/lit/ - Literature

>>21468622
>Which men actually embodied the philosophies they espoused?
This guy
>"I learned that all moral judgments are 'value judgments,' that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either “right” or “wrong.” I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments.
>Believe it or not, I figured out for myself—what apparently the Chief Justice couldn’t figure out for himself—that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any “reason” to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring “the strength of character” to throw off its shackles. . .
>I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block, and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable “value judgment” that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these “others”? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other?
>Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as “moral” or “good” and others as “immoral” or “bad”?

>"I learned that all moral judgments are 'value judgments,' that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either “right” or “wrong.” I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments.
>Believe it or not, I figured out for myself—what apparently the Chief Justice couldn’t figure out for himself—that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any “reason” to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring “the strength of character” to throw off its shackles. . . .I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited.
>And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block, and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable “value judgment” that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these “others”? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog’s life to a hog?
>Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? >Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as “moral” or “good” and others as “immoral” or “bad”?
Moralsisters...

>>17773309
The funniest thing about arguing with libshits are the way they go into espousing some kind of perverted shit when they're losing. Every time. Why are they so demented like this?

>>17769243
sounds gay

>>16523574
Cry all you want bitch. They can't hear you

>>16331752
Yes

>>16268447
Holy based. Did someone say redpilled?

>>16142624
I'm a man still with a job and not on unemployment checks

>>16141550
Holy fuck

>>16123933
Imagine being this ass hurt, almost like you were literally sodomized by mere dissent

>>15997002
Pissing your faggoty virtue signaling ass off and boy does it feel good