/lit/ - Literature

>>14649770
The theory could work, but first you need to define exactly what a bad experience is and at what point and experience goes from being good to being bad.

Good luck.

>>14649795
According to Sammy boy what "sucks" is pain, therefore if you rape a woman but somehow drug her so she doesnt notices the rape and never knows shes been raped you are acting morally responsible.

There's no morality without God.

i;m not gonna lie bros, i couldn't understand a single fucking thing he said

>>14649770
Is there anything sadder than chain-posting philosophical arguments on Twitter? Just link to a blog and try to get it all out there in one refined, thoroughly edited take, come on dude

>we can also be selfish and short sighted. many solutions to our problems are zero-sum, but better solutions aren't
Of course, someone has to develop and implement the better solutions. If I spend my energy to cure a cancer I don't have, I might already be entering a bad bargain

>>14649770
>Unfortunately, many experiences suck

Not obvious.

>Conscious minds are natural phenomena

Not obvious

>If we were to learn all material things ... [we could] make the universe suck less

Not obvious

>We should avoid what really and truly sucks

Not obvious

>We can be confused or mistaken about experience

Well at least he admitted his whole thing was a joke inside the joke

>But *better* solutions [exist]

If that is true, why isn't he tweeting those things instead?

---

How does anyone take this clown seriously? He has a dozen fuck ups in the span of a few tweets

>>14649770
This is what a professional 'thinker' looks like under capitalism

>>14649833
and, alas, there is no god

>>14649868
>and, alas, there is no god
Yes there is.

>>14649868
>there is no unmoved mover

This is what late stage liberalism looks like

>>14649770
These are just subjective prejudices.

Why do Americans use "sucks" the way that they do?

>>14649822
He did not define it as pain, he just used a hand on a hot stove as an example that would be more or less universally accepted as an experience that sucks. He swung for the extremes because he knows everything he said was bullshit and would fall apart if he ever stepped into that massive grey area he created and pretended did not exist.

Who is this guy?

>>14649898
It is just a slang. Most likely outs one as having spent at least part of their sentient youth in the 90s.

niggor

>>14649900
But Anonimander, what is the nature of something that sucks?

>>14649910

>>14649867
>If we were to learn all material things ... [we could] make the universe suck less
How could we do anything if there is no free-will. Sam believes that the universe is deterministic in the hardest sense, that no one can help any choice because the universe can only resolve one way. The word “could” can not function in his world.

>>14649770
Delete this thread and try again with the correct spelling and grammar you fucking phoneposter/coked-up retard/ESL nigger, for fucks sake please can we try to have some fucking standards as a literature board FUCK.
STOP REPLYING TO POSTERS LIKE THIS UNTIL THEY LEARN TO SPEAK ENGLISH LIKE A HUMAN BEING REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>14649874
>late stage

>>14649916
honestly at the end of the day sam is just a jew rat trying to demoralize and confuse. make fun of him and move on

>>14649947
If you can't see that liberalism is on its last legs, there's something wrong with your head.

>>14649770
Things just suck bro, thats the way it is. Some things out there just really and truly suck massively. On a physical level they suck. The make-up of the thing sucks. Its just facts. Things suck.

>>14649952
only good post

>>14649770
>getting from "is" to "ought"
>let's assume that there are no "ought's"
okay lol

>>14649770
So Sam is either a negative utilitarian (minimize pain) or an emotivist. Both of which are shit positions.

A thread died for this.

>>14649833
There is no morality with God.

>>14650029
There is, because if God exists then humans can have a telos infused into their being.

>>14649770
>>14649868
Dilate

>>14650031
If God is real then you can kill people and there is nothing bad with that cause he can revive them or they go to haven and shiet.
So you can't really kill anybody lmao and nothing really matters if God is real.

>>14650036
I just told you why it would be bad but you're apparently too stupid to understand what I said.

ITT: 8 year olds tackle the God question.

>>14650036
But hey, I'll explain it further. Things aren't morally wrong because they create a negative consequence, but because they are contrary to man's telos, or his ultimate end.

>putting your hand on a stove is an experience that sucks
This disregards people that derive sexual or other pleasure from pain, which is a real thing.

