/lit/ - Literature

>>22107895

>>18668788

>>17779891
>I'd bet half the people itt agonizing over the prospect of pleasing a woman have never even had sex let alone proved bad atit.

>>17419773
nothing shows how much 4chins has changed than people whining that they want to go outside and interact with other people in public spaces

>>14314753

>>13346284
>Like St. Augustine, the Marquis de Sade would agree that freedom was a function of morals.
>Sade, "lel it's all relative, your morals make you do good, mine make me do bad, but it's not bad. It's my morals"
The way the devil deceived Eve was by making her question what God said and His reasoning as to why he said it. Similarly, this lie falsely says everyone has their *individual* morals, thus, they are only slave when they go against their own wishes.

Keep in mind, this is all a matter of predisposition. Because for a greater majority of people, by embracing moral relativism makes it easier for them to make morally wrong decisions and to feel justified. Because they are their own authority on what is right and wrong, even when tempted to do something society would view as wrong. Whereas if they believed in objective morals, they wouldn't be relying on themselves as the authority to say one thing is good to do and another bad, but instead on that authority of *another* who is higher than themselves, the God's Word for example.

It's a model of objective universal morals which applies to everyone versus a model of subjective individual morals, where no one is wrong in their actions. It's easy to see which one would yield better fruit for the vast majority of people in the long term.

Now bare in mind, this is all a matter of predisposition. Because for a greater majority of people, embracing moral relativism makes it easier for them to make morally wrong decisions and to feel justified. Whereas if they believed in objective morals, they wouldn't be relying on themselves as the authority to say one thing is good to do and another bad, but instead on that authority of another, the God's Word for example.

Also interesting to note that the moral relativist model really requires a reliance on affirming yourself where as the objective view of morals means rejecting your self.
One view would more easily lead someone further down a path of the flesh and their impulses controlling them, but someone under the other system, of objective morals, rejects their impulses as a justification for their actions, thus rejecting themselves in a way that is profoundly different than the other, and thus relies on a system outside of themselves.

>putting in an option for gender

>>11827902
>Who fucking takes a meme seriously and dedicates months of his life to prove a meme wrong?
I bet 10 months from now you would say the same thing about the NPC meme

>>11653587
>He was tremendously self-assured that his tastes were superior and that people that had differing tastes from him were sure to be either stupid or missinformed.
I guess everyone is a authoritarian on 4chan then

>>11640857
>it is like an entire tribe of complete faggots, smarmy unthinking weaklings repeating variations of phrases to each other

>>11578581
And you aren't? Kill yourself senpai.

Hiro is shit and I miss moot

>>4957125
>Autism
>edgy