What are good books about this?

File: 343 KB, 720x703, 1690774640620297.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:03:38 2023 No.22323947 [Reply] [Original]

What are good books about this?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:05:05 2023 No.22323951 >>22323947 Encyclopedias. Also Democracy is a ridiculous system that is both inherently flawed and always corrupt in practice.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:05:19 2023 No.22323952 >>22323947 It can't happen here by Lewis Sinclair

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:05:28 2023 No.22323953 >>22323947 >The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:12:52 2023 No.22323968 >>22323947 The Bible

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:22:46 2023 No.22323991 >>22323947 Probably The Machiavellians by James Burnham

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:32:34 2023 No.22324026 >>22323947 LMFAO pls maister may we have a crumb of the crowns money, just pay us to build roads maister please. NOOOOOO WE MUST FIGHT THE HOUSE OF YORK. All of English history.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:33:57 2023 No.22324030 >>22323953 funny how anyone can barely understand what the fuck is churchill is talking about

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:34:14 2023 No.22324032 >>22323947 In Russia sir you promised us housing and equality why are you giving money to oligarchs? Lol…. Lmao

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:38:55 2023 No.22324050 File: 373 KB, 1080x882, 1690583587110325.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22323968 This

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:55:28 2023 No.22324102
File: 39 KB, 750x733, 1678833209956331.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>22324026
The problem is that we have gotten this in democracies anyway but with them lying to us about the "will of the people". This is one of them main reasons I have become anti-democracy and have turned so right-wing. Don't piss down my leg and tell me it's raining. Don't tell me I live in a democracy but all the decisions that matter are actually made by a small cohort of unelected officials, judges, and bureaucrats. I'd rather be told a shitty truth than a comforting lie. And a comforting lie seems to be all that democracy is.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 04:57:10 2023 No.22324106 >>22324102 Fuck the electoral college and fuck the Supreme Court

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:08:09 2023 No.22324128 >>22324030 It's been said before, but Churchill was wrong for almost everything, except the few times it really mattered the most

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:10:27 2023 No.22324131 File: 241 KB, 810x822, 1679443298627324.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Christopher Lasch, Revolt of the Elites

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:12:57 2023 No.22324134 >>22324128 He was right about Gahndi and should have told Roosevelt and Stalin to fuck off regarding India.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:17:23 2023 No.22324138

>>22324102
If you’re an American than I disagree with you so hard, we vote for our republican officials who voice our opinions for us. At congress or locally. It’s literally the most perfect and sustainable ever drawn up. It just makes sense. And we don’t have any backwards stupid romanticism of dark age tradition and tribe. Maybe in Europe it’s different.
>>22324106
Doesn’t understand that America will be around for 1000 years and any trend you don’t see being picked up fast enough will be picked up in time if it’s truly the sane will of the people.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:21:50 2023 No.22324144 >>22324138 >we vote for our republican officials who voice our opinions for us. Most of Congress is either old, stupid, or both, and most of their legislation is written by hardcore capitalist lobbyists and staffers who are all idiot communists.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:31:28 2023 No.22324156

>>22324144
The American people believe that wokeness and affirmative action is necessary to pull black people out of the slums and make them equals in society. They’ll grow into an enraged and worse off 13% of the population if they aren’t assimilated. Look how white washed wokeness is, these are the circles we make for black people joining college. It’s perfect, they are being assimilated.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:33:39 2023 No.22324160 >>22324156 Wokeness is shitty demonic anti-Christian stuff. They hate God, they hate Jesus Christ, they hate the Church, for that reason they need to be crushed in the name of God.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:34:23 2023 No.22324161 >>22324144 The lobbyists are good for now, the economy is in a good spot. The system can transition to become more pro worker. The majority of people agree with me on both wokeness and the economy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:35:24 2023 No.22324164 >>22324160 God isn’t real

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:36:08 2023 No.22324166 File: 1.19 MB, 2001x1493, Ricci,_Sebastiano_-_The_Resurrection_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22324164 You'd better hope not. For your sake.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:36:37 2023 No.22324167 >>22324164 God is real and he hates black people.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:55:30 2023 No.22324189 >>22324134 Elucidate.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 05:56:32 2023 No.22324191 >>22324134 Rent free.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 06:06:50 2023 No.22324216 >>22324166 >>22324167 Lol it’s so funny that you guys can’t see how ridiculous how you are

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 06:38:10 2023 No.22324276 >>22324131 Found the entire audiobook on yt, thanks

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 06:46:53 2023 No.22324298 >>22324216 Fools have toppled empires before, so maybe being ridiculous is a strength.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 06:56:15 2023 No.22324317 File: 116 KB, 598x900, mind-blown-ivan-stanimirov.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22324102 Wait until you find out who appoints the appointees

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 07:08:14 2023 No.22324342 >>22323947 Neal Ashers The Owner Books.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 07:11:39 2023 No.22324352 >>22323947 The Political Illusion by Jacques Ellul Popular Government by Henry Sumner Maine The False Assumptions of Democracy by Anthony Ludovici

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 07:30:58 2023 No.22324398 >>22323947 John Locke - Essays & Second Treatise of Governent

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 07:41:01 2023 No.22324414

>>22324102
The issue with Democracy is the same issue with Communism, Fascism, and every other form of government: It simply does not function at the present scale.
When your elected official lives next door to Bubba and his 5 brothers who like to go hunting on the weekend, the consequences for his actions are real and immediately present. When official is a nameless, faceless cog in a massive machine, those consequences become distant. Bubba and his 5 brothers can no longer bring those consequences to bare.
The same problem occurs in the elections themselves. When you have a town of 100 people, spotting voter fraud is incredibly easy. When you have a town of 1000 people, it's a bit difficult, but still possible. When you have a nation of millions spread over an entire continent, voter fraud becomes impossible to avoid.