>>14649770
but in all seriousness this is fucking retarded because whether an experience "sucks" or not is completely dependent on why it sucks or does not suck, the purpose fulfilled by the experience completely defines whether it is good or bad
what if the reason your hand was put on a hot stove is because you are a persecuted christian confessor in pagan rome? of course, it's bad that this experience happened at all, but at the same time that you chose to have this experience instead of just converting proves the depth of your faith. if you had never had this experience, would you still have the same amount of faith? would others, who never saw you willingly undergo pain for your faith, also have the same amount as if they did?
experiences that universally "suck" are not only inevitable, they are actually the means by which any meaning at all enters this world to begin with, because how do you know the value of something you've never had to sacrifice anything for? it's the sacrifice itself that pegs the value of what is sacrificed to what is sacrificed for, without it there is no value at all. making these experiences impossible just results in a meaningless world, a flat emotional plane where the only metric for the significance of phenomena is how it appeals to your base senses

>>14650043
Because God wants so?
Give me a reason why one should care about what he wants?
Fuck him. It's just his desire lmao.

>>14650046
>contrary to man's telos, or his ultimate end.
i.e. what God wants, and you care about that only because if you don't it has negative consequences lmao

>>14650062
I'm telling you that God creates humans such that a telos is a legitimate, real property of their existence. That is, you are created with "oughts" as part of your very being. Whether you dislike God or choose to ignore them does not matter, because they are eternally binding upon you.

>>14650055
blah blah blah
it's about long term well being
In your christcuk example, he thinks that he will get a revard in an after life for his behaviour so he is pursuing long term well being though he is miss informed about reality to make a proper judgement.

>>14650069
>created with "oughts" as part of your very being
If that was true you wouldn't need a codified morality, everybody would just know what to do and not to do.
>are eternally binding upon you
Sure so you have no reason of talking about morality, because whatever one does ultimetly god will judge him/her however he wants.

>>14650086
>If that was true you wouldn't need a codified morality, everybody would just know what to do and not to do.
This is true to an extent (it would not apply to certain civil laws, for example), and humans do generally know what they should do, though they repress the knowledge in favor in sin.
>Sure so you have no reason of talking about morality, because whatever one does ultimetly god will judge him/her however he wants.
The ultimate arbiter of reality will do what he chooses, indeed. But you're still here talking about consequences -- I have to do X because otherwise Y will happen. I'm talking about something different, that there is a set of behavior that is proper to you as a human being because it's what you were created to be. It's proper for you to behave in accord with your ultimate end regardless of whether it has a negative consequence or not.

>>14650104
>humans do generally know what they should do
Just move to an isolated tribe that wasn't brainwashed by globohomo and you will find that their first commandment is "kill thy enemy".
> It's proper for you to behave in accord with your ultimate end regardless
Define "proper". And justify why one has to act this way if there are no consequences?

>>14650144
>Just move to an isolated tribe that wasn't brainwashed by globohomo and you will find that their first commandment is "kill thy enemy".
Are they free of sin? No, so I don't know how this would apply.
>Define "proper".
I just meant that you ought to do it.
>And justify why one has to act this way if there are no consequences?
Because it's what you are as a human. It's funny because you criticize divine morality because "God is just going to punish you if you don't do it so fuck him," but then the only reason for morality you will accept is punishment. Which is it?

>>14650104
>morality is just, like, god’s opinion, man
>but let me lecture you about it anyway
lol christcucks

What if I like the pain of putting my hand on a stove?

>>14650161
I'm not sure I understand your objection. Any morality that you form is your opinion, and you seem to find this acceptable. But the "opinion" of your creator and the ruler of all creation is something you find unacceptable. But of course morality is not simply an opinion of God, because humans are created in God's image. The telos we are imbued with is a reflection of God's nature. Even if it were simply arbitrary on his part (which it isn't) that would not change the fact that you obligated to obey it.

>>14650159
>so I don't know how this would apply.
They don't have the same moral code as you have, because they didn't have the same kind of brainwashing. So your idea that humans are created with some inherent "oughts" isn't justified.
>I just meant that you ought to do it.
You must act in a proper way. i.e. you must act in the way that you must act.
Do you even examine the things that you write before posting them?
Is this bait?
>It's funny because you criticize divine morality because
I don't, that is the only morality that can exist. The issue is that if god is real then killing someone isn't irreversable, he can change it. Nothing is a big deal if god is real, he is just playing the over sensitive faggot while being a control freak.
>Because it's what you are as a human.
If you were made in a certain way that would make you inherently follow a certain behaviour you wouldn't need morality, you would a fucking robot. But since you have some sort of "free will" you must be compelled to act in a certain way, thus punishment and revard.

