/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11368214]

Raping and killing a baby is wrong and this fact is as clear as the sun. So how could you possibly not believe morality is objective?

[Anonymous No.11368219]

Imagine all the babies that have been raped and killed in the history of the world. Babies are probably being raped and killed right now. There also probably exist, and have existed, a number of people who would disagree with you.

[Anonymous No.11368220]

Morality from society

Some societies think raping spoils of war is good

Some societies see infanticide, usually genetic defects as beneficial

[Anonymous No.11368221]

Also, the sun isn't clear.

[Anonymous No.11368222]

>>11368219
t. baby murder-rapist

[Anonymous No.11368225]

>>11368214
>objective morality

[Anonymous No.11368229]

>>11368222

What is this even supposed to prove lmao

[Anonymous No.11368231]

>>11368214
Not literature.

[Anonymous No.11368234]

>>11368214
I would rape and kill her if you know what I mean.

[Anonymous No.11368239]

>>11368234
please tell us what you mean

[Anonymous No.11368248]

>>11368214
>this fact is as clear as the sun

[Anonymous No.11368252]

>>11368219
>>11368220
>>11368248
People being immoral does not blur the line of morality.

[Anonymous No.11368254]

>>11368214
roasties suffer from severe cognitive dissonance

[Anonymous No.11368271]

>>11368214
>So how could you possibly not believe morality is objective?
because i'm not retarded

[Anonymous No.11368290]

From a utilitarian perspective the baby will have no recollection of the act, but the rapist would benefit greatly assuming that's what they're into.

[Anonymous No.11368292]

Chocolate ice cream is superior to vanilla ice cream. This fact is as clear as the sun.

[Anonymous No.11368293]

>tfw believe in the Lord
>tfw know morality is objective
heh, it's that easy

[Anonymous No.11368298]

>>11368214
Homosexuality is obviously wrong. Didn't stop leftists from brainwashing the entire Unitef States in ~20 years.

[Anonymous No.11368310]

>>11368290
Ted Kaczynski became antisocial because his parents weren’t allowed to see him when he was in the hospital as a baby. Just because you can’t remember trauma doesn’t mean it doesn’t affect you. Also, fuck utilitarianism.

[Anonymous No.11368313]

[Anonymous No.11368321]

>>11368248
The IJA did nothing wrong.

[Anonymous No.11368322]

>>11368252
Nor does having an example that is in-vogue produce a line of morality.

[Anonymous No.11368330]

>>11368290
If the baby gets killed, they will stay dead. Intentionally causing death means diminishing the human population. If it is seen as a means to itself, and the growth of the human population is seen as something to seek, then killing a baby is something negative. If it is seen as a way of controlling population overgrowth in order to stop the overconsumption of available resources (which are meant to be preserved for the sake of even distribution amongst humans and non-humans alike) on Earth, then it might be seen in positive light.

[Anonymous No.11368335]

>>11368298
>Homosexuality is obviously wrong
explain how you know this

[Anonymous No.11368344]

Fucking objectivists.
> killing is just so obviously wrong
> what basis do you have for that
> it’s just so horrible
> why
> because it is
> you have to have an objective basis for ethics not just I feel that it’s wrong
>

[Anonymous No.11368357]

>>11368313
based icycalm poster

[Anonymous No.11368383]

>>11368214
Imagine being THIS spooked. Holy shit.

[Anonymous No.11368384]

>>11368214

>Raping and killing a baby is wrong

Objectively? No. There are several cultures in which people were allowed to do this. Take slavery in the ancient world: conquered people (slaves) were believed to be disposable objects, little more than furniture with limbs. Masters could rape and kill you (without age really being a problem) whenever they felt like it. The biggest problem was the economic loss in doing so, and nothing else.
In order to discuss the possibility for objective morality you first have to acknowledge that the human being has committed almost every conceivable brutal acts against its peers without even needing revenge as a reason, just because that was the culture of the times. Take human sacrifices in south american civilizations, take cannibalism which still survives today in certain tribes of africa. Not every people on the planet believes that eating another human being alive is wrong - why would everyone believe what you say?