Our current systems do not scale. It's the same with out economies. We simply are not equipped to operate at the global scale we do.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 07:56:48 2023 No.22324455 It depends on which one is the frog and which one is the scorpion in your mind. A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, and the Federalist/Antifederalist papers are both good reads depending on your view.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 08:18:56 2023 No.22324509 File: 16 KB, 360x288, young-down-syndrome-man-smiling-face-portrait_53876-148037.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22324414 >Muh voter fraud

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 08:23:58 2023 No.22324516 >>22323947 something something kafka

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 09:38:49 2023 No.22324653 >>22324414 You don't need to do voter fraud if you can control the minds of the population.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 10:41:37 2023 No.22324763 >>22323947 Hitler wrote about this in the first part of his Kampf.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 10:58:49 2023 No.22324791 >>22323947 Lenin & co.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 14:10:56 2023 No.22325132 >>22323951 Every system is flawed in practice, but democracy is based on the premise that people are competent, which they are largely not.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 16:56:02 2023 No.22325600 >>22324763 Oh the irony! No, Hitler was not elected democratically chancellor

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 17:24:00 2023 No.22325705 >>22325132 >People aren't as smart as I think I am therefore we should revert back to an arbitrary system of people no one chose

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 17:29:39 2023 No.22325724

>>22324102
The appointees are appointed by... elected officials. Yeah, generally the executive nominates the person and then the legislature approves them, or the legislature makes a search committee and then votes them in (e.g. most town clerks).

You can't elect every position. This is how you get people with no medical background as town coroner, and then, because no one cares about or understands these positions, you end up with someone with no medical experience who gets caught buttfucking the corpses (which has happened in Colorado lol).

Having appointed officials is essential because they need to answer to the executive. Otherwise, you just have parts of the government telling each other to fuck off, they don't work for each other. I have worked with a city that has an elected town treasurer who was also a fucking crazy person and was working two full time jobs (so not doing her elected job) and the mayor couldn't do shit because "I work for the people," and organizing a recall is a lot of work.

I have worked with New England towns with open town meetings, where everyone with valid ID who shows up is essentially a member of the legislature, and it is a fucking shit show.

People raging about "unelected officials," have no clue what they're actually asking for. It is as dumb as "OMG, this bill is 3,000 pages, how could it possibly be read, too long = bad."

No, shit is complex and if you don't spell out laws than judges have to ad lib. If you want to rage about the court rage about life time appointments, not them being appointed.

Do I want the mostly 65-80+ year olds in Congress deciding what the minimum construction work that needs to be done post flooding to stop mold infiltration in order to qualify for FEMA funding? (A move to save tax payers from spending more out of laziness on the behalf of owners). No. Because they have no expertise is mold remediation and millionaires have super majorities in both chambers and Congress has one (1) tradesperson in the entire fucking organization. If we just went with nationally elected folks we would have a government run by people with a median age of fucking 74.

Protip, if you think government can be easily fixed by getting le bad evil corrupt men out and putting le good virtuous men in, you're fucking dumb.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 17:55:25 2023 No.22325811 >>22325705 >t. dumb zoomzoom Yuh uh frfr ong nyeggao

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:10:00 2023 No.22325867

>>22324102
>Mad that system isn't a direct democracy
>Right wing
Hilarious. Do you think it would be better if "the people," chose everyone you interacted with? Hopefully you're not American, because if you are this is extra dumb. The right wing party hasn't won more votes than the left wing party in a national election in over a third of a century without the benefits of an incumbency they got by winning the Presidency while earning fewer votes. And even then, Bush II won by very thin margins and only one because of the 9/11 bump, and so he won by being POTUS during 9/11 despite losing the popular vote in 2000 and very likely the electoral college as well based on the recount data released in 2008. He won by getting close enough and having his campaign manager be the AG of the state in question and his brother the governor, who stepped in to stop the recount, a move ultimately backed up by a party line SCOTUS vote.

Glorious Blump, who leads as the GOP nominee by 40-50 points now, lost by 3.5 and then over 7 million votes. Even if he wins the EC in 2024, he will likely get 9-11 million less votes just based on demographics.

This is why right wing populism is fucking dumb. You don't actually want populism. That's going to fuck your shit up.

I don't want populism either, not because I am le ebin far right, but because I recognize that "the people" are retarded. We have to let them vote so that truly poor governance gets punished and there is turnover, but they also can't decide technical issues because they are retarded but think they are geniuses from watching propaganda.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:15:27 2023 No.22325886

>>22324414
Just have a tiered system where groups of 7 people elect one of their number to represent the group in choosing a leader. Then one person from each group of 7 goes to the next level, and so on.

It only takes 10 cycles to cover way more people than the US electorate. The first groups will be neighbors, the later groups can get funding to get a bit of time to debate. Everyone will know people involved in the decision making process to some degree. The groups don't even represent over 100,000 people until the 6th round.

Anyone appointing a leader will have to have sat down with 70 other citizens and gotten a majority of them to pick them to represent them each time, far more representative than having money and party insiders decide your two options.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:20:27 2023 No.22325900 >>22324106 >t. liberal faggot

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:21:28 2023 No.22325908 >>22324164 go back to redd1t

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:25:58 2023 No.22325924
File: 18 KB, 480x360, 1555696979086.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>22324509
you have to be an actual retard to think voter fraud DOESNT exist.

but of course you know voter fraud exists, you're just pretending it doesnt because its your side doing it

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:29:51 2023 No.22325934 Mao. Even has the animals.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:32:36 2023 No.22325941 >>22323947 >voted for What the people vote for is irrelevant, being elected does not give officials any special rights to interfere with individuals. Government employees are just humans and should be forced to respect the rights of everyone else.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:36:26 2023 No.22325952

>>22325924
Exactly. Trump won, fuck your feelings. We all saw the evidence of the rigging. Mike Lidel showed off the proofs. It's just that Barr is a deep state cuck RINO just like Tillerson, Mattis, Espers, McConnell, Romney, Mulveny, Pence, Miley, Bolton, etc. They tried to subvert the will of the people by filling the Cabinet with deep state cucks.