>>14650199
Lmao
>you are this way
>therefore you must act this way
But if you already are this way then you wouldn't need to be compelled to act in that way.

>>14649833
First, there's no god.
Second, no theist philosopher has ever successfully shown moral realism necessitates theism. That's a fringe view among philosophers.

>>14649902
Do today's youths really not say sucks? What do they say?

>>14650240
yikes

>>14650202
>They don't have the same moral code as you have, because they didn't have the same kind of brainwashing. So your idea that humans are created with some inherent "oughts" isn't justified.
They are fallen humans, dead in their sin, and their actions will be evil. There is such a thing known as "common grace" which a restraining beneficence shown to humans in various ways. One of those is cultural exposure to Christianity, which they lack. You're really not saying anything problematic here.
>You must act in a proper way. i.e. you must act in the way that you must act.
>Do you even examine the things that you write before posting them?
I just said you ought to behave in accordance with your ultimate end. If you think that's tautologous I don't really care.
>I don't, that is the only morality that can exist. The issue is that if god is real then killing someone isn't irreversable, he can change it. Nothing is a big deal if god is real, he is just playing the over sensitive faggot while being a control freak.
I already explained why this is irrelevant and you've ignored it.
>If you were made in a certain way that would make you inherently follow a certain behaviour you wouldn't need morality, you would a fucking robot. But since you have some sort of "free will" you must be compelled to act in a certain way, thus punishment and revard.
I'm not going to get into free will. But why are you objecting at all? God will give you the ultimate, eternal punishment if you don't obey him, so what is your problem?
>>14650213
Having an "end" does not mean that you necessarily behave in accordance with that "end". Do you even understand what is being discussed?
>>14650225
>First, there's no god.
Very interesting post, thanks for sharing.

>>14649873
based and godpilled

>>14650240
cringe, yikes, mood

>>14650240
I do not think I have ever heard anyone under 30 use 'suck' in that fashion. I am sure some do, but it is a dated phrase and barely used compared to the 80s and 90s. It used to be, like, totally, everywhere.

Daily reminder it has been empirically proven religiosity stifles scientific innovation.

https://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Religion%20December%201g_snd.pdf
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21052.pdf

Daily reminder the overwhelming majority of leading scientists are atheists

https://www.nature.com/articles/28478
https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1936-6434-6-33

Daily reminder most philosophers are atheists

https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl

Daily reminder religious people are less intelligent according to dozens of studies.

http://diyhpl.us/~nmz787/pdf/The_Relation_Between_Intelligence_and_Religiosity__A_Meta-Analysis_and_Some_Proposed_Explanations.pdf

Daily reminder religious people are less educated

https://www.economist.com/news/international/21623712-how-education-makes-people-less-religiousand-less-superstitious-too-falling-away

Religious people are literally a lesser breed of human

>>14650263
>Very interesting post, thanks for sharing.
Nice cope
Keep parroting views that are widely disregarded by ethicists

>>14650244
>>14650273
>>14650277
>i'm just now realizing all 4channel's flippant shitposting language is actually standard zoomer talk

>>14650294
I have no concern about what is accepted by "ethicists" so I will do as you say. Thanks for your concern.

>>14650263
>God will give you the ultimate, eternal punishment if you don't obey him, so what is your problem?
I don't care. I'm not a submissive cuck like you.

>>14650301
>I have no concern about what is accepted by "ethicists"
And it shows, you're extremely ignorant about the subject.

>>14650296
Tomorrow is the first day of your midlife crisis.

>>14650305
This is what I meant. If punishment is the only reason you will accept but then you want to ignore it, there's nothing more to say.

>>14650312
Being ignorant of secular philosophy is fine, thankfully.

>>14650263
>Having an "end" does not mean that you necessarily behave in accordance with that "end".
So the "end" is again what God wants. But you can't explain why one needs to do it. Why should any thinking person follow what someone else plans for them.