[Anonymous No.11368393]

>>11368214
tell that to John Pedosta and Hillary

[Anonymous No.11368397]

>>11368214
>a jezebel-poster believes in an objective morality
Not surprising.

[Anonymous No.11368400]

>>11368239
with details

[Anonymous No.11368404]

Killing and eating an animal is wrong and this fact is as clear as the sun. So how could you possibly not believe morality is objective?

[Anonymous No.11368429]

>>11368214
Objective morality doesn't exist because you can't objectively prove that something is morally wrong.

[Anonymous No.11368433]

Moral relativism leads to ruin.

[Anonymous No.11368436]

Shitposting and trolling is wrong and this fact is as clear as the sun. So how could you possibly not believe morality is objective?

[Anonymous No.11368482]

>>11368322
What?
>>11368344
>>11368384
>>11368429
It's as clear as the sun, if you think otherwise you are not functioning right.

[Anonymous No.11368521]

>>11368248
communist lies!

[Anonymous No.11368528]

is a raindrop falling on the ground right or wrong?
its neither, just something that happened. as is baby murder-rape, despite your emotions telling you otherwise

not that id do it btw. but the reason i wouldnt do it isnt because of morality

[Anonymous No.11368540]

>>11368482
>It's as clear as the sun
Evidently not, since counterexamples were given. Your emotions aren't objective reality, no matter how many people feel the same way.

[Anonymous No.11368553]

>>11368482
t. brainlet.

[Anonymous No.11368559]

>>11368214
Let's put aside that error theory is the correct metaethics and imagine that we go extinct one minute from now. Why would the proposition "raping and killing babies is wrong" be true even then?

[Anonymous No.11368601]

>>11368214

Why do so many women have weird septums?

[Anonymous No.11368624]

>>11368252

I was responding back to OP with his same retarded logic. I don't think that my post is an adequate argument against objective morality.

[Anonymous No.11368625]

>>11368482
>Having 35 IQ.
yer example doesn't prove objective morality u dumb faggot lmfao

[Anonymous No.11368631]

>>11368482

Out of curiosity, how much philosophy have you read?

[Anonymous No.11368645]

I believe moral propositions express feelings.

[Anonymous No.11368679]

>>11368482

[Anonymous No.11368724]

>>11368645
This is factually true.

[Anonymous No.11368835]

>>11368540
>>11368553
>>11368624
>>11368625
>>11368631
So naming that people KILL and RAPE babies means that somehow it's MORAL? You guys are insane. It's as clear as the sun!

[Anonymous No.11368881]

>>11368214
What good is a new born baby? Another mouth to feed, incapable of contributing to society other than producing waste, an ineffective communicator, relying on grunts and babbling to convey its needs and wants, objectively speaking a baby is a burden that even if raised to adulthood will more likely become an underachiever destitute of any significant worth to humanity, the environment, economics, scientific innovation, anything. Morally speaking, it is worse for humans already existent to birth more humans, it means in increased workload and further diminishing resources.

The point being that a moral argument can be made for the most atrocious behavior, regardless of your supposedly "objective," perspective. You must think past morality altogether.

[Anonymous No.11368892]

>>11368835
If the sun is so clear, how come I can't look at it retard?

[Anonymous No.11368959]

>>11368335
AIDS ?

[Anonymous No.11369037]

>>11368959
>Being european is obviously wrong
>Why's that?
>The bubonic plague?

[Anonymous No.11369049]

>>11368881
go back to r*ddit edgelord

[Anonymous No.11369070]

>>11368892
your blind to the truth ...

[Anonymous No.11369106]

>>11368214
The subjectiveness of morality applies mostly to it's variety.
There are many objective points wich form a subjective phasm.

Something like that...

[Anonymous No.11369117]

>>11368214
But what if the baby is racist?

[Anonymous No.11369137]

Empathy is a nice thing for people to have but it is not objective. Killing and raping babies is a very distressing thing for most people to deal with so we probably shouldn't do it, but there is nothing "objectively wrong" with it. You just think that because you're a human with empathy.

[Anonymous No.11369147]

A baby has no agency, self-awareness, or cognizance. To rape a baby is just a stimulation of their central nervous system and they in no way comprehend what's happening for better or worse. Killing babies isn't a big deal since they have no inherent value and are unable to do anything to benefit themselves or society.

[Anonymous No.11369157]

>>11368214
Prove it

[Anonymous No.11369163]

>>11368214
>Me say x
>Therefore x

[Anonymous No.11369349]

>>11369147
the baby does and will have.

[Anonymous No.11369373]

>>11368214
This thread is wrong.
Saged.

[Anonymous No.11369376]

>>11368214
The only morality that can be followed without moving towards extinction is a morality that directs our behavior towards passing on our alleles, e.g., “Be fruitful and multiply.” (Genesis 1:28). Quite naturally, that is the morality that people follow when they not are subjected to propaganda and coercion to make them choose a different morality.

[Anonymous No.11369392]

I literally can't believe this board has fallen so low as to try and morally justify horrible infanticide because
>muh extinct cultures
>muh world elites do it
>muh retarded objectivism
>muh animals do it
I shall pray for you all.

[Anonymous No.11369622]

>>11368214
Was it objective there would be no amorality

[Anonymous No.11369668]

>>11368214
Maybe the baby was gonna rape and kill that guy first. Self defense.

[Anonymous No.11369695]

>>11369392
We all think it's bad, just that its badness is instilled instead of objective to the universe, unless the universe itself has a moral grounding such as God(s).

[Anonymous No.11369733]

>>11368229
kek

[Anonymous No.11369744]

>>11368214
You've done zero fucking introspection, apparently.

[Anonymous No.11369774]

>>11368214
What the fuck.

>>11368482
>What?
Oh. You're just stupid. That's what it is

[Anonymous No.11369787]

>>11368335
Explain how you know raping and killing a baby is wrong?

[Anonymous No.11369835]

>>11369392
You're a fucking idiot. There is a huge difference between arguing against the idea of objective morality and "morally justifying horrible infanticide." No one here is doing the latter. Though, the idea that the board "has fallen" because it doesn't subscribe to your brainlet objectivism is ridiculous anyway since the Greeks are at the epicenter of literature and philosophy and they handled infanticide rather casually. tl;dr you don't fucking belong here. Fuck your prayers.

[Anonymous No.11369860]

>>11369835
>There is a huge difference between arguing against the idea of objective morality and "morally justifying horrible infanticide."
There isnt actually though, you want your moral outrage as well as your pretentions to philosophical sophistication but you can only have one

[Anonymous No.11369873]

>>11369860
Stop babbling and say something with some reasonable thought put into it first.

[Anonymous No.11369876]

>>11369873
either morality is objective, or we can justify baby rape, you just have to be inventive about it.

[Anonymous No.11369889]

>>11369876
Key word is "can." The potential for existence doesn't guarantee existence. Denying objective morality doesn't mean the denier is personally justifying anything.

[Anonymous No.11369893]

>>11368290
>>11368330
>>11368384
>>11368384

forget temporal/societal/cultural practices and forget the impact on the baby - the violent violation and murder of an innocent creature is detrimental to the soul. It's a destructive act, not just on the victim, but on the perpetrator. Whether the baby is killed or survives the trauma doesn't matter. Whether or not your culture, age or political situation condemns or supports the act doesn't matter.

If you're a pedophile criminal secretly grooming children in 21st century America because of your disturbed sexual fantasies, or a Greek warrior throwing a kid off a wall after raping a bunch of your enemies prepubescent priestesses in the name of conquest and glory - you're fucking with your soul.

Baby rapers and baby killers are not happy people. Even those who do it on the daily and get away with it and enjoy the rush and the sexual satisfaction of what they're doing and consider it a normal thing for people like themselves to indulge in (like some of the ruling elite), they are incredibly fucked up, gross, weighted, disturbed, filthy people. They cant sleep at night like a good, morally healthy person would sleep. They're weighed down and haunted.

[Anonymous No.11369915]

>>11369889
this is true

[Anonymous No.11369935]

>>11368384
However the source of the disconnect here might not be the moral intuition (raping and killing people is wrong) but the judgment of facts (slaves/blacks/children/women/X group of choice are/aren't people).

[Anonymous No.11369950]

>>11369876
You're conflating the denial of objective morality with the denial of all morality. What's being denied is its alleged objectivity, not morality itself. Everyone here acknowledges the existence of morality and its many forms and applications. What is being denied is the idea that any morality exists independently of the moralist. This does not mean any of us condone baby rape or infanticide.

[Anonymous No.11369956]

>>11368384

Firstly,
>There are several cultures in which people were allowed to do this
>conquered people (slaves) were believed to be disposable objects, little more than furniture with limbs
>Masters could rape and kill you (without age really being a problem)

quote your sources. you sound like you're pulling information out of your ass

>ya like well they totally just raped people like even little kids were probably not really a problem yknow cos i imagine they probably raped kids too if they had them as slaves and didnt reeaallly seee it as a problem

Secondly, lets for the sake of argument assume that the many cultures of the
>ancient world
really were barbarians who went in for a lot of rape and murder and slavery and had not developed the sense of this being wrong

isnt the fact that we have moved on from those times actually an argument for the existence of morality? Evidence that morality has developed as we humans have consciously evolved over the millennia? If morality wasn't a thing, why are we still not raping and slaving in mainstream Western civilization? Might it be because we have GROWN and EVOLVED in some aspect?

[Anonymous No.11369969]

>>11369956
>isnt the fact that we have moved on from those times actually an argument for the existence of morality?
No, you're just begging the question

[Anonymous No.11369982]

>>11368290
The parents may have something to say about it.

[Anonymous No.11370050]

>>11369392

Let's take away feelings for a second and look at it as if someone has never been taught its wrong, nor has been taught its correct (to kill a baby).

1. If it is not related to you, why would you have any sort of interest in preserving its life in any sort of way? Humans are fundamentally like every other creature which means their number 1 job (and to some people, only job) is to reproduce; this, therefore, makes any creature outside of the bloodline to be perceived as either a threat or necessary for the continuation of their line.
2. Seen throughout nature, there is a commonality where other creatures have "adopted" another species into their "pack". While this inherently goes against the first statement, it is about preserving one's own (or emotions, if you believe animals have that, entirely your own philosophy).

Basically murdering babies is not actually a perceived bad thing within uncivilised times. It has only been with liberalism and the growing charity that the human race feels about the continuation of the species that is forcing it to start murdering the young (and old; overpopulation/lack of resources is a bitch that will soon be upon us).

[Anonymous No.11370085]

>>11369>>11369835
>>11369835
>>11369860
>>11369873
>>11369893
>>11369950
>>11369956
>>11370050
none of you have addressed the argument that raping a newborn is bad is the same as the sun being in the sky it's objective and if you think it's ok then you aren't thinking right and that does not make it relative it makes you an asshole ..

[Anonymous No.11370088]

>>11370085
Shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.11370119]

>>11370085

Use punctuation, you neanderthal. I've objectively given you reasons why people may not see it as wrong. There are thousands. That doesn't take away from the fact that I don't agree with it and the vast majority don't either.

Maybe stop being such a conceited little bitch about your morality and look at things objectively. Your emotions do not equal shit to anyone besides yourself and like minded people.

People like you are the type to complain on Trump's twitter posts about grammatical issues and non-sequiturials.

Read what people have said instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and your head into the ground like some malfunctioning idiot.

[Anonymous No.11370124]

>Raping and killing a baby is wrong
>This fact is as clear as the sun.

[Anonymous No.11370206]

>>11370085
>I feel that this statement is true
>therefore it is an indisputable fact
>if you disagree with me you are an asshole that is thinking wrong

[Anonymous No.11370228]

>>11368835
This argument is beyond cogent. Literaly undefeatable, impgegnable and perfect in every way. How can one not intuitively recognise the sheer force of Truth contained within that statement?

The only people disagreeing with OP are rothschild globohomo utilitarian communist satanist rothschild jew puppets who have no morality

[Anonymous No.11370239]

>>11370228
Careful with all that tin foil faggot

[Anonymous No.11370278]

>>11368214
The devil is always in the details. All humans may share some universal values, but each society varies in how exactly it interprets those values, and how it decides whom those values cover.

[Anonymous No.11370285]

>>11368310
How the fuck do you know for sure