Do you think Trump didn't know the rigging would happen? He told us it would, that the CCP would help Biden! So there is a plan. If not reinstated he has another plan, and he will win, in a landslide, getting more LEGAL votes just like in 2016 and 2020.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:36:57 2023 No.22325954 >>22325886 Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:48:00 2023 No.22325977

>>22325954
If you're ready to take the Red Pill, come join us. https://greatawakening.win/

Where we go one, we go all. Do not fear the storm, for we are the storm.

Take heart, if Trump is for us, who can stand against us? For this is the whole of what we strive for: to further Trump with your whole mind, your whole body, and your whole soul, and to love your LEGAL CITIZEN/ NON-ANTIFA COMMIE neighbor with all your heart.

Only then will the Pedocrats and Traitors pay and benefits brought to justice.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:53:03 2023 No.22325988 File: 735 KB, 1080x3322, Screenshot_20230731-135208.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22325977 Very soon we will see reinstatement. No election will be needed because we know who won last time.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:57:11 2023 No.22325998 >>22325988 Checked. HH brother, insiders reprot that punished Trump has finally had his eyes opened to the JEW PARASITE. Not one of those little rats will escape this time.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:57:46 2023 No.22326000 >>22325724 Often times unelected officials go against popular demand, though, which is why people rage against unelected officials. Your sophist take is not representative, you are the "unelected official" ITT

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:59:24 2023 No.22326007
File: 283 KB, 1600x900, 8609BCEC-2CFB-45B5-851B-D876DCB8B30F.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>22324166
Y-you better hope n-not! Or else…magic man will…he’ll…he’ll get you!

>five minutes later

God is good! God is love!

Christianity is the phenomenon as wokeness and arguably what gave rise to it. This sort of fake syrupy warm idea they preach or love, happiness, equality, and moral goodness yet actually being about hatred of those who are not the ingroup and always resorting to “PUNCH NAZIS!” or “YOU’LL BURN IN HELL!” as if five minutes ago they weren’t just preaching about loving everyone. Both are also completely incoherent and only held together or given status from the mass of people who all can’t be wrong, and secretly the people at the top don’t support it and just rake in cash and power while repping wokeness/Christianity to the herd.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 18:59:29 2023 No.22326008 >>22325952 Who cares he was shit anyway and lost all the momentum and grassroots allies he had in 2016. He didn't, by any means, deserve to win the 2020 election

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:01:28 2023 No.22326013

>>22326000
It's almost like elected officials can fire more appointed ones at will... In the rare cases they can't, it's normally shit like city auditor or comptroller or Fed chair. These can still be removed by elected officials, it is just normally a 2/3rds vote or some shit. Why? Because you don't want your accountants cooking the books based on popular demand and this site is plenty of evidence that people don't understand macro at all well enough to have them elect a Fed chair.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:15:56 2023 No.22326058 >>22323947 Brideshead Revisited

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:20:28 2023 No.22326075 >>22325705 >Nobody tell him how town officials were appointed

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:24:18 2023 No.22326089 >>22325998 >>22325988 >>22325977 I redact my previous subscription request. Best of luck to you, however. You gonna need it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:29:13 2023 No.22326098 >>22326007 If a person can be angry and then loving then why can't God do the same thing?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:43:16 2023 No.22326147 >>22325811 Nice non-argument, faggot. >>22326075 >Government positions appointed by elected officials is worse than government officials being appointed by unelected officials because I'm wicked smart unlike the rest of these plebs.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:45:03 2023 No.22326153 >>22324128 Churchill wasn't wrong he just got voted out as soon as the war was over and literal socialists had control of the Empire at its most pivotal point in centuries.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:48:53 2023 No.22326165 >>22325924 And the proof is what? The 2020 elections the Republicans lost? The 2022 elections the Republicans won? The 2016 elections the Republicans won? The 2018 elections the Republicans lost?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:52:00 2023 No.22326174 >>22326098 Because believing in an emotionally volatile man in the sky is obviously stupid and christcucks are desperate to claim God is something else. You can't get objective morality from someone that is known to throw hissy fits.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:53:10 2023 No.22326177 >>22326174 tips fedora I've seen the "objective morality" of atheists and I'd much rather live with Christians in charge.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:55:53 2023 No.22326184 >>22323947 >my guy won the election, it was fair and square >my guy lost the election. It was rigged Why do both sides cope like this?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:55:55 2023 No.22326185

>>22326177
>and I'd much rather live with Christians in charge
Which is a fundamentally subjective judgment like all morality. Bible thumpers like to claim objective morality from God as an apologetic tactic proving his existence but it never works. God doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 19:58:02 2023 No.22326194 >>22326184 Hillary conceded the next day despite winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college by the same margin Trump did in 2020

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:38:14 2023 No.22326311 >>22326185 If morality is subjective then there's no reason why I should consider you human. And since you're no longer human, your opinion really doesn't matter. Glad this could be resolved.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:39:56 2023 No.22326316

>>22326311
>And since you're no longer human, your opinion really doesn't matter.
And since most people think that dehumanizing someone is a moral wrong you're going against society and can expect the repercussions that come along with it. Like with all morality

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:44:55 2023 No.22326328 >>22326316 Huh? Sorry but I can't understand what you're saying. I don't speak chimp. OOO OOO EEE EEE? BANANA?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:45:37 2023 No.22326333

>>22326316
Do you think this became the established consensus for no reason? It's completely arbitrary?
If it's instrumental, using the idea gives relatively reliable outcomes then it exists, it's not arbitrary or subjective. It's a structure we found in objective reality like the circle.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:46:53 2023 No.22326340 >>22326333 When you wrestle with pigs be prepared to get covered in shit.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:50:00 2023 No.22326352

>>22326333
>Do you think this became the established consensus for no reason? It's completely arbitrary?
I suggest reading some history because this is hopelessly naive. There have been many, many different cultures that have a sense of morality we would consider repugnant today. Societal repercussions are just something that happen, it doesn't mean they are somehow justified. Again I'm arguing that objective morality doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:50:38 2023 No.22326353 >>22326316 Behold the apogee of atheist though! What is popular, is right! Socrates thrashed retards like you 2400 years ago nigger how stupid do you have to be to take up Thrasymachus's sophistry.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:52:07 2023 No.22326360 >>22326353 >What is popular, is right! Socrates thrashed retards like you 2400 years ago nigger Socrates also trashed objective morality from God in Euthyphro

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:52:27 2023 No.22326364 >>22325867 right wing populism would be useful if it pushed forward this basic framework. > one man. > one vote. > one time.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:53:38 2023 No.22326372 >>22326364 This would crush the Republican party. The only thing keeping them above water is the electoral college. They are the clear minority party

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:53:45 2023 No.22326373 File: 94 KB, 1080x797, Fuf8H8iWYA8IiqA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22326360 >Christians are wrong so uhhhhh please ignore that I'm wrong and talk about them!