>>14650326
I already stated that it's because the end is part of your being as a human. You are imbued with real "oughts" as part of your being.

>>14650316
I don't see eternal life as much of a punishment.

>>14650320
This is a literature board, buddy.
Anti-intellectuals who hate reading don't belong here.

>>14650331
>I already stated that it's because the end is part of your being as a human
You realize your stupidity don't you?
You keep saying that one must act this way because this is how one is made. And yet you are free to act as you wish, and that is trully what you are. Acting according to the "end" would deny what you trully are as a human.

>>14650332
We exist eternally regardless of our choices.
>>14650338
Who said I hate reading? I just don't read the garbage that you do.

>>14650357
>I just don't read the garbage
This is always the way anti-intellectual illiterates justify themselves

>>14650371
Not him but there is an argument to be made about not wanting to let you mind be contaminated with verbal waste.

>>14650371
Okay.
>>14650354
>You keep saying that one must act this way because this is how one is made. And yet you are free to act as you wish, and that is trully what you are. Acting according to the "end" would deny what you trully are as a human.
This doesn't make sense. If you possess a legitimate end, then that is what you ought to be. The ability to do otherwise has no bearing on anything.

>>14649833
which god?
why your god and not someone else's god?

>>14650383
>literature that disagrees with me is verbal waste
The absolute state of this place.

>>14650199
>Any morality that you form is your opinion
ahaha Hahaha holy fuck this is what abrahamism does to your brain

>>14650401
>oh yes i will let anybody inject my brain with their opinions
You are the equivalent of an easy woman anon.

>>14650401
If you know the answer to a problem why would you read a bunch of books about the wrong answers?

>>14650394
Because I have faith and you don't

>>14650423
This. I'm afraid to read non-Christian philosophers cause I don't wanna end up atheist again

>>14650423
>>14650457
Are your beliefs really that weak?

>>14650463
Mark 9:24 Immediately the boy’s father cried out and said, “I do believe; help my unbelief.”

>>14650475
I will take that as an emphatic yes. Hope you work that out anon.

>>14650394
The God of Abraham and Jesus, because he exists.

The natural conclusion of harris's sophomoric philosophy is to just lobotomize everyone or oblivion via heroin drip. The man is just not smart nor even well educated. His book 'waking up' which is adapted from his thesis cemented for me that hes kind of a fucking idiot.

>>14649868
imagine being so unread that you think public pseuds are a capitalist phenomenon

>>14650899
Based as hell

>>14649795
you only need to admit that there is such a thing as bad, and there is a range of experience of good and bad
the rest is just up to implementations
but what is important is to understand this principle before we can have any meaningful conversation about any moral questions
why is it "worse" to kill your own baby slowly with a fork then to kill a random stranger with a click of a button?

>>14649867
>Unfortunately, many experiences suck
>Not obvious.
Really? This is literally the most obvious thing in any human experience
If this isn't obvious, then nothing is
why is 2+2=4? why does implication works? nothing is obvious, please provide 10000 words proof that implications are true without using implications

>>14649770
What I see here is amorality. This is an argument against morality. Everyone's experiences are subjective, you can't base a moral law on that. He's basically either saying that every person should have their own morals, or ever person should be subjected to his conceptions of good and bad. The former is farcical, the latter is authoritarian.

Arguments for the existence of morality without religion are ridiculous

>>14649770
I disagree with it because I'm not retarded. He just assumes

>we shouldn't do things which suck

As an implicit premise. He "overcomes" the is-ought gap by just claiming one ought is so obvious you can't doubt it. But that's not overcoming the gap, it's just him *yet again* not understanding it.

>>14651779
>>14651813
No no no no, I think it is you who doesn't understand. Here, put your hand on this hot stove and tell me I'm wrong.

>>14651827
In what world is pain immoral?

>>14651837
In this world pain sucks and immorality sucks, therefore pain = immorality = sucks. Simple

>>14651844
In this hypothetical moral system where anything that induces negative feelings in a person is considered immoral, then anything that induces positive feelings must be moral, therefore to be the most moral we should all be selfish hedonistic pleasure seekers without self restraint.

>>14651866
Now you are starting to get it

>>14651875
The absolute state of the public intellectual in the 21st century.

>>14650225
>First, there's no god