hfgzo8h]= For something wrong to happen a human must do something , and its not just a matter of how that person stands to what he has done , or what witnesses think . What wrong is was/is decided by the mass of people throughout history . Giving right and wrong more substance than just his stupid philosophical semantic explenation that it doesnt realy exist .

Again I never said it didn't exist. I said it was subjective and not based on facts & evidence, that it depends on the group you refer to and that it therefore is not objectifiable. If you would read my posts you would know that.

If you look Fork is using exactly the same argumentative tactic as Ellis .

And that is?

Stop playing games, GOD, you are the one avoiding questions. Show me were I'm wrong, the mistakes in my argument.[/quote:3hfgzo8h]

Superior articulation through objective debate while maintianing control of one's emotions. First, you've got to surrender your EGO.

 

[spice]

ellis, you are a joke. You have shown no ability to practice what you preach.


You didn't even attempt to refute/respond to any of the numerous points made by myself or others.

You will find that this can go on infinitely. You are wrong-headed and blind, a typical example of your kind.

Your rhetoric is weak, your attitude distasteful, and your ability non-existent.

You no longer are arguimg your case on its (very few) merits, but flailing around,
reactively, calling me names or ignoroing my points....you must be able to see, upon re-reading this thread,that your overall position is asinine, you logic is that of a freshman reporter on FOX news, and you haven't at all made your points very strongly.

You have no ability, and no psychedelic insight.

What is the point, redneck?

 

[????????]

I thought that TrollisDee had said goodbye..............

 

[Guest]

ellis, you are a joke. You have shown no ability to practice what you preach.


You didn't even attempt to refute/respond to any of the numerous points made by myself or others.

You will find that this can go on infinitely. You are wrong-headed and blind, a typical example of your kind.

Your rhetoric is weak, your attitude distasteful, and your ability non-existent.

You no longer are arguimg your case on its (very few) merits, but flailing around,
reactively, calling me names or ignoroing my points....you must be able to see, upon re-reading this thread,that your overall position is asinine, you logic is that of a freshman reporter on FOX news, and you haven't at all made your points very strongly.

You have no ability, and no psychedelic insight.

What is the point, redneck?

You're everything you despise. I cannot learn from you. "Bye".

 

[????????]

A troll is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

 

[spice]

ellis.....that is you....


again, don't let the door hit you on the ass.

Take your republican ego and get the fuck down the road.

You said goodbye, so go back under your bridge, TROLL.

 

[Shake]

Fuck i just read this from Ellis!

"The USA ended WWII with a little nuke here a little nuke there, and SAVED countless american lives"

What an absolute retard you are.

GUYS why are you even bothering with him?????

Fuck wits like Ellis make america the shit hole it is.