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:56:15 2023 No.22326383 >>22326373 That's what started this argument though. Objective morality from God. If he can get points for using Socrates to disprove part of my argument against objective morality I can surely use Socrates to directly disprove it.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:56:28 2023 No.22326384

>>22326352
Braindead regurgitation of the popular meme, yet another retard that has no clue how to think about any subject.
In each case there's a reason so it's different structures being used to accomplish different aims. The blood of a million slaves is objectively good for the crops. There are also other consequences in various timescales, objectively. The Aztecs explored structures of objective reality we avoid today, partly because groups like the Aztecs tend to get back what they dish out. If you disagree, there may be opportunities for you where you have an edge on everyone else that doesn't understand objective reality as well as you do, through ritual sacrifice or whatever your insight may be.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:56:46 2023 No.22326385 Daily reminder that behind every dimwitted internet atheist there's a little boy mad that mommy and daddy made him go to church.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 20:59:56 2023 No.22326397

>>22326385
Do you think this is going to make them reconsider their hatred of what was probably an unsatisfying religious upbringing? I'm on your side in a general way but I see "dry drunk" type atheists as often having been burned badly by shitty services and apathetic religious leaders around them. Better to show them that those are isolated examples than to act like a bully and enforcer for what they perceive as a shit institution.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:00:42 2023 No.22326405

>>22326384
>The blood of a million slaves is objectively good for the crops.
I seriously doubt that Aztecs ever sacrificed people on a scale large enough to meaningfully fertilize crops.
>If you disagree, there may be opportunities for you where you have an edge on everyone else that doesn't understand objective reality as well as you do
So you must agree with modern societies morality then? Since we have the economically, technologically, and militarily most advanced society in human history. In direct competition the US would stomp any past society in a matter of days.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:03:16 2023 No.22326424

>>22326383
It's just whataboutism to deflect from the fact that your shitty fedora atheist subjective view of the world is just as wrong if not more so. It doesn't even seem like anybody responding in this thread at this point is defending Christianity as a Christian. Christians at least have some kind of excuse based on tradition or whatever but you're just saying things you know are wrong that create bad outcomes.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:06:43 2023 No.22326445

>>22326424
Here >>22326098 is the post I responded to here >>22326174. The whataboutism is you trying to get us to ignore the gaping holes in the Christian position by pointing out holes in the atheist one. Which again since I don't believe in objective morality aren't holes.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:07:53 2023 No.22326451

>>22326405
You're number one if stomping things is the ultimate goal. All these objective structures rest in contexts, we have to use qualifiers like "if". If the goal is stomping then nukes are basically divine.
If creation is good like is declared at the start of the Bible then objective consequences arise from that premise. Life is good, humans are good, the kind of things healthy humans do should be nurtured therefore we shouldn't do things like murder.
If creation is good then nukes and all that stomping shit is basically evil. Modern societies are not doing anything, they're just decaying and celebrating decay as good.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:09:42 2023 No.22326458
File: 46 KB, 556x544, Fz4RQZcaEAQqtzj.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>22326445
>well you see I'm a bit of an atheist, I believe in subjective morality which means facts and logic don't apply to me, I create my own reality. checkmate kiddo, heh better luck next time

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:09:48 2023 No.22326459 File: 214 KB, 1348x2000, FEF140BF-76EB-4BBE-96BB-AF4A2AF1025D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:11:51 2023 No.22326467 File: 382 KB, 498x498, rich-man-homer.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22326458

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:12:23 2023 No.22326469

>>22326451
>If creation is good like is declared at the start of the Bible then objective consequences
Bro I've already said I the Jesus crap is horseshit. You were trying to give some type of objective morality from
>It's a structure we found in objective reality like the circle.
I guess you just gave up on that position then. And the Bible one is obviously stupid and your preference for it is purely subjective.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:19:19 2023 No.22326499

>>22326469
>I guess
Try reading instead of guessing. I explained to you what objective morality is and you apparently can't grasp anything said on any level? Why else would you use these pathetic cope excuses to avoid thinking?
Your post doesn't relate to anything I said, just to shit you made up in your diseased mind. Every time you "enlightened by your own intelligence" retards are challenged even slightly you reveal you can't even begin to think about any subject.
How can you lie to yourself that you can think?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:21:59 2023 No.22326510

>>22326499
You started out by saying that objective morality can come from the preferences of a successful society but when I pointed out that means you have to accept modern morality you pivoted to claiming it came from the Bible. Which is obviously retarded for multiple reasons some of which I mentioned already above like Euthyphro

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:23:01 2023 No.22326515 >>22326510 the other guy already pointed out your source invalidates your own position too

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:24:29 2023 No.22326521

>>22326515
>the other guy already pointed out your source invalidates your own position too
And then he said it was whataboutism to use Socrates to disprove what started the argument to begin with. And like I already said at least three times I don't believe in objective morality so Socrates doesn't disprove anything about my position.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:26:13 2023 No.22326530

>>22326521
whether you believe in objective morality or not has nothing to do with the fact that your view is pretty well deconstructed and argued against in the republic. if im readin this right you agree that both christian view of morality and an atheistic subjective one are wrong?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:28:13 2023 No.22326538

