[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

File: 40 KB, 482x427, 1588110856370.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

16307229

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:09:09 2020 No.16307229 [Reply] [Original]

My mom started an OnlyFans account. I have no idea why. It's not like we need the money. Dad was in the tech sector and made lots of investments before he passed so we're very financially stable.

She posted about it for all the family and friends to see. I confronted her and based my arguments against her actions in Kant's Categorical Imperative. After half an hour she still wasn't understanding the concept and was just in tears that I wasn't being supportive.

I told her alright look, imagine things in terms of universal actions. So you should consider whether the act of subscribing to your OnlyFans is something you'd want to see all men in the world undertake, i.e. me, your own son. Obviously this renders it immoral since it fails Kant's Categorical Imperative.

Now she just thinks I'm trying to make an elaborate argument that justifies me subscribing to her OnlyFans because I'm a perv and she's starts crying whenever she sees me. She's threatened that I'll have to move out but I think it's a bluff.

I'm giving up on invoking the Categorical Imperative and need some other moral arguments. Unfortunately I've spent the last 7 years of my life pretty much exclusively reading Kant and secondary sources on Kant, so I don't really have a good grasp of non-Kantian morality.

Any help would be appreciated.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:11:56 2020 No.16307247 Mind sharing the OF link?Or even better ,some free samples?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:12:11 2020 No.16307252 We can't help you unless you post a link to her OF profile

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:13:25 2020 No.16307258 >>16307229 I really hope this is a troll man.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:14:16 2020 No.16307260 >>16307229 You should've asked about it without ever mentioning it. Just have a conversation on universal morals. Say that there exists a sentence "man ought to do x" there implies a formula for finding x not unlike 1+1=x

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:17:56 2020 No.16307286 >>16307229 >WOAH ebin fanny torolololololo but yo das deeeeep post under layered le irony XDDDDD

>>

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:20:52 2020 No.16307308

>>16307229
God, you philosofags need to do a bit of formal debating in your life. Wittily calling something retarded in a relatable manner will always beat out making autistic points about the noumena or whatever it is that nerd wrote about. While you may be right, no one will care because people want human rhetoric and sophistry, not unemotional lectures.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:22:34 2020 No.16307324 >>16307308 That's a short term solution to a long term problem anon. It will come up in non sexual related matters as well

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:24:45 2020 No.16307346 >>16307229 your dad is a limpdick that doesn't satisfy her sexually after years of romantic stagnation

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:25:30 2020 No.16307356 >>16307346 In op it says he's dead

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:26:47 2020 No.16307366 >>16307356 haha oops. yeah anyway that's why.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:29:57 2020 No.16307383 Post link faggot

>>	今晚打老虎 Mon Sep 7 14:39:44 2020 No.16307434 File: 3.29 MB, 680x383, iu[1].gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] we would be better to offer advice and help to you with we had the OnlyFans link

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:42:17 2020 No.16307445 Obviously a troll, there is no OnlyFans link unless proven otherwise.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 14:56:26 2020 No.16307496 be a good son and help your mother with her new occupation

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:49:21 2020 No.16307773 >>16307229 My calculator says that it is morally right.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:50:51 2020 No.16307778 >>16307229 Kek’d

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:51:24 2020 No.16307783 >>16307229 The categorical imperative is retarded. Move out of your mom's house and do something better with your life than read Kant all day

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:54:59 2020 No.16307806 >>16307229 Another proof of why virtue ethics is superior. Fuck you all, I will never read Kant.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:55:35 2020 No.16307812 >>16307229 Try saying that God is against her plan. Stop it with Kant and stuff no-one understands.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 15:57:06 2020 No.16307822 File: 671 KB, 1009x1317, Kant.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16307229 I see the immortal use of Kant is in full use.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:06:03 2020 No.16307880 >>16307229 op is smarter than all of you fools, his post is a critique of kant and not to be taken as a literally true event

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:19:34 2020 No.16307948 >>16307229 link or banned

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:25:19 2020 No.16307978 >>16307229 >My mom started an OnlyFans account. based >I confronted her and based my arguments against her actions in Kant's Categorical Imperative. ok this is fake. sad.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:27:04 2020 No.16307996 >>16307880 How is it a critique of Kant? If anything, it's a critique of his whore mother.

>>

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:31:32 2020 No.16308020

>>16307286
The quality of posts is extremely important to this community. Contributors are encouraged to provide high-quality images and informative comments. Please refrain from posting the following: . . . Ironic shitposting
Example: "upboads for le funy maymay trollololololoxdxdxdxd~~!"

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:44:03 2020 No.16308078 >>16307229 “Hey mom. It’d be real fucking cool if you didn’t act like a whore.” She’s not smart enough for philosophy. Just be an asshole and tell her you’ll disown her for being an e-whore. Also post a link, I wanna see previews

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:45:42 2020 No.16308089 >>16307229 Nerd

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:49:59 2020 No.16308108 >>16307229 Good too see the quality of the shitposts are picking up, I'll give you a 7/10 for the concept alone. Fine craftsmanship anon.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:51:14 2020 No.16308115 >>16307308 >implying you're not supposed to do both Have both the unassailable argument and eloquently call your opponent a retarded faggot, it really isn't that difficult.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:52:17 2020 No.16308121 >>16307229 First of all, you applied the CAT-I wrongly. It has to applied to HER reasons/motivations for being a whore, not the consequences (ie you watching her). Beyond that, Kant was retarded and a goblin

>>

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:52:54 2020 No.16308127

>>16307996
I have not read Kant, so I cannot comment on the validity of the critique, but it is clearly a fictional scenario presented to argue that the categorical imperative is not a solely sufficient device to support a moral framework in which the character may argue his mother out of engaging in virtual harlotry

he also frames the scenario such that the mother is not doing it out of necessity (the father makes good money)

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:53:25 2020 No.16308131 tell her she's a whore and that you are going to fuck her like a whore

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 16:53:32 2020 No.16308132 >>16308121 True, OP should shove dildos up his ass on camera as a perfomative reductio ad absurdum

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:01:27 2020 No.16308175 >>16307229 You don't understand the categorical imperative.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:03:19 2020 No.16308181 >>16308132 this

>>

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:07:36 2020 No.16308198

OP is either the smartest man on lit or the dumbest man on lit where x designates the likelihood that he is the smartest man on lit and y designates the likelihood that he is the dumbest man on lit. this implies that there exists a formula for finding x and y not unlike your average math equation where x + y = z.

luckily for me and for OP I have never even once passed a math test.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:08:25 2020 No.16308202 >>16308132 Unironically. But he won’t because Kantians are invariably weak

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:11:40 2020 No.16308217 >>16307229 Wouldn't the action in this case be every mother making an OF account? In which case your mother probably wouldn't have any problem with it and so it is not immoral. All you've proved is that subscribing to your mom's OF would be immoral.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:13:18 2020 No.16308226 >>16307229 kek

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:13:56 2020 No.16308228 what the fuck is going on in the US with onlyfans? It seems like literally everyone and their mother started whoring themselves out on the internet.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:17:45 2020 No.16308258 >>16308228 It’s pretty much free money... for women. They get paid by beta males to do what they would do on any given day anyhow.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:29:15 2020 No.16308338 File: 8 KB, 241x210, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>16307229 /r/4chan bait but still pretty good. The image of this made me laugh.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 17:30:41 2020 No.16308349 >>16307229 very funny OP, you have a future in writing absurdist humor.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 18:32:34 2020 No.16308738 >>16307229 great piece. keep it up bro.

>>

Anonymous Mon Sep 7 18:53:55 2020 No.16308854 [DELETED]

[DELETED]

File: 115 KB, 500x689, following-the-categorical-imperative-investigating-the-limits-and-powers-31110019.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>16308121
>>16308217
Actually, OP is being insanely nuanced here, which is probably why it's failing to register with his mother.

He's presenting her with a potential moral quandary that *he* will be faced with (subscribing to his mother's OF), which is a direct result of *her* actions, and then plugs it in to her own arguments in favor of creating an OF account (I'm not forcing these men to subscribe to it and why would it be wrong if they did?) His mother's (assumed) rational of "why would it be wrong if these men subscribed" is what OP is criticizing.

He is appealing her maternal instincts by analyzing the moral status of the men who would be his mother's potential subscribers (whose moral status his mothrr would be responsible for in this case) and thereby presents his mother with a critique from the perspective of a consequence of her actions. It is immoral for a man, *any* man, to subscribe to his mother's OF because it cannot be a morally acceptable universal action since some of the men who subscribe to it might have the status of being her blood relation. So her action stands as the cause of an immoral situation and is therefore immoral itself.

Needless to say, op is correct in seeking to ditch Kantian morality and finding a more pleb-appropriate argument.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 19:01:44 2020 No.16308902 >>16307229 I'll tip $100 + whatever the book you want the most if you post the link. I'll tell her in the tip note to get you the book.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 7 19:06:05 2020 No.16308928 >>16307229 >I confronted her and based my arguments against her actions in Kant's Categorical Imperative This is the exact point at which you fucked up.