>>22326510
>objective morality can come from the preferences of a successful society
That's what you said not me. I laid out basic logic which you deliberately ignore, not because you don't understand it but because you're a deranged brainwashed idiot.
You will never sincerely read anything I write or anything related to the subject. You're too far gone to ever understand how to. You'll demand I said something I didn't and jerk off about it endlessly like you already started.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:28:38 2023 No.22326541 >>22326530 >an atheistic subjective one are wrong I hold an atheistic subjective view on morality. The atheistic qualifier is unnecessary because I don't believe any type of objective morality is possible.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:30:25 2023 No.22326550

>>22326538
My bad I thought this was you here >>22326333
>>22326333
>Do you think this became the established consensus for no reason? It's completely arbitrary?
>If it's instrumental, using the idea gives relatively reliable outcomes then it exists, it's not arbitrary or subjective. It's a structure we found in objective reality like the circle.
That anon thinks objective morality can come from the preferences of a successful society.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:32:02 2023 No.22326559 >>22326541 okay so then we agree that ala socrates what you've said your view is here is silly and wrong

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:33:34 2023 No.22326570

>>22326541
Justify the claim. Explain what the fuck you're talking about retard.
I explained how given a goal there are objectively better and worse ways to approach that goal.
Someone capable of thought would point out the subjectivity of the fucking premise, that the goal itself can't be derived objectively. You have to first assume a goal like at the very least wanting life to continue but all life agrees on that goal so in practice the objective rules derived from that goal dictate our behavior.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:33:46 2023 No.22326571 >>22326559 >okay so then we agree that ala socrates what you've said your view is here is silly and wrong How can it be wrong? It's a subjective statement.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:34:55 2023 No.22326576

>>22326550
>That anon thinks objective morality can come from the preferences of a successful society.
Just endless deliberate dishonesty like predicted. If you have no interest in understanding anything said to you what hope can I have of saying anything to you? How can you become like this? Who fucked you up so completely?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:35:09 2023 No.22326578 >>22326570 >that the goal itself can't be derived objectively You think there are objective goals? You understand what objective and subjective mean right?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:36:12 2023 No.22326585 >>22326576 Bro that is exactly what you claimed there. That objective morality can come from the preferences of a successful society. If that's not what you meant what the fuck did you?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:38:05 2023 No.22326593

>>22326571
the claim that morality is subjective is an objective claim about reality. the views you put forward as far as morality and society are objective claims about how the world works. these are almost exactly claims that were pointed out socrates argues again in the republic pretty successfully.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:38:18 2023 No.22326595

>>22326578
Can you even read? What the fuck are these fucking posts that either have nothing to do with what I said or pretend I said the exact opposite?
Can you fucking read retard?
>>22326585
>If that's not what you meant what the fuck did you?
What I explained in detail and you completely ignored to make up a strawman about how great nukes are. Try reading a fucking word of what's written instead of just making up fantasies.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:38:22 2023 No.22326597 File: 583 KB, 488x720, A History of Central Banking.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22323947

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:39:06 2023 No.22326600 File: 38 KB, 908x539, 1513997245135.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >ITT

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:43:01 2023 No.22326618 >>22326595 >What I explained in detail and you completely ignored to make up a strawman about how great nukes are. I don't even know what is going on at this point you must be having a schizo break. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP NUKES.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:46:44 2023 No.22326627

>>22326600
dubble dubs right on the money. this guy is basically just saying whatever he thinks will win him the argument and if you point out the problems in his own views he just says that his own views should not be held to the same standard as christards. very snakish, not much point in talking with him you might as well box a cement block.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:49:29 2023 No.22326635

>>22326627
>and if you point out the problems in his own views he just says that his own views should not be held to the same standard as christards
This will be I think the fifth time I've said this, I don't believe in objective morality. An argument against objective morality doesn't effect my position since I don't believe in it to begin with. Christcucks claim objective morality from God as an important apologetic tactic. An argument against objective morality definitely effects them.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:52:28 2023 No.22326651

>>22326618
You work so hard to avoid understanding. Why would you do that? Who does that help?
If x then y. This is an objective structure we found in reality.
If we for example value life there are objectively better and worse ways to preserve it.
You brought up modern society as a supposed example of "better" with no hint of thought on the subject except just claiming that it is. When I explored the idea you ignored that exploration completely as if you couldn't grasp the idea of exploring a presented premise, as if you're completely incapable of thinking.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:55:21 2023 No.22326660

>>22326627
not a part of this argument, just going to point out that christians should hold themselves to a standard above non-christians or else their texts are meaningless. if you do not practice what you preach then by the logic that you are asserting is true you are being sinful. the person you are discussing with not being christian does not absolve you of this. that quite literally makes you a bad christian and a bad actor for the faith you represent.

I am not christian but I have lots of respect for christians who act christian. Most of them these days in america at least are quite funnily enough mormon.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:56:01 2023 No.22326663 File: 819 KB, 1516x1454, The Last Judgement - Jan Provoost (1525).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22324166 Absolutely based

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 21:57:19 2023 No.22326666

>>22326651
>If we for example value life there are objectively better and worse ways to preserve it.
And these values clearly change with different cultures. You claimed Aztecs sacrificed millions of slaves.
>If x then y. This is an objective structure we found in reality.
But the values or preferences are subjective. Objectively pursuing a subjective preference doesn't magically make your actions objective. If it did every morality would be objective and then you run into the problem of "objective" moralities contradicting each other.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:03:06 2023 No.22326687 >>22324106 kys

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:03:31 2023 No.22326691

>>22326635
it's been pointed out thrice now I think that your conception of morality and society here >>22326316 and here >>22326185 are pretty thoroughly addressed in the republic. i dont know why you keep whining about how you dont believe in objective morality? nobody has said you do? the problem is that when you are confronted with this, your only response was that socrates questions the morality of organized religion in euthyphro. so I say, you are not denying that your views are wrong merely replying that christcucks are as wrong as you!

>>22326660
sure it's a part of the argument, im arguing against HIS view on society. i could give a shit about christianity. and if his stated view on society is merely a tool he's using to attack christcucks rather than a genuine belief then my post here>>22326627 is even more justified.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:05:24 2023 No.22326700

>>22324106
>give me my blobocracy
"No"

Abolish the electoral college, bring back Roman voting except instead of wealth/property it's by based on degree of occult powers manifested. If you can't even move a phonebook page because of a few styrofoam peanuts causing electrical infetterance, you go directly in the capite censi.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:05:49 2023 No.22326702 >>22324414 >>22325886 This why we had state legislatures send Senators to Congress but they amended that because they knew one election was easier to cheat on.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:07:53 2023 No.22326708 [DELETED]

>>22326691
>so I say, you are not denying that your views are wrong merely replying that christcucks are as wrong as you!
And I say(like I did here >>22326383) that since what started this argument was Christain belief in objective morality me pointing out Socrates attacked it in Euthyphro is directly relevant while you pointing out supposed holes in my position is the whataboutism.

since we started talking about

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:09:11 2023 No.22326713

>>22326691
>so I say, you are not denying that your views are wrong merely replying that christcucks are as wrong as you!
And I say(like I did here >>22326383 (You)) that since what started this argument was Christain belief in objective morality me pointing out Socrates attacked it in Euthyphro is directly relevant while you pointing out supposed holes in my position is the whataboutism.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:13:03 2023 No.22326723

>>22326708
>>22326713
its not whataboutism because im not christian, i dont defend christianity. i care about what YOU said YOUR beliefs are. if this is your actual belief then there is no problem with us having a conversation about it. if it's merely a tool you use to argue in a particular argument and not something you actually believe then my post is justified, you're not arguing in good faith and nobody should take you seriously.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:13:43 2023 No.22326730

>>22326666
>t the values or preferences are subjective
As already explained life tends to value life because of objective rules that produced that result and that premise results in objective consequences.
I explained why the Aztecs were objectively wrong but your mind doesn't process anything. Try reading.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:14:42 2023 No.22326733 >>22326723 So it won't be whataboutism to ask how you can possibly defend objective morality against Hume's is/ought distinction. You have to answer this if you're truly arguing in good faith

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:17:16 2023 No.22326741

>>22326730
And we're back to the same stupid shit. Values and preferences can't be objective. They are almost by definition subjective. How are these objective consequences that supposedly validate your values to be judged? Through your subjective fucking values. You've given a textbook example of circular reasoning.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:19:09 2023 No.22326744

>>22326733
you have not addressed the very first question in this entire chain regarding the republic, which you have now been asked 4 times. first you said christians are wrong so it's okay that you're wrong, then you tried to ignore it, then tried to pretend to not understand it, now you're just answering a question with a completely different question. like I said, chasing ones own tail would accomplish more than talking to someone like you who will say whatever he thinks will help him win

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:21:03 2023 No.22326753

>>22326744
>you have not addressed the very first question in this entire chain regarding the republic, which you have now been asked 4 times
The very first question was regarding Christian belief in objective morality. Which I did answer with Euthyphro. You were the one that came up with whataboutism concerning my position. And don't think I've failed to notice you dodging the question. You're not arguing in good faith.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:23:40 2023 No.22326765

>>22326753
you literally brought up euthyphro in reply to being questioned about thrasymachus. you never actually addressed it though. which I point out here>>22326744. when I brought up thrasymachus and said your ideas are wrong, your response was to bring up euthyphro and say "yes my ideas are wrong but so are christians so its okay!"

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:24:48 2023 No.22326773

>>22326741
We're back at you being a dishonest retard refusing to even try to understand anything said to you.
Why would you do this? How can you justify all these posts subverting your own ability to understand the world around you?
There are objectively better and worse paths to any given goal. The goal of propagating life is given by the structures that resulted in life, a process that propagates.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:26:49 2023 No.22326777

>>22326765
>you literally brought up euthyphro in reply to being questioned about thrasymachus
You don't just get to choose where the argument starts. You were responding here >>22326353
to me here >>22326316 which started all the way back here >>22326174 with my first post. Face it my nigga you're the one pulling the whataboutism here I raised the question of Christian belief in objective morality first. And I'll remind you that you still haven't responded to Hume.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:29:07 2023 No.22326786

>>22326777
my argument started with my post. there's no whataboutism because I agree with you that christian morality is wrong. your ideas are also wrong, but you can't address that because you dont care about anything. you're a bad faith actor just interested in dabbing on christcucks. nobody should take you seriously because you can't even take your own views seriously. when I point out they're wrong all you can say is "BUT LOOK HOW I DABBED ON CHRISTKEKS!" cool but you're still wrong too

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:29:12 2023 No.22326787

>>22326773
>The goal of propagating life is given by the structures that resulted in life
And again this goal is just something subjective that you've assigned to life. THERE ARE NO OBJECTIVE GOALS. Even your supposed way of finding them by looking at the objective consequences relies ob subjective values to determine whether the consequences are good or not.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:31:09 2023 No.22326795 >>22326786 Still haven't responded to my Hume question I see. But you expect me to respond to a side question you raised in response to my direct continuation of the original argument. Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:32:33 2023 No.22326798

>>22326795
>why won't you respond to all of these questions I'm asking you after I ignored your first question!? I won't respond to your questions but maybe you'll respond to mine and I can use that against you
you're literally just this meme >>22326600 why would I take you seriously, you can't even take yourself seriously

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:33:58 2023 No.22326803 >>22326798 Still no answer for Hume huh? You bad-faither. Naughty naughty

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:36:47 2023 No.22326813

>>22326787
>this goal is just something subjective that you've assigned to life
What are you talking about retard? I didn't decree that life would propagate. You're desperately undermining your own ability to put together the simplest thoughts to justify the religious convictions you've been brainwashed with. There's no hint of thought here just schoolbook examples of religious zealotry by a retard that doesn't think he's religious.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:37:48 2023 No.22326817 File: 31 KB, 908x539, 1513997245135.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>22326803 look i even put you into the meme. i used comic sans because you're kind of a joke

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:40:28 2023 No.22326824

>>22326813
>I didn't decree that life would propagate.
Then who the fuck did? GOALS ARE SUBJECTIVE. You can't fucking look at a rock and say it has a goal outside of what you give it. You're bordering up on stupid Aristotelian teleology. People talk about about intelligent falling as a theory of gravity as a joke but that is actually what Aristotle believed. That rocks fell to the ground because their purpose was to be there.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:40:50 2023 No.22326827 >>22326824 >You can't fucking look at a rock and say it has a goal outside of what you give i Why

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:42:18 2023 No.22326837 >>22326827 BECAUSE GOALS ARE SUBJECTIVE. I've already asked if you understand what subjective and objective mean. I shouldn't have taken you at your word when you said they did.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:42:58 2023 No.22326840 >>22326837 >BECAUSE GOALS ARE SUBJECTIVE How

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:43:46 2023 No.22326843 >>22323947 Stirner

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:51:37 2023 No.22326880

>>22326824
>Then who the fuck did?
What is this? Why do you pretend to be unable to string together anything resembling a thought? I know you can think if you try so why not try it out?
Organisms are concerned with survival and therefore all the consequences that result from being concerned with surviving are relevant to all organisms. They all have external objective rules they need to navigate to survive.
What kind of retard demands to be spoonfed like this and actively undermines the ability of people to communicate with him? Do you grasp the levels of decay your existence represents?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 22:59:08 2023 No.22326902

>>22326880
>Organisms are concerned with survival
Why? Who came up with that goal? You're trying to find goals in biology and physics where there are none. Do you crawl along the ground since gravity pulls you towards it? That's obviously the goal in your sense of gravity. You've managed to jump the is/ought gap in your own mind with a grade school metaphor about the "goals" of evolution. Do you think electricity is bad since it's NEGATIVELY charged?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:02:47 2023 No.22326917 >>22326902 see >>22326353 We already bullied one nerd out of the thread for being wrong, lets not have a repeat okay?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:04:38 2023 No.22326921

>>22326917
>We already bullied one nerd out of the thread for being wrong
I thought this was the same guy I was arguing with since the beginning. The one that claimed objective morality could come from the preferences of a successful society. The reverse whataboutism left after I beat him down with the time stamps on my posts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:04:47 2023 No.22326922 >>22324102 How old are you?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:05:48 2023 No.22326926 >>22326921 It is, that's the joke

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:07:51 2023 No.22326936

>>22326902
>Why?
Because of objective structures in reality that lead to organisms concerned with survival existing.
>Do you crawl along the ground since gravity pulls you towards it?
Do you subvert everything you touch? Can no coherent thought come in contact with you without being turned into the most braindead nonsense imaginable?
The consequences that result from being concerned with surviving are relevant to all organism concerned with survival.
>muh is/ought and other memes
This is how you "think", you string together these conditioned memes you don't understand on any level and expect everyone else to share the same brainwashing. Actual logic is apparently completely alien to you.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:11:08 2023 No.22326953 >>22326921 Confidently delusional on every level about even the most mundane subjects. What's the point? Why would anyone do this?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:11:46 2023 No.22326958

>>22326936
>Because of objective structures in reality that lead to organisms concerned with survival existing
The objective structures of reality lead to rocks being found on the ground in low places. Does that mean they have an objective goal of being there? Fucking think for half a second dude you haven't managed to solve a fundamental problem in ethics with a blip about the goals of life from a PBS special.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:13:57 2023 No.22326966 >>22326817 Thanks I've needed this meme, I swear there's one faggot on here that does this religiously.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:14:26 2023 No.22326968

>>22326958
What do you think this post could possibly accomplish? I didn't use the word "goal" in the post because it triggers your conditioned associations you completely rely on in place of thinking. So what is this post retard?
>braindead appeals to some idea that nobody can ever figure anything out and therefore any attempt to do so is wrong
Imagine being this fucked in the head.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:15:10 2023 No.22326971 >>22326966 Like the guy that tried to derail my argument about objective morality from God by whatabouting into an attack on my position. Fucking pathetic. He even refused to answer problems in his own position

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:16:11 2023 No.22326973

>>22326968
>I didn't use the word "goal" in the post because it triggers your conditioned associations you completely rely on in place of thinking.
THEN WHAT THE FUCK WAS THE POINT OF IT? You're trying to give me an objective goal. If you admit you can't do that I've won the fucking argument.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:17:03 2023 No.22326980 >>22326958 >you haven't managed to solve a fundamental problem in ethics There is no problem. Retards like you subverted history and started making up these memes about "subjective morality" etc like 50 years ago.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:17:25 2023 No.22326984 here is a short audiobook about that subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0pJf2mF9Zg&t=111s

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:17:47 2023 No.22326986

>>22326966
no problem, I feel I've come across this type of person before. you ask them a question, they refuse to answer it, then they ask you a question and act offended as if you have a duty to answer their question when they won't afford you that same privilege. when you point this out it makes them seethe like >>22326971 where the only response is to keep pretending that for some reason you have a duty to answer their questions but it's okay for him to ignore your initial question

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:18:27 2023 No.22326991

>>22326980
I've already named it above Hume's is/ought divide. Straight from the horses mouth published nearly 300 years ago

In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remarked, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary way of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when of a sudden I am surprised to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is, however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, it's necessary that it should be observed and explained; and at the same time that a reason should be given, for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it. But as authors do not commonly use this precaution, I shall presume to recommend it to the readers; and am persuaded, that this small attention would subvert all the vulgar systems of morality, and let us see, that the distinction of vice and virtue is not founded merely on the relations of objects, nor is perceived by reason.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:19:13 2023 No.22326997 >>22326817 >>22326986 like look see even here >>22326973 all he cares about is I WIN I WIN I WIN there's no point in taking it seriously because he's not arguing in good faith just to get some kind of validation

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:19:28 2023 No.22326998 >>22326986 Cool bro. I already showed I asked the question about objective morality from God first >>22326777

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:19:30 2023 No.22326999

>>22326973
The rock goes to the ground, if you want to call the logical process from the starting conditions to the conclusion a "goal" being fulfilled you can but since the word "goal" triggers you because of your religious beliefs we can avoid it completely.. The point is not about an agency but objective logical structures like if x then y.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:22:21 2023 No.22327004

>>22326999
>The rock goes to the ground, if you want to call the logical process from the starting conditions to the conclusion a "goal" being fulfilled you can but since the word "goal"
So the goal of something is just what physics says it will do? Think for a fucking second. Just stop and think about that. A morality based on those goals from physics would be impossible to violate since every action we take is subject to the laws of physics. You literally could not perform an immoral act.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:22:27 2023 No.22327005

sorry >>22326997
meant for >>22326966

>>22326998
yeah i told you here that i agree with you that christian morality is wrong >>22326786 im not christian why would i sit here trying to defend their view? my first post in this thread was asking you about your views and all you can do is sit here whining and crying that i want you to answer the question I asked in my first post instead of ignoring it and answering your subsequent questions

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:22:58 2023 No.22327008

>>22326991
Wow 300 whole years instead of 50. Fuck off with your retard memes, they don't trump basic logic.
We can just as well say what "is" to you derives from an "ought". The apple is red because seeing it as red is an adaption you have in order to propagate.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:24:18 2023 No.22327012

>>22327004
>So the goal of something is just what physics says it will do?
I'm talking about logic you subhuman piece of shit not physics. Do you not grasp any logic on any level? It's all conditioned associations with reddit memes? Are you even a person?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:25:21 2023 No.22327015 ask him if he's jewish

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:25:43 2023 No.22327017

>>22327005
>my first post in this thread was asking you about your views and all you can do is sit here whining and crying that i want you to answer the question I asked in my first post instead of ignoring it and answering your subsequent questions
And I never responded to that line of questioning just like you never responded to my question about Hume. Face it man you're wrong. There is no whataboutism with me using Euthyphro to stomp ethics from God.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:25:47 2023 No.22327018 >>22327004 >Think for a fucking second. Just stop and think Why do you keep pretending you know anything about thinking? Is it "thinking" about working hard like you to subvert all meaning and basic logic?

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:27:08 2023 No.22327022

>>22327012
>I'm talking about logic you subhuman piece of shit not physics. Do you not grasp any logic on any level?
You think a rock falling to the ground is a logical process and not a physical one? Like you can find gravity in the logical reasoning?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:27:58 2023 No.22327024 >>22327017 oh where did you ask me a question about hume before >>22326353

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:31:56 2023 No.22327031

>>22327024
Where did you ask me a question about Thrasymachus before >>22326174? Again I started the argument with objective morality from God. You responded by trying to whatabouting into an attack on my position. Your response is 5 deep in that chain I clearly have priority.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:39:32 2023 No.22327061

>>22327022
Our model of the rock falling is a logical system physically encoded in brains not rocks. The conclusion of the rock resting on the ground is a consequence of given rules and starting conditions.
That's a model of the behavior of a rock interacting with gravity. A different system than modelling an organism interacting with its environment. The organisms has objective rules it needs to navigate in order to propagate. The history of morality is about attempts to navigate these objective rules. Pretending otherwise is subverting history and your own ability to navigate objective reality.

Anonymous Mon Jul 31 23:41:44 2023 No.22327069
File: 13 KB, 334x334, E4YWUXiUUBEDGbT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>22327024
>>22327031
Oops sorry I had the wrong post. I asked you about Hume here >>22326733 which was like an hour and 20 minutes after >>22326353 Yeah I get what you're saying now it's pretty ridiculous of me to expect you to answer my questions when I wont even answer the one you asked way before that! I see that you said that you're not even a Christian and aren't defending their religion in a bunch of posts so obviously I'm not stupid enough to call it whataboutism since that would make no sense lol. Anyway yeah I don't really have a response so rather than dragging this out and throwing a temper tantrum I think I'll just admit that now. Thrasymachus got absolutely btfo and it was pretty stupid of me to put his ideas forward while trying to get my epic own on the christcucks!

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 00:01:43 2023 No.22327125 >>22325867 >This is why right wing populism is fucking dumb. You don't actually want populism. That's going to fuck your shit up. you don't know what populism is. populism isn't >vote for who's le popular its about >the "people" versus the elites

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 00:19:38 2023 No.22327174 >>22325924 >he’s concerned about the lesser fraud but doesnt even see the greater fraud that gives presents us a choice between faggots like joe biden and donald trump in the first place sad many such cases

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 00:20:53 2023 No.22327179 >>22323991 I came here to post this

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:26:39 2023 No.22328040 >>22323947 Bro, democracy is evil, i agree with that. But it's also the lesser evil. There are no alternatives

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:39:47 2023 No.22328064 >>22326194 Girl, did you forget the Russiagate cope? She is not above anything.

Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:43:47 2023 No.22328073

>>22328040
>Bro, democracy is evil, i agree with that. But it's also the lesser evil. There are no alternatives
Mass spiritual awakening is the only hope for humanity. Otherwise we'll be ruled by shitty authoritarians forever, whether they call it democracy or fascism or monarchy or oligarchy.

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:47:20 2023 No.22328078 >>22328073 >Mass spiritual awakening is the only hope for humanity. WHAT PROBLEM ARE YOU REFERRING TO REEEEEEEE

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:47:22 2023 No.22328079 >>22324191 India is toilet-free.

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 06:50:23 2023 No.22328087 >>22328078 "No alternatives." There is an alternative that no one wants to hear, and I've already said it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 09:25:50 2023 No.22328319 >>22323991 This. Also read "Democracy in America" by Alexis de Tocqueville

>>	Anonymous Tue Aug 1 09:30:32 2023 No.22328324 >>22328319 Also democracy is quite lindy as long as only high IQ land-owning males are allowed to vote

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature