Was he right?

>>91794537
depends on who you ask

if nothing's more important to you than maintaining your own morality then you'd agree, if not then you wouldn't

>>91794905
"Maintaining your own morality" makes it sound selfish, when all he set out to do was punishing the crazy mass murderer of innocent millions for his ghastly deeds.

>>91794537
No. That position is untenable. No one can live with a purely black and white morality, and no one does. Rorschach didn't (he worked with the rapist murdering Comedian while claiming rapists and murderers only deserve death). Dr. Manhattan doesn't, because he's aware of how complex a person's life is, and how single points of choice can effect things that have no initial connections to them. Life is simply to complex to never compromise.

>>91794537
yes
once you compromise once you will compromise again
given enough time humans can be convinced to kill their own mothers with little effort

>>91794537
japan should have listen to him and never surrendered during ww2

>>91795585
Have you ever heard of the slippery slope fallacy? Because you're pretty much describing it perfectly.

>>91795638
i heard its a fallacy by people who once claimed they would never do things they do now
how its a fallacy? its easier to get someone to agree to give you 2 dollars 50 times than to give you 100, its common knowledge

>>91795697
It's a fallacy because you are claiming something will lead to something else without any sort of direct connection. It's like saying that the painting a room's walls grey will mean a child will sleep in the room.

>>91795754
>witohut any sorth of connection
this is exactly where you are wrong

>>91794537
>Was he autistic?

>>91795754
its easier to get someone to agree to a lot of tiny things than a big one, this has always been the case
The slippery slope only works if the person that keeps agreeing to tiny things doesnt realize that its building up to something bigger
If you point out whats happening wich is the truth, truth being the way to fight a lie, you will be acussed of commiting a falacy because there is no connection because as soon as the connection is established then you cant execute a slippery slope anymore so if you are decieving people with tht thactic you cant admit to it ever.
Claiming that the slippery slope is a falacy is a falacy

>>91795789
Direct connection. The direct connection is what's important. Drop egg > Egg falls > Egg hits ground > Egg Breaks > Person slips on egg and gets hurt
That's a proper argument because there's a reasonable causal link from one point to the next. A slippery slope would be like saying Drop egg > World War 3 begins. There's no reasonable link between the two
If you want an extreme example

>>91796029
>claiming a well documented logical fallacy is such is a fallacy
Really? Are you really trying to refute that a specific fallacy is possible because it means that [whatever thing you dislike here] won't be the end of the world?

>>91796043
so you are saying that people dont lie or decieve one another
I will drop an example, politicians dont give a crap about transgender rights and bathrooms, transgenders being less than 0.1% of the population, politicians want in fact to pass laws that give them more control over state goverment and this is the perfect excuse to execute such law now that the gates of hell have been opened and you can get arrested over offending people, and people can get offended over anything.
I know this not because of bias, not because a shitty chart on the internet but because i go the extra mile to learn and listen and it was explained by Jess Herbst wich is the first transgender mayor in texas in an intreview
>>91796157
do you want to fact check it?

>>91795638
Slippery slope arguments are not necessarily fallacious.

>>91796214
So you're just a /pol/posting fearmonger? You're not really helping your case here. So put away the tin-foil hat, and stop pretending that just because stores don't have to be closed on Sundays that the end of worship of the Abrahamic god is right around the corner.

>>91796252
They are by definition fallacious because they are linking two things which have no link.

>>91794537
No that's a fallacy

>>91796363
>So you're just a /pol/posting fearmonger?
no, i dong give a shit about balck people or jews or if a man wants to suck another mans dick or amputate his testicles.
I am a person who knows why he has rights and why he needs rights and when my personal rights are attacked i know the reason behind it.
Like it or not the people who came up with said rights were quite smart, smarter tha you or me and saw most things that could go wrong

>>91795605
In retrospect they should have.
Americans only had 3 bombs. So they nuke three cities and that's it. They blew their whole powder.

>>91796450
Like the British invading? They were a bunch of drunk politicians who didn't give a shit about anyone who wasn't rich, white, or their personal friends. One of them committed genocide, for shit's sake.

>>91796533
Then they get invaded by the Russians and we have to deal with a North Japan/South Japan situation

>>91796533
What's another few hundred thousand innocents dead? And another ten million deaths during the ground invasion? And the effects of radiation on the troops, who's invasion plans had them marching through the various ground zeroes. Why no bump the total deaths WWII caused up to, oh, maybe 100 million lives.

>>91796535
Its a great injustice that kids dont get taught why they have rights
You have rights because we operate under a democracy, democracy isnt just nor fair as you have probably experienced recently. In democracy the majority gets to be represented and the minority doesnt, rights exist to protect the minority because without rights a majority could vote to kill black people or arrest the gays or wathever else you can think of, rights exist for the sole purpose of stopping opression.
When someone tells you he wants to take away your rights because he wants more justice or wants to protect a minority he could aswell be saying he wants to set you on fire to prevent you from being burned

>>91794537
Yes.

That being said, he was a literal crazy person who subscribed to libertarian bullshittery, but he's not wrong.

It's fine to compromise of practical or insignigant matters, like what to get on a pizza with friends, or how wide to make a road in a small community, but if you compromise on your ideals, your morals, then they're not really morals, are they?

Which is exactly why Obama failed.

>>91795546
Comedian wasn't a rapist, he just suffered a minor lapse of judgement once.

>>91796681
Unless you constitute part of the minority, that "argument" falls apart. I'd like to know which "rights" are being reduced, and how exactly such a law made it past any mildly competent judge and/or law firm, who would love to make a big payday by means of a class action against a government who defies their countries constitution.

>>91796885
a lot of people suffer lapses in judgement, most of them don't try to rape people

>>91796885
Then committing one murder doesn't make you a murderer? Burning down someone's house doesn't make you an arsonist?

File: roar.png (1MB, 675x714px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 675x714px

>>91795546

You know, that's a good catch on the Comedian. He does explicitly excuse his attempted rape of Silk Spectre as a moral lapse because the Comedian is a patriot.

The last few times I've read Watchmen I've gotten the impression that Rorschach was really still Kovacks. There's that scene where he gets back to his apartment after breaking out of jail and he confronts his landlord. He just looks so sad. This too is a compromise I guess.

At the very end when he's about to die and he takes off his mask you can see rivers of tears going down his face. He's been crying for a while even though no one could tell through the mask. He was talking tough about never compromising, even in the face of Armageddon, but he couldn't handle what had happened. He thought he was Rorschach but has Kovacks all along.

>>91796990
he's sad confronting the landlady because her son reminds him of himself, and he didn't have the luxury of ignorence

>>91796895
yes, unless you are in danger of being opressed you are not likely to be concerned with opression, havent you heard that poem
first they came for the blacks, then they came for the jews?
>wich rights are being reduced
free speech
fair trial
of the top of my head
>any mildly competent judge and/or law firm
because competent people in posittions of power form pedophile rings and satanistic cults
are you going to pretend for a second that what about obama and the right to privacy, does the nsa mean anything to you?
do you realize under obama laws preventing the media from publishing propaganda were removed? how do you feel about trump having the same power people complained obama had?

>>91797052

Right, and because of that he lets the landlady slide even though she sullied his reputation. It's a real piece of emotion from a character that hadn't had all that much of it up until then.

>>91796990
Oh course. He only put on the mask because he couldn't look at himself in the mirror anymore. He did it to distance Walter the textile worker from Rorschach the Vigilante

>>91797077
>free speech
>fair trial
>of the top of my head
How so? Do you have any evidence?

>because competent people in posittions of power form pedophile rings and satanistic cults

Oh boy. You must live in terror every waking moment, don't you? The idea that people are capable of making various choices that are different from yours, yet still remain moral human beings must astound you, doesn't it?

NEWS FLASH, we don't live in a comic by Jack Chick!

>>91794537
none of them were right. that's the point.

>>91796533
your post is a whole new level of retarded.

>>91797174
Either Ozzy was right or he wasn't.
If he wasn't, then Rorschach was right in trying to expose and punish him.

He got blown apart for no reason. That should show you how right he was.

>>91797230
and you aren't right either.

>>91797230

I can't wait for all these ambiguities that people still talk about decades later to be settled once and for all by Rebirth.

>>91797230
its a mistake to think that someone had to have been right,

if anything the comedian was right.

>>91797158
free speech is constantly under attack, people take the streets claiming that speech is violence, independent journasilsts get slandered to hell and back by people who have to appologize plenty of times every week for reporting fake things, people demand that people who say certain things lose their jobs, the go out of their way to harass them or take justice by thier own hands, im sorry if you are this out of the loop that none of these things ring a bell i cant help you
As for fair trial lots of people demand that to not be a possibility for people acussed of rape, im a man and i could be acussed of rape at any point by anyone and i need my right to have a fair trial if that happens
>Oh boy. You must live in terror every waking moment
i dont trust people who have power over me
>The idea that people are capable of making various choices that are different from yours, yet still remain moral human beings
are you saying sexual abuse of minors of 7 years of age is a moral choice?

>>91795546
>rapist murdering Comedian
He didn't rape or murder anyone that did not deserve it.

File: 1478667429169.png (19KB, 300x309px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x309px

>>91797339
I'll never accept this Rebirth con job. Moore or bust.

>>91797454
>He didn't rape or murder anyone that did not deserve it.
I'm curious as to what Silk Specter did to deserve it?

>>91797454
Shooting his vietnamese mistress was unwarranted.

>>91797540
Being a tease, duh.

>>91797565
so are people allowed to murder you if you annoy them?

>>91797598
Yep. George Carlin was pretty right on this issue.

>>91795546
>effect instead of affect

Opinion completely discarded.

File: elementary_school_vocabulary.png (198KB, 1080x1285px)

198KB, 1080x1285px

>>91797738
>not understanding that words can have multiple meanings

>>91798104
Affect is the verb and effect is the noun, you neo-marxist post-modernist re-educated fucking retard.

File: 1492311429334.gif (498KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

498KB, 400x300px

>>91798215
>literally arguing with the dictionary
>getting this defensive

>>91798366
You still weren't using it right. You aren't saying "[S]ingle points of choice can accomplish things that have no initial connections to them." You're saying the verb "affect," which means to make a difference to. "[S]ingle points of choice can make a difference to things that have..."

So actually, when you think about it, your own smug retardation is the punchline here.

Did the doc really zap him to death or to somewhere else so his death can make a point?

>>91796214
>transphobic, right-wing politicians pass a law requiring you to carry your birth certificate with you in order to use a public restroom
>somehow muh lie-brul sjw big gubbmint democrats are the problem here

Fuck off back to /pol/.

>>91798366
fuck you're dumb

File: 0f85b381-563d-44f8-ad9a-8802d61cd47c.png (795KB, 925x690px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 925x690px

>>91798923
Let's try simply lifting the wording straight from the definition, shall we?

>...single points of choice can [bring about] things that have no initial connections to them.

>...single points of choice can [cause some things to happen] that have no initial connections to them.

Oh, look, they both still make sense! What's funny is that either "affect" or "effect" work in that statement, but your fixation on the former prevents you from understanding this. So, turning your own words against you:

>your own smug retardation is the punchline here

>>91796926
Well, technically the murder one is correct, but not the arsonist. Arsonists are like serial killers: they have a pattern, they mark multiple targets, they use specific preferred methods, etc. Setting fire to one house doesn't make you an arsonist, you have just committed arson.

Yes. Veidt's plan is retarded.
Sure, in the short term everyone is going to be shitting themselves and suspending hostilities, but how long is that gonna last? What's gonna happen when 10 years go by without so much as a peep from the psychic space octopi? Does he think everyone's just gonna be on good behavior "just in case" for the rest of eternity? No, sooner or later everyone's gonna go back to killing each other and the alien will just be a weird footnote in history. Unless Veidt has made arrangements to do his plan all over again every decade or so it's just delaying the inevitable at the cost of millions upon millions of lives.

>>91794537
I prefer the original, latin version.
Fiat justitia ruat cælum

And while he was right, he didn't live by it (as others have demonstrated through the Comedian, who among other things killed Woodward and Bernstein to conceal Nixon's misdeeds).
And, on the practical front, if Rorschach had killed the Comedian all those years ago, the Comedian would never have seen the island and never been killed by Ozzy, and Rorschach would never have gone investigating the Comedian's murder, and never uncovered Ozzy's plot, and never left his journal behind to be published, revealing Ozzy's deception and ruining world peace.

Of course, Kovacs was probably deliberately blind to the Comedians numerous sins.

>>91800055
It's only funny because "effect" the verb does NOT work in that statement, and the verb "affect" does and would be selected 10 out of 10 times by anyone who actually understands the rules between the two words. Your attempt at vaguely trying to match the effect verb to a common "affect" statement is pitiful and doesn't work under the standard rules.

Why would you try to make those points instead of acknowledging that you genuinely didn't know how to use the right form?

Again, retardation on your part. Humor for everyone else. Get a grammar book next time you want to actually discuss this.

>>91795546

He also supports the nuking of japan saying that it was for the greater good even though innocent people were hurt. Rorschach is intentionally painted as a hypocrite but people don't really care because he's le epic or whatever.

>>91800170

Because delaying the apocalypse is a lot better than just letting it happen.

Also, there's the possibility that the incident permanently repaired US and USSR relationships.

>>91800186
The Comedian acted as a government agent at the time, so it's reasonable to assume that Rorschach viewed him as upholding law and justice with his killings instead of violating them. Only shrugging off the attempted rape is actually in conflict with his usual uncompromising stance.

>>91800170
This is why I disagreed with a lot of people who bitched about the removal of the alien in the movie. Manhattan could return to Earth every few years, blow up a building, and laugh ominously before fucking off back to wherever in the universe he is brooding.
In the comic, Veidt has painted himself into a corner, but that was probably the point. Heroes can't save the world.

>>91800456

Dr. Blue Dick uniting the world doesn't make sense because he's an American weapon.

>>91797358
Can the comedian and dr. Manhattan be right at the same time?

>>91800326
You can hardly jugde Rorschach a hypocrite because he wrote one thing as a child and then acted differently as an adult. Besides, its explicitly stated to be the Blair Roche case of '75 that pushed him over the edge and made him finally adapt his "Punish evil at all costs" philosophy.

>>91800407
But how did he know an apocalypse was going to happen? He assumes that the countries are willing to destroy the world for their pride, but realistically, no one wants the world to end.

>>91800502
He was blamed for blowing up an American city, tho. That was an idea in both the comic and movie, that Manhattan's existence is an existential threat to the entire human race. Sure, he was of the Burger once, and for the Burger at the moment, but he could flip the fuck out (or just get bored) at any moment.
And the story Viedt sells in the movie is that said flip out has come.

>>91800591

No, he talks positively about Truman as an adult too.

>>91800603

It was the cold war but with tensions getting even worse because of Dr. Manhattan.

>>91799259
Oh dangit.
Now I'm vaguely remembering a comic where Doc didn't kill Rorschach at all, but zapped him somewhere else that was funny.

>>91797454
wew lad

File: grammar.png (27KB, 735x541px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 735x541px

>>91797738

>>91800456
>In the comic, Veidt has painted himself into a corner, but that was probably the point. Heroes can't save the world.
Exactly. Now, try to explain that to Snyder, please. And while you're there, put a bullet in his face so he stops making movies.

>>91800866
Still not comparable. Truman was president, vested with the proper authority to make the decision he did. The US and Japan were officially at war, so he didn't just nuke them completely out of the blue either. Veidt on the other hand was just some rich faggot without any legal authority who conspired to murder millions of innocents so he could mold his new world order. That's why Veidt is a villain and Truman is not.

>>91799865
Strawman me harder senpai

>>91800777
it also meshes quite well with Adrien's plan to fuck with Manhattan in the first place. pretty easy to swallow a story that manhattan went mad with grief upon finding out his bizarre dong gave the woman he'd loved cancer and immediately being swarmed by paparazzi before he had a chance to process that. the tabloids in the following weeks would have been savage

>>91800186
It's not world peace if it's based on a lie

>>91800866
>>91801090
Rorschach also probably doesn't care about human life as he kills and tortures plenty of people without any real proof of guilt. He cares more about honesty and chivalry in his twisted version of morality. Truman warned Japan and told them to surrender before the nuke. The playing field for the Japanese was clear, whereas Viedt is doing things clandestinely and nobody knows why and are therefore being tricked into action.

>>91795232

Yeah, well Rorshach was always sucking Truman's dick for doing the EXACT SAME THING Veidt did.

>>91794537
Moore used Rorschach as an example of how Objectivism at its core is stupid. No one can exist in a morally black and white world without ever having compromise. This is why Ayn Rand is shit.

>>91796533
We were gearing to start pumping them out as fast as possible. Operation Downfall, the plan for a ground invasion of the home island, called for upwards of sixty atomic attacks aimed at softening up resistance and destroying emplacements.

>>91795754
>It's like saying that the painting a room's walls grey will mean a child will sleep in the room.

You CAN paint a room grey for that very reason you know.

>>91801200
It's not the same thing, see >>91801090 >>91801183
Veidt wasn't president, nor openly at war with New York. Truman didn't kill millions on his own dime or deceived the world about the reasons.

>>91801201
Maybe not but not being moral makes you weak and there are people out there who will prey on this weakness and use it to destroy you
There is a difference between seeing objectivism as a goal than an ideal, I used to love rand but now I'm older and I don't believe in a perfect world.
The only perfect world is a world were only I exist as society is the only thing that stops us from achieving utopia

>>91794537
This is the cape version of "dude, Tyler Durden really makes you think!"

No he's not fucking right you dummy.

No Adrian was

>>91801105
>strawman

That isn't what that word means.
And you are retarded. That's not ad hominem, btw, because you being retarded is my conclusion.

>>91801179
That's not even true.
It is world peace if there is no war. Truth has nothing to do with it.

>>91797174
This. Come on guys, it's really not that complicated

>>91801487
Lies tend to come to the surface, when people realize it was all a lie then there will be twice as much conflict
How is that wolrd peace?

>>91801350
>The only perfect world is a world were only I exist
what anime are you quoting?

>>91801201

And as often happened, showed why Ayn Rand isn't shit. In Rand's case because all a whole lot of her critics were doing was gaslighting one of the very, very few eastern European college-age intellectuals to survive some time with the surreal horror of Bolsheviks getting started up. In Moore's case because he then put his objectivist murder-hobo in the same comic as Veidt and then made him the only nominal "superhero" willing to stand up to the guy over killing citizens by right of ubermench.

Basically, what the criticism ends up doing is illustrating that what the thing being criticized is trying to do is codify why something evil and unacceptable *is* evil and unacceptable, and in lieu of anything else making a half-assed attempt it ends up getting credit for trying.

>>91797140
>It's a real piece of emotion from a character that hadn't had all that much of it up until then
his character is almost all emotion

>>91801636
We want two things, we want the benefits of living in society and the freedom of being an individual
There is the conflict society and freedom are two opposing concepts and you can't have both
A perfect society should allow you to live in a society while also being completely alone and free hence you can only live in an utopia if you are the only living person
Adam lived in paradise until Eve came along, it's not a complicated concept

I thought the movie was fine

>>91794537
>Was he right?


Yes, absolutely.

What Ozymandius did was monstrous, and Dr. Manhattan should have expunged him for it and revealed the entire thing without hesitation.

Never compromise. Not even in the face of Armageddon.

>>91801930
>Dr. Manhattan should have expunged him for it and revealed the entire thing without hesitation.


I don;t know about expunging him, but revealing his plot to the world would likely just escalate tensions against the USA to the point of actually starting WWIII

>>91801851
>A perfect society should allow you to live in a society while also being completely alone and free hence
>hence you can only live in an utopia if you are the only living person
most people just enjoy some time alone in their house when they want to be alone, and leave their house to go out into society when they want to go out into society
>Adam lived in paradise until Eve came along
Adam and Eve lived in paradise until they wanted to grow up, move out, learn a trade, and make their own life choices rather than sponge off their father for all eternity.
mayhaps you should follow their example

>>91796926
Chopping down one tree doesn't make you a lumberjack. Well that's what my maybe-gay roommate said.

File: 9d992a82939d225814ac1b588aee3d80b894b6bad08d6e8047e56e9b326260cb.jpg (22KB, 517x480px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 517x480px

>>91801350
Yet morality tends to breed a herd mentality, making some sacrifice themselves or others for said morals. Rational self interest is the way to go, especially since you can help others in the name of your own rational self interest. Utopia is also a spook. Even a fully automated society with unlimited resources would still have it's problems, even if people would have more freedom to be themselves.

>>91801930
>Dr. Manhattan should have expunged him for it and revealed the entire thing without hesitation.
but to do so would have been a compromise on Manhattan's part

>>91797500

Fuck it. Moore was more disrespectful with lost girls than DC is being with rebirth

>>91800407

No . Because Manhattan laughed in his face with his pointless attempt at lasting peace.

Not enough is said about ozys clear narcissism .

>>91794537
Of course he was right.
Only fucking humanists don't agree with it and for some reasons love to defend criminals.

>>91802465
Herd mentality is good on your own community / race / clan / nation / country, it increase unity and it's also more easy to be individualist at the same times on it.

Considering every beings like "equals" or "part of the same boat" and especially when they are against your interests is fucking stupid.

Why didn't Dr. Manhattan just rearrange the particles in Rorschach's brain to make him forget what he found out?

>>91797174
>>91801500
You guys aren't right either.

Nah, he was a doo doo head.
Also if you look at the files from when he was a kid he says he thought nuking the Japanese was a good idea because it pre-emptively saved lives.
This is interesting because most kids start off with his adult morals as a kid, black and white, and then change their morals to account for shades of grey as an adult.
Take from that what you will.
I thought he was an interesting character who made sense but he wasn't right, he was going to doom the world just because there are no little white lies.

>>91801569
I can't help but get postmodern here and point out that all nations are based on a lie. The fact that Italy and Germany are utterly stupid and ahistorical ideas hasn't stopped Italians and Germans from living in relative peace with each other since they were imposed on themselves in the 19th century (compared to the perpetual infighting of the Holy Roman Empire and the dickwaving contests of the French and Austro-Hungarian Empires, anyway). Hell, the German lie is so pervasive that the Germans reunited themselves, despite the historical kingdoms of Bavaria, Prussia, etc, only being clumped together because it was easier for Soviet beuracracy to handle.
And this is not to even get into the so called "German-Americans" whose ancestors actually bailed out because the emerging Germany (unlike Hannover, etc) had no place for them. Or the Poles whose ancestors were Russian peasants, etc.

The lie of "Humanity" is just one more lie piled upon many.

>>91794537
Yes he was a right wing retard.

>>91794537
If you're right any compromise is evil. Depends on how deeply thought out your answer is. It's like answering a math question by commitee. Sharing info and knowledge is great but in the end if you have two answers you don't just pick the average.

>>91798366
>being wrong and not accepting it

>>91803958
>race (collective), nation (collective) and country (collective)
Spooks. Literally spooks. They will never tangibly exist in the ways you're describing them.

Stirner didn't perscribe anything other than total control of the self and a death of spooks (read:abstraction/ideology).

It is about descriptive collectives growing organically rather than perscriptive collectives. If people had the mental strength to truly embrace Stirner tier individuality the world would immediately be a better place. Would it be peaceful? I hope not. Would it be more fullfilling? Undoubtably.

>>91805224
>if everyone thought exactly the way I wanted them to think the world would be a better place
Cool beans, friendo.

>>91805306
>doesn't know anything about Stirner individualism
>still talks about it
VERY COOL, very cool.

>>91805323
Stirner individualism assumes that everyone can pursues their interests and passions without starving to death.

Guess what, not many people actually want the shit jobs but take them anyway an that's what keeps this world turning. Sorry if your coffee shop bullshit is stupid and doesn't even work as anything but a thought experiment.

Decent writer that spent his whole life in academia and assumed this made him qualified to be a philosopher.

>>91805405
>pursie passion without starving to death
I'm pretty sure it just means you have to take some actual responsibility in your choices mate. Starving or any other pointless alteration to your natural state runs counter to it. The difference is each person weighing up just how much living a shitty job for several decades balances against trying and potentially failing to do something else and taking responsibility for it.

>keeps this world turning
Barely at fucking all. The economy is filled with bloat shit that serves no utility whatsoever and it's usually those roles that suck.
Stirner is about living life actively. Your fuck ups are your own. If your personal interest is in a stable life then follow that. He doesn't assume too much uniformity unlike yourself.

That he's one of the few that calls abstraction out for what it is, an intangible pressure that shouldn't have power over because it doesn't exist, lesser philos just add to the pile of make believe and feels good.

>>91796533
America would have won even without the nukes, they were just a way of speeding things up.

>>91805224
You know if you start to relativize everything, so everything became instantly meaningless and nothing else matters.

Humans need spooks to handle existence and their survivals, nobody want to be "equal" with people they have conflicts of interests and differences, in fact even concerning self-interests being equal is pure shit, you want to be superior, it's simply natural, the World is made like that.

>>91794537
Rorschach died for his beliefs. The question he presents is do you think it's better to be dead and morally pure, or alive knowing you had to compromise to survive?

>>91805522
The Allies had already won the war, and American didn't have to do shit. Russia was going to goose step all over Japan.

>>91805613

America should have kept going and plunged into Russia. Patton was right

>>91805606
>removing spooks is relativistic
Not really man. It's as objective as you can get. Ideology and abstraction creates relativity. Objectivity comes from the empirical.
I never said anything about 'equal' and I don't think it's relevant to spooks or individualism.

>>91805491
By replacing the abstractions people make sense of their lives with it leaves with nothing but personal satisfaction and what you can tend to yourself with other pople existing in thier own bubbles he deliberately removes the individual from any ability to find their bearings. He assumes 'spooks' are anchors holding people down when it's simply a north star telling them where the hell they are.

>>91805639
If we're talking straight objectivity he was a failure of a person and on that token shouldn't be taken seriously as his only objective achievement was fucking up a milkshop.

>>91805660
The significance you give them is presumptuous. Stirner's personal experience of individuality also displays how this is wrong.
A lot of people unfamiliar with Stirner or who believe his own personal views were that of his views on individuality often for get that being kind is something humans naturally find value in. We're social creatures. Self-interest isn't I'll help you so long as I get something, it's saying "I'll help you" only when you genuinely want to help as opposed to feeling like you'd be a bad neighbour if you didn't. It's a removal of the bullshit that has grown up around us or been constructed to corral us and instead returning to the roots that allowed them to grow. Unified morality and faith in a cause or concept is beautiful but it's people's inherent need to fullfill that despire of assistance and community that makes it possible, not the other way around.

>>91805710
Objectivity was mentioned only in relation to relativitity. Pehaps you should either proffer your own world view or form a more whollistic reason of why you find Stirner's incompatible rather than picking at tangential bits of wordplay and broader discussion. I'd be interested to hear it, frankly.

>>91805712
That assumes morality can be developed outside of contact with other people and his altruistic self interest is inherent within people, in which case we differ on a matter of behavior as it relates to biology.

>>91794537
I would just like to point out that Ted Cruz once said that Rorschach is one of his favorite superheroes. Take of that what you will.

>>91805807
He also claims his father had nothing to do with the JFK assaination.

>>91797454
>>>91795546
>>rapist murdering Comedian
>He didn't rape or murder anyone that did not deserve it.
The edge

>>91805798
a) Individualism never precludes contact with others or learning from others. What you you even implying
b) altruism aside social behaviour is demonstratbly inherent and rewarding for individuals. I make no assumptions there at all. Those are just facts.

>>91805807
Ell Ratto is a cool guy, basically. He wanted the delegates at all costs but realised that he wanted his countries prosperity more.
That scene where he holds the gunmen off while the others escape expending the last few delegates he had was heart breaking. He's one of my favourite characters ever.

>>91805856
His whole thing is denying the spooks created society, in doing to you reject morality, there is no reason to respect or help other people than either the spook of altrusim, which according to him shouldn't even exist but he hand waves by saying 'as long as you FEEL that you are doing it out of your own volition it's totally not a construct'.

>>91794537
No, he was wrong.

He was a total badass, though, so I can see why there might be some confusion.

>>91805894
>there is no reason to respect or help other people than either the spook of altrusim
Except that isn't what he says. Stirner's individualism (regardless of how he experienced it personally) is perfectly compatible with Rousseau. That people NEED spooks and outside pressure is an assumption you, like Hobbes are making. The current research that I've seen would also say you're wrong. For better or worse we're social and seek means to those ends. So no. Being social isn't any more a spook than eating is. It's a natural human desire that the individual needs to weigh their enjoyment of against their obsession with, just as it's inappropriate to become a glutton so too do all desires have extremes where the individual becomes a slave to a facet of themselves.

thought I was on /lit/ judging by how gay and libcuck this thread is

File: 1435652437920.png (33KB, 205x252px)

33KB, 205x252px

>>91801004

>>91804018
I don't think he can do that. Guy might be able to see every neuron firing, but that doesn't give him the ability to understand the pattern they form at a level he can make higher-level changes to it.

Also he wasn't predestined to.

>>91805965
If you're going to expand the definition of NEED to literally anything that makes people feel good and you determine to be a natural human desire and behavior we're going to be here all day and you'll have a list of things that aren't spooks but actually biologic requirements and loop back to Hobbes but with naturist backing.

>>91806020
>he wasn't predestined to
>people still don't understand how predetermination works
He's not destined to do it because he chose not to do it. It's not like his destiny is forcing his hand. Everything is him he just knows the answers to the questions he'll ask himself in future before he asks them.

>>91806039
You're literally retarded as a child if you don't get social interaction. There are loads of examples of 'poor' orphanages doing so.
It IS a developmental need and continues to be so even if less than at that delicate stage.

I'm not expanding the definition unreasonably. You just don't like the implication.

>>91805807

Well of course he is. Ted is the Zodiac killer after all

>>91806079
I never said it wasn't, I'm saying that Hobbes is fundamentally right in that outside spooks being needed to actually nurture traits like altruism.

>>91806131
Well that's where we differ. I'd say those traits need to be developed to grow but they don't need to be by spooks. Being aware of what you're doing and why you're doing something is just as powerful as 'because God told you to', 'because you'd go to jail otherwise', 'because a real 'x' would do it'.

Spooks are just flavouring on the medicine to make children take it. The medecine is still there under all the abstraction and always will be. It's just that reality is harder to swallow without but that's called growing up.

>>91806165
The self is a fucking spook, the concept of other people outside of you is a spook. I find it funny how every time I talk to a follower of Stirner they immediately assume that anyone who doens't adhere to their specific set of self enlightened nonsense is some kind of sociopathic monster who is only held back by irrational fears.

>>91806020
>he can change air gold
>but a human neurological pattern is to complex for him to understand
It's arrogant as fuck that humans think they're so special that our minds can't be laid out into fundamental patterns a smarter being could comprehend.

>>91794537
"A compass, I learnt when I was surveying, it'll... it'll point you True North from where you're standing, but it's got no advice about the swamps and dessert and chasm that you'll encounter along the way. If in pursuit of your destination, you plunge ahead, heedless of obstacles, and achieve nothing more than to sink in a swamp... What's the use of knowing True North?"

>>91794537
He was right. There are lines you don't cross. There are things you don't back down from. There is a right and a wrong, and you have to stay the one and not the other. Choosing one means choosing one, even though there's only one to choose. Granted how you go about it is the free will part. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil, and letting evil get off being evil is allowing evil in the world, and more evil would happen since evil men won't "just stop" being evil. Morals are something you have to be stalwart for. Funny how they've dropped that word from the common american language, and the meaning behind it. Funny is for comedians.

>>91806309
The railways solved this with dynamite and throwing countless lives at it. This fag could learn a thing about tenacity and engineering.

>>91806272
>The self is a fucking spook
only if the concept serves to obfuscate from your wants and needs.
>sociopathic monster bla bla
When did I do that. Accepting that certain thigns are spooks doesn't somehow make me spook free you spastic fuck. I'm not tipping a fedora at you about theology I am just being intellectually honest about what purpose that interaction serves.

>>91794537
The fact that he got atomized and everyone went on without him showed that he was wrong. He didn't make a difference.

>>91806329
"This fag" was Abraham Lincoln talking about freeing the slaves while still preserving the union.

>>91806366
We never saw what happened after Blue Penis Never Erect fucked off into space and his "friends" got assumed identities.

>>91806379
The Union solved this with black powder and throwing countless lives at it. This fag learned a thing about tenacity and engineering.

>>91806392
You're hopeless

>>91806354
Your immediate assumption that anyone who follows Hobbes' thinking must be only doing things " 'because God told you to', 'because you'd go to jail otherwise', 'because a real 'x' would do it"

Completely ignoring there is more to why people do things and take duties an responsibility other than they are personally weak or deficient.

>>91806388
We see early glimpses.

In Ozy's manipulated world the USA and USSR are both still alive apparently working in cooperation to prepare for more dimensional aliens.

So from the start we already have an inferior timeline from real life since the brutal regime that is the USSR would still be alive past 1992, possibly subsidized and kept breathing with US resources. So congrats Ozy you kept a regime that killed tens of millions alive.

Not only that, but after a few decades both superpowers would quit being afraid of unknown aliens that haven't shown up in decades and start fighting each other again with more advanced weaponry.

So either Ozy psychic nukes another major city to raise their fear again or we get Cold War 2: Electric Boogaloo

Fuck that purple boy loving faggot. Manhattan was right, "Nothing ever changes"

>>91806452
That was noting to do with hobbes, that was purely trying to give examples of abstraction that would affect altruism. My God, lad. Settle your shit.
Further that you see those reasons as weak and deficient is quite telling of your character.

>>91806020
>>91806276
I'm just making excuses for the author here, but my interpretation is that Manhattan's predestination bullshit was the ultimate form of cowardice.

Manhattan could, physically, rearrange Rorschach's neurons and turn him into Jesus Christ plus the Disciples and Paul to boot, but to do that would mean acknowledging that Manhattan could also rearrange his own brain (or build it differently when he recreated or teleported himself), and to do that would mean embracing his own freedom as a god. Basically, Dr. Limp Dick NEEDS the human brain to be complex, and he NEEDS events to be predestined, and he NEEDS these things because the alternative is just being a guy. A guy with powers beyond mortal understanding, sure, but ultimately a guy.

To take the straightest example, the Comedian calls Limp Dick out on not turning his gun into a banana when he shoots the Vietnamese chick, and the Comedian is 100% right. Limp Dick could have done literally anything, but he didn't, because the future he'd predicted included him standing there naked, dumb and useless while someone died for no reason. He wasn't FORCED to be that way, he chose it, because the alternative would have forced him to be a guy. A nobody. Doing things without knowing precisely how they'd turn out.

It is like that whole business with how you can scan someone's brain with an EKG and know exactly what they'll do before they know they'll do it, except that sometimes everything fires up but the person decides not to act. Or the thing with Schopenhaur about saying No to life. Or Hegelian negation. Basically, Dr Limp Dick REFUSES to assert his will/independence, and so coasts along on the most likely path, since as long as he is doing the dumb shit he knew he would do, at least he knows what will happen.

>>91806535
The thing is it doens't why you do something is secondary t you actually doing something if the end result is the same.

And I am saying that people like you look down upon those as spooks and crutches. If you personally don't see them as such then I misinterpreted your reasoning of why spooks should be abolished.

>>91806467
>brutal regime that is the USSR would still be alive past 1992

Meaning that the crash in life expectancy, rise of AIDS, spread of prostitution and organized crime, and all the other human disasters that accompanied the fall of the USSR are held off for at least a few years.

Of course, the obvious fact that the monster Ozy was holding back was the USA seems to have slipped by you somehow, so whatever.

>>91806612
Yeah I'm sure all those things you listed totally equal out to having two superpowers ready to nuke each other in past 1992...

Also last I checked the USSR was far more expansionist, Imperial and brutal to conquered territory than the USA.

Eat shit and go die in whatever shit hole is still communist in 2017.

>>91806612
You forget that the USA and Soviets are no longer propping up dozens of inhumane dictatorships around the world, and that a large number of former soviet states live far better now than in the past.
All things considered I would call it a fair trade.

>>91806572
Spooks are bad but I am not spook free. I don't look down on people for having them. To be free of spooks takes a lot of fortitude, as you say, humans look for reason and meaning in abstraction.

>end results are the same
Except they aren't. Doing something spook free is purer and more likely to lead to personal fulfillment. It's a truly autonomous action. Using the analogy before: if you help someone only to be a good neighbour despite haitng them you tempt bitterness. Further, lets say you live like that awhile and one day something bad happens to you. You're not worried and you haven't planned ahead too much because you expect people to naturally return the favour. When they don't is when the difference in the two actions is shown anew
To help someone is a mere action. To do it to be a good neighbour ties reputation, obligation and expectation to it
Abstractions aren't real and while they don't hurt anyone when they're working when they go wrong they're like quicksand.

>>91806681
Guys what the FUCK is a spook other than a racial slur for a black person in 50s English.

File: Max_stirner.jpg (10KB, 200x237px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 200x237px

>>91806689
Thank /his/ for this one. Spook comes from a philosopher Max Stiner which as far as I can tell basically argued for man to be amoral because honoring any form of social contract or morality was a "spook"

I may be off but that's basically how 4chan faggots use it.

>>91806689
A spook is a force that affects one's decisions without actually existing in a tangible way, like ideology/abstraction

If you try to be a 'real American' for example, are you even sure what that is? Aren't your coasts flooded with hippies aren't your midlands flooded with reactionaries? Such a thing only exists in your mind and takes whatever shape you give it.
Other people might also envision what a true American is but it's inconsistent. Even if the concept weren't if it doesn't reflect the reality of your country it's simply an idea that you work towards for no tangible reason.

For example. Neighbours are spooks. Do I mean that I'm not living beside people right now? No. However there are a load of concepts and preconceptions that float around the term neighbour beyond the actual reality of just living next to someone. Those things exist only in our heads and shouldn't affect our actions. One should act on their own judgements alone after surveying scene as it exists

File: d5rxvsa5lu-6gprb5-wnqa.png (34KB, 479x427px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 479x427px

>>91806644
Yeah, remember when the USSR staged a false flag attack on its ships so it could "justify" murdering millions of noncombatants and poisoning the very ground across three seperate countries just to prop up a series of incompetent puppet dictators? And how one of those dictators was Literally Pol Pot?
No, wait, that was the USA I'm remembering.
Remember when the USSR plunged Afghanistan (formerly one of the most liberal and progressive mideast nations) back into the stone age and created the very terrorist groups that would orchestrate 9/11?
Shit, I'm sorry, I was remembering the USA again.

Fuck off back to ...
You honestly seem a little to neocon even for /pol/ desu. I have no idea what pit you slithered out of, but fuck off back to that place.

>>91806678
The USA is still propping up inhumane dictatorships all over the world.
As for the Soviet states, some of them have returned to Soviet levels, some have not. On the whole, only Turkmenistan likes the new world, and that country is out of its mind.

>>91806737
I don't really care for the 4chan definition of things but I'll google max stiner, seems like it's better to get it from the source.

>>91806737
>Aren't your coasts flooded with hippies aren't your midlands flooded with reactionaries?
Aren't they just as "true American" as you are since their loyalties still lie with the nation of America?

>>91806737
I hope you're not the anon I was talking to because I've not been using it like that at all

>>91806755
I'm not even American man. The point is that no such thing can ever or will ever exist. It's a spook. A concept. A thought and nothing more.

If you're googling him be cautious of the wording, 'self-interest' Max didn't fuck about and while that is literally what he means the conotations don't reflect the intent of the statement.
As explained in this thread. Max considered that, for most normal people, having friends and enjoying the company of others was a self intersest. Within this context self-interst can be operationalised as something that one chooses for oneself and does so willingly. For example having friends because you want to not because you don't feel you have enough and you'd be a loser if you don't make more.

>>91806749
Doesn't exactly seem mindblowing. Sounds like the sort of stuff any high schooler realizes.

>>91806749
This sounds like overengineered Buddhism, which being German it is.

By the way I''m not sure if you are an American but 'real Americanism' is adhering to the intent and word of the Constitution. Maybe instead of researching some broke proto nihilist you focus on actual civics.

>>91806689
So, there's this Twilight Zone episode where a Board of Directors in a Modern Corporation are laughing at Ignorant Savages, and then one guy stands up and says something on the lines of
>you laugh at Ignorant Superstition, but this building doesn't have a 13th floor, Director #2 has a lucky rabbit's foot, Director #3 believes in the rights of man, and Director #5 believes he owns a house, and Director #6 thinks he's on a board pf directors of an modern corporation. You're all idiots, and only I am smart enough to see through it! Me!
That's not really how the episode goes, but I hope the point gets across. A spook is a fixed idea, something without material reality that you still imagine to exist (another example would be that one fucking asshole who obeys the speed limit on the interstate).

More particularly, spook includes an element of "you think you're so cynical, but you're really the biggest rube in the damn world."

>>91806737
It is a /lit/ meme.

File: 1415809220510.jpg (169KB, 1417x1153px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 1417x1153px

>>91806056
I was mostly joking with that, but it was a major part of Manhattan's character that he doesn't believe himself to have free will. We are all puppets, I am just a puppet that can see the strings, and so forth.


>>91806276
>can alter the basic properties of matter, using his ability to control atomic interactions
>cannot understand human neurological patterns, using his ability to control atomic interactions
Yes, that's exactly how his powers work, you moron.
It's nothing to do with humans being "special". He doesn't have any special understanding of living things, and the most sophisticated thing he has done to them before is blow them up.
Which is what he does to Rorschach.

>tfw you type Rorschach's name right on the first try and have to go back to check whether your spellchecker's working

>>91806749
Oh, so it's Satanism.

>>91806800
I've not met any highschoolers who've articulated Stirner's individualism. A lot of them still cling to spooks.

>>91806802
>muh civics
I think that's a good definition and yet a load of people on the coast might disagree and the consititution should change to say, get rid of guns for the good of the people. That a real American would value their country over their dogma.
What makes you any more right past the beleifs you hold? There is no answer, it's just a spook.

>>91806814
>pursuing a happy secure life under your own free will is devil worship
Fuck off crusader.

>>91806751
What's the matter, capitalism too prosperous to insult?

That poll is laughable, a bunch of old slavic sheep who failed to survive in a capitalist market so they cling to the dictatorship that at least gave them a house and radishes in exchange for total thought control and millions of people dead.

Honestly it's hilarious how much of a shill you are for a dead nation.

>How dare you interfere in Vietnam you horrid American!
>Oh but look at this poll, see Slavs loved becoming communist puppets by threat of force

Enjoy living in America's shadow you worthless commie.

>>91806831
That's literally what Satanism is.

>>91806570
My pet theory is that it's Dr. Manhattan's obedience to authority that allows him to exist. He could try to change the future, but it'd create a time paradox and wipe him from existence. That's why all the attempts to make more of him have failed - none of the candidates had Dr. Osterman's deep-set obedience, his willingness to do whatever was asked of him with hardly a word of protest.
He doesn't know this, he's just never thought he could make decisions by himself, so it doesn't occur to him to try changing things.

>>91806823
...By the supreme law of the land backed by the military and the american people?

>>91806838
>devil worship is selfautonomy along with the responsibility and determination that comes with it
Doesn't exactly sound statnic to me

>>91806813
If he can understand how the smallest particles in the universe come together to form matter, he can understand how biological animals function. He put his body (including his brain) back together from nothing and repeatedly does it again every time he teleports. There's absolutely no reason why he couldn't alter, or at the very least remove, Rorschach's memories.

>>91806838
Satanism is a 200 dollar check you cut to the Church of Satan.

>>91806689
Besides that Stirner thing, it's also a colloquial term for a ghost, or a similar supernatural being.
Or a spy, I think, though I'm not sure where and when that has actually been in use.

>>91806843
Except there's likely more people against guns than not right now so not the people at all. Excpet the law has no inherent value past being a means to extend the will of the people onto the state itself.

So basically it is what you say it is because of the military?

>>91806847
That's literally what Lucifer was trying to bestow upon the human race, while God was completely against it.

>>91806868
No and this is what people who reduce everything down to phantasms will never understand. How the collective idea of something is more than just an idea.

>>91806847
Well, there's evidence of Crowley influencing LaVeyan Satanism via a sort of hero worship. And that guy believed he could summon a god by believing real hard while getting savagely fucked in the butt. So, if you have a degeneracy quota, perhaps that hits it.

>>91806860
Stirner is using it to mean ghost, actually. It's in reference to 'the great specrte over europe' which his commie friends were saying was capitalism. Stirner said they're all retarded and that communism was just another ghost waiting to lurk over europe and then basically started calling everythign that wasn't rooted in reality more than it was human imagination, a spook

>>91806878
Tell me how it isn't. I am open to Swarm mechanics and things like that. I beleive collectives are powerful and sychronisation and patterns are effectively inherent to groups but that doesn't suddenly make an idea reality.

>>91806851
>how the smallest particles in the universe come together to form matter
>how biological animals function
Those are
DIFFERENT
FIELDS!

Fucking Niels Bohr could understand how particles come together to form matter. It's not a particularly hard thing to understand. That did not, by itself, make him a capable brain surgeon.

>>91806884
Satanism is literally a business, if you really believe in God and devils then more power to you but the entire thing is a circus act from start to finish.

>>91806869
>>91806884
>occultism
It's on my to-do list. I'm holding off because I don't think there's a good way to talk about it even if I DID find something of value there. It doesn't come of as very considered or cedible.

File: Ideal.jpg (66KB, 563x500px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 563x500px

>>91795546
>No one can live with a purely black and white morality.
You're not living your life correctly. Its like you're not trying to be a Hero of Justice.

>>91806886
It is a reference to his gram-grams who believed in ghosts, whereas his father would roll his eyes because he was a "modern" "man" and "patriot" and other equally non-existent ideas.

The Ego and His Own predates the Manifesto.

>>91805613
Russia was literally borrowing ships from the US and the US was the one who basically supplied all of the Allies. Stalin and the head general of the Soviets even admit without the US material dick they would've lost to the Germans and got buttfucked even harder.

>Russia won the European Front and all of WWII
This shit needs to end. This was a united war.

>>91806905
Do you honestly think Dr. Manhattan would have any problem learning about anything he wanted? He didn't know how his own biology functioned before he died, but he figured it out pretty easily once he resurrected himself.

>>91795546
>rapist

Who'd he rape?

>murdering Comedian

He killed on behalf of the Government.

>>91806467
coldwar tensions in the 80's were nowhere near what they are in watchmen.

>>91806903
Individualism is impossible to maintain in group. Say what you wish but the minute you hear or read someone elese, even someone you agree with, your reality changes. You mentioned swarm dynamics and that is essentially what I mean by ideas having manifest in something other than just in the mind, once it moves out of the mind and into communication it is now something in between action and thought when in the group.

Stiner was wrong in saying the individual can overcome his spooks with enough thought and still be a part of a wider society.

>>91806905
They're not different for Manhattan, though. He can teleport living people to Mars, clone himself, etc.

>>91806840
All you've done is make virtue out of necessity. That doesn't change that it is fundamentally cowardice before the potential of being a real, fallible human being that restricts Manhattan.

>>91806957
he didn't kill his Vietnamese baby momma for the government

>>91806948
>source: anecdotes i pulled out of my ass just now

>>91807017
I disagree. The self is not inherent. It grows and changes. It's desires vary and differ. Individualism through Stirner's principles is more akin to mindfullness. Making sure that you're not doing something or 'liking something' on merits other than the content of the activity. Just beacuse it was introduced to you externally doesn't change the autheticity of the experience.
Addmittedly Stirner had his own views but he basically said, these are mine get your own. By nature indicidualism is highly idiosyncratic but the principles are uniform. Judge based on the content of the question not the context. Act in moderation. Maintain reasonable self control (avoid complete descent into vice).

As long as you're concious of the effects that society at large is having and NOT pretending they're magic rules rather than societal effects and trends Stirner's individualism is perfectly primed for large groups.

>>91806957
>who'd he rape
Come on man.

>>91807017
>>91807074
Further, to refere all the way back to one of the posts that started this chain, I think it would actually create more accord than not.

With Individualistic institutions and people in active autonomy they would not seek membership to things because they should or must, nor would they freely sacrifice many of their interests to do so.
Those perscriptive memberships 'you're in this team so act this way' would become sparse and descriptive groups would become dominant, ones where people collaborate towards a mutual goal without concerning themselves with what their members do outside this specific objectives.

We see examples of both groups in our current societies and I don't think one would ever full depose the other however, from my experience and perhaps yours descriptive collectives are much more stable and productive.

>>91802522

That's just silly.

>>91807074
>pretending they're magic rules
No one thinks that though, it;s some weird projection Stirner fans have that everyone is as mindful to arbitrary rules of mindfulness as they are and when they do something it is becasue they make a willing choice to enslave themselves to it.

Removing context and only focusing on content does nothing but limit the answers and is incredibly impractical for a philosophy that claims it's rooted in practicality.

>>91798366

Christ, you're dumb.

>>91807074
>>91807109
It seems like to live a life true to Stirner's philosophy one would have to become an ascetic recluse. It's basically Buddhism without the concept of Nirvana since Stirner would see that as a spook.

>>91807163
Enlightenment is the abolishment of the Ego so if he bothered studying eastern philosophies instead of getting mad at communists and dying from a bug bite he might have learned that.

>>91807122
It's not a projection so much as it's an exageration to distinquish between the two perspectives.
Some poster not so long ago touted the law as an authority on the definition of a true american. That foundless belief that the law has meaning beyond the people who (should) define it and those who enforce it.

It's those little conceptions beyond the tangible reality of the concept that are spooky. It's like when I say neighbours are a spook and someone saying neighbours are real? Are you retarded but really it's the expectation and obligation around the role that is spooky.

>>91807163
Not really. As long as you're aware of and in control of the pressures that threaten to superceed your self intersts you're fine.
Few people want to live as recluses. Doing so would be spooky as fuck, even if the premise is to remove spooks

>>91807182
Except he didn't want to abolish world desires and concepts of self he just wanted to make decisions based on reality so that he could optimise his autonomy and truly live his life.

>>91807214
What was Stirner's opinion on sexual intercourse? It seems like a concept full of spooks.

>>91806847
Satanists don't actually believe in Satan; the Devil is a goddamn metaphor for freedom. The only people who actually believe in Satan are some Christians and utter idiots.

>>91807226
Gotta say I don't know, man. It would be intersting though, yeah. I can't see why the act itself would be an issue but all the stipulated significance? Yeah, shits spooky as fuck.

>>91807056
>Pulled out my ass

"Without American production, the United Nations could never have won the war" - Joseph Stalin during a dinner at the Tehran Conference, 1943

"I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin’s views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were “discussing freely” among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany’s pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don’t think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so." -Nikita Khrushchev in his Memoirs

"Today some say the Allies didn’t really help us… But listen, one cannot deny that the Americans shipped over to us material without which we could not have equipped our armies held in reserve or been able to continue the war" - Soviet Marshal G.K. Zhukov, 1963 Interview

Literally. THE SOVIET LEADERSHIP straight up CONFIRM without the UNITED STATES the SOVIET UNION was fucked.

>>91807054
It was war. Things happen. Besides 1) she attacked him, and 2) Manhattan could have stopped him at any moment, making him complicit.

>>91807090
Who did he actually rape?

>>91807301
I wouldn't exactly use Georgy "I must unite the Russian people under one cemetary" Zhukov as a glowing review.

File: 1433918817396.png (195KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 500x281px

>two detailed converstations about political history and philosophical viability have been going on as if the other wasn't even in the thread
>most /his/ threads can't even manage one detailed conversation
>most /co/ threads can hardly avoid shit posting and cancer
Thank you Moore you magical British Wizard

>>91796029
Are you retarded?
A slippery slope argument is only a fallacy when there isn't a plausible logical link between event/argument 1 and event/argument n.
All slippery slopes have to have a connection it's only a fallacy when the degree of plausible connection drifts too far or jumps from 1 to n too abruptly.
It's like saying "stop raising bus fair or one day buying a car will always be cheaper"

>>91795754
>without any sort of direct connection

Its a sliding slop of morality based on small steps instead of large ones, the connection is there.

>>91794537
adrian's peace through genocide would've never worked in the long term even if rorschach did agree to keep quiet

>>91806949
>Dr. Manhattan
>"A live body and a dead body contain the same number of particles" Manhattan
>"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon" Manhattan
>wanting to learn a single thing about biology or human psychology
Honestly, if he gave a fuck about Rorschach's feelings he probably could have resolved the situation without even having to do super brain surgery.

>>91808386
>if he gave a fuck about Rorschach's feelings
Suddenly you discover humanity. Convenient. If you'd cared from the start, none of this would've happened.

>>91795877
Was he cute

>>91806689
it's a thing you think is real but isn't, like your ideology or morals.

>>91796731

Obamas mistake was believing that congress would prioritize actually doing the jobs they were elected for over carrying a petty grudge for 8 fucking years straight.

You cant really work with people who are willing to hold their breath and piss away billions of dollars of the american peoples money on an obstruction plan they know in advance will never work just because they can. Working together has to come from both sides.

>>91809532
Isn't politicians' job to represent their constituents?

If their constituents didn't agree with Obama congress was right to be obstructionist.

>>91797359

None of thst stuff you list is against freedom of speech, you know. Freedom of speech protects you from censorship by the government, full stop.

If a CEO gets caught saying something absurdly racist and it creates such an uproar that it affects the success of the company due to the bad publicity, and forces inside the company use that as an excuse to oust the guy? That never goes against freedom of speech.

>>91794537
No, that was the whole point of his character. That he wasn't right.

>>91809709
This is a bit disingenuous.

Yeah, freedom of speech is for the government to not hunt you down for what you say, but the point of that, was in a time where the government was the main "handler" of what gets to be said or not to allow people to say what they want.

As we move to a more privatized world, the right has to be expanded.

>>91809766

Thats an entirely different argument, though.

>>91807487
there is no logical connection because half the information is hidden by obamas press

>>91809823
It fits, because I was an entirely different anon who just saw your post and replied to it.

>>91809853

That makes sense.

So, just out of curiousity, how would you expand freedom of speech in the modern day?

>>91809709
What you describe doesn't go against the letter but very much against the spirit of the law. The principle of free speech is supposed to protect unpopular speech from those who have the power to suppress it. The idea that "those with power" may not necessarily be the government but can also apply to public opinion punishing any defectors is not novel. It has been expressed at least as far back as John Stuart Mill and probably earlier. If the principle of free speech is to have any worth at all, it needs to be held firm against anyone who has the means to suppress speech.
Incidentally that's precisely the reason why modern liberals like to go "The 1st amendment only protects you from the gov't and not from me ;^)" They know they have public opinion on their side at the moment and wish to weaponize it to suppress the speech of their opposition. As soon as the tide were turning the other way, they'd be the first to be screaming for free speech, the letter of the law be damned.

>>91794537
>91794537
if he's wrong does that mean "always compramise, even in the face of armageddon" is the morally correct thing to do?

>>91810180
The opposote of love is not hate, but indifference.
By way of analogy, the opposite of 'NEVER COMPROMISE' is not 'ALWAYS COMPROMISE' but 'you may or may not compromise at your convenience'

>>91810139
It's a very tricky situation, because, on the one hand, one could make the argument that because an employee said some shitty stuff on facebook, customers will dislike him and the business would lose sales, so it makes sense to fire him.
But on the other, how many people would be okay with the same situation, but the customer just said gays should be able to marry and adopt and the employer goes
>well, I dun mind his opinions, but you see boy, we're a texas business and down here south, folks don't like that sort of talk. So it's bad for business, you know? Gotta let him go

People would be upset for that.
The employee would be able to sue. But the previous one, wouldn't? Isn't it a bit wrong if the government protects -by acknowledging your suing- if you sue for being fired for some speech, but not for some other speech? Even the current form of freedom of speech should make the government treat speech equally.

What I do, is keep out of the workplace stuff irrelevant to firing. And have people being fired come with a rational justification as to why they're fired that the employer can prove. So that the employer just fire someone for something they posted online and pretends they fired him for something else.

In the workplace, yeah, you should have to talk however your employer wants, it's his business. But what you say outside should have no consequence.

>>91810149

But in that example, the CEOs speech isnt being surpressed. He said what he wanted to say, and he was not prevent or directly punished for doing so. He was simply not protected from the consequences of his actions.

In that example, what would you do? Force people to endorse his company or buy his product against their will? Or prevent the company from removing a liability from their ranks that was costing them money? You cant wave a magic wand and make people not care about what he said, you can only restrict how they can respond to it.

>>91810327
Oh bugger off with the "consequences of actions are not protected" bullshit. It's grade S sophistry. The gov't could throw you into prison for criticizing it and then go
>Sorry dude, you were able to say what you wanted to say, but that doesn't protect you from the consequences ;^)
Same fucking difference.

The answer in such situations is, of course, tricky as the other anon said. Personally I think the principle of free speech needs to be considered as something sacred by the general public if it is to work as intended. Therefore, ideally, the company should be free to fire the CEO, but should not exercise that right because they refuse to cave in to some twitter mob. Ideally, there would be a pushback against the pushback of the surpressors, cancelling each other out. People should not be punished for saying unpopular things, whether by the gov't or some offended part of the public, full stop.
Only exception being if it does directly result in bodily harm, e.g. the CEO saying to an audience "Niggers should be murdered!" and the audience acting on this. But this would be a high bar to clear. In most cases you won't find a direct link of someone's unpopular speech to the bodily harm of another person.

Let me remind you that if this "hate speech should not be protected" shit was enforced since day 1, AMERICA WOULD STILL BE RULED BY THE CHURCH.

Why are some of today's liberals so eager to enforce rules that will bite them in the ass if a real tyrant actually shows up?

>>91807369
Not him, but he attempted rape on the first Silk Spectre, but IIRC another Minute Man stopped him. That one was pretty unambiguous, he tried to rape her after battering her a bit and bending her over a pool table. However, later when they conceived the 2nd Silk Spectre, it was consensual.

Being hit with a bottle is pretty brutal but I don't think it justifies lethal assualt with a gun, especially against a pregnant woman, in almost any legal system.

>>91810595
There's always been limits on free speech bruh. Shouting FIRE in a crowded theater and such.

>>91797454
Mental gymnastics, just like Rorschach.

>>91797541
War
War never changes

>>91800051
>>91805165
>>91807156
This samefagging.

>>91810653
Because that would directly result in bodily harm of other people.

The modern movement of restricting people's speech because it might hurt liberal fee fees is rather novel. Or maybe not quite. There used to be movements who wanted (and succeeded) to restrict speech because it hurt christian fee fees, back when Christianity ruled public opinion with an iron fist. As >>91810595 implied, it's only thanks to the principle of free speech that liberals eventually gained the upper hand in the first place. And now they try to pull the same shit as their former oppressors. Truly, history repeats itself.

>>91810547

Thats a direct punishment, though. The whole point of the example is that none of the consequences involve the intervention of another power. You are creating a totally different situation thst isnt equivalent.

>>91810788
Tell me, does it really make a difference to you whether the government slaps you with a fine for speaking your mind, or if an angry mob successfully destroys your livelihood because you spoke your mind? For me it sure as hell doesn't.
If anything, the angry mob might be even worse than the gov't. At least the gov't tends to have clear rules which are laid out for anyone to see and you can defend yourself in court. Whereas the angry mob tends to strike at random and without any accountability whatsoever.

>>91810907
>hating your fellow man so much you cry out to wrapped in the big, strong arms of authoritarianism
I only pity you.

>>91810907

As you say, the difference is that the government is bound by laws, and public opinion is not. You also are ignoring that the angry group rallying against you is them exercising THEIR free speech. So long as it doesnt involve physical acts of destruction or violence, any freedom of speech protection you would invoke applies to them as well.

>>91805807
Wait what other politicians read comics?

>>91811054
That's why it is tricky. But the fact remains, if you can't speak your mind for fear of punishment - whether because of gov't or mob intervention - then free speech is functionally dead. What's needed is a strong culture of valueing free speech, so that angry mobs may exist but can't accomplish anything of substance. Claiming it to be acceptable for a mob to destroy a man's livelihood because he expressed an unpopular opinion is the opposite of such a culture. It's the first step towards the abolishment of free speech.

File: 1464820698801.jpg (178KB, 958x1280px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 958x1280px

>>91811167
Obummer shouldn't surprise you. Said he was a Conan fan among other things.

>>91811460
Surprizing, but not really out of character for Obama. A lot of Conan has Conan just wandering from town to town doing the right thing.

>>91794537
he was autistic

File: watchmen-back-cover.jpg (365KB, 1280x866px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1280x866px

>>91805992
One could well argue Watchmen threads belong on /lit/ because of its status as world literature.

>>91796731
This.

>>91796990
>He's been crying for a while even though no one could tell through the mask.
aren't we all, anon... aren't we all...

>>91815879
Is Rorschach, dare I say, /ourguy/?

>>91794537
totally

>>91800201
>it doesn't matter that you've twice elaborated with points I can't refute
>I'm right because I'm angry

>>91794537
No, he was wrong, and that was the point of his character. Letting the world end because it proves you right is pure hubris.

That's why Dr. Manhattan killed him. Rorschach lost perspective. Saving people and being heroes is never about proving you are right. It's about saving the world, even from itself.

>>91819712
If everybody in the world adopted Rorschach's morals, it would be an alright place to live in at the least.

If everybody in the world adopted Veidt's morals, the bodies would pile skyhigh because nobody would have touble to deceive and murder for "the greater good."

It was Veidt who suffered from hubris.

>>91819858

If everybody in the world adopted Rorschach's morals, they would fucking murder each other until only a handful of like minded psychopaths were left.

>>91797454
>14 years old visits /4chan/

>>91821128
Except unlike Veidt, Rorschach actually does not murder indiscriminately. He only sets out to punish evil people. If you're innocent you have nothing to fear from Rorschach and his morals. It's Veidt who might still murder you even if you're totally innocent cause you're just a pawn in his grand schemes for "utopia."

>>91821279
What if he is wrong and does not realize it in time
His morality is shit
The universe does not work in absolutes
So we shouldn't aswell

>>91821353
I like to assume he would take responsibility if he realized he made a grave error and had wrongly jugded an innocent. Even then, it would be one innocent harmed by accident. Meanwhile Veidt harms millions of innocents on purpose. Now that's a shit morality.

>>91821279
there are as many definitions of evil as there are stars in the sky
think about it. in a world where everyone acted like rorscharch, there would be millions of murders committed every day by people who think that drinking alcohol, smoking, eating meat, getting tattoos, and any other such lifestyle choice is a sin
and millions more murders committed to punish those people for killing people for unjust reasons
who in turn would be killed because no, those reasons were just, fuck you

>>91816275
It's time to shitpost.

>>91821461
Rorschach doesn't murder everyone he slightly disapproves of, that's not what his morality is about. IIRC he only kills the worst criminals who escaped punishment despite deserving it, your murderers and rapists.
Nice straw man though.

>>91809681
they also deliberately misinformed their constituents and lied about their own policies to gain an artificial high ground. on top of that not only did they spend their time needlessly stopping the presidents progress they made none of their own.
the republican side of congress made a ow to obstruct Obama as much as they could pretty much as soon as he was sworn in, and despite that Obama still made some headway with his plans. so if you want to blame anyone for lack of change that lay squarely with the republican side of congress for the last eight years.
not that the next four are looking any brighter, the sheer incompetence of our president and his team and willingness of republican congress to embrace it is telling. heres hoping hes thrown out before he watses anymore time, money and resources than he already has

>>91821353
>universe doesn't work in absolutes
>universe
>not absolutes
What is this relativistic garbage? Yes it does. It is governed by a foundational set of laws the define all other laws and interactions. The entire thing is cosistent and causal. How much more absolute can you possibly expect it to be?

>>91812889
When everyone is autistic nobody shall be. You know, because they won't be able to recognize the social cues of autism in each other.

>>91821773
>lying to constituants
The second countries started needing to keep war secrets was the second informed voting died. No one knows what the fuck is going on. Experiements, technologies, failsafes, internments. There's stuff from WWII that's still locked down.

If you can't know for any reason then you can't vote about it. If you can't approve or dissaprove then they can do whatever at their discretion.
It doesn't matter who you elect, you'll never be making an informed descion.

>>91821792
Only humans deal in absolutes
We use it to explain what we can't explain
The universe works perfectly in harmony, outside absolutes

>>91822731
Now try and argue that without the mysticism and sophistry

>>91806366
actually Rorschach was the one that propelled the story by getting the other heroes to figure out who killed the comedian

>>91822774
Read Dune
It will explain far better than me
I don't remember most of it

>>91823010
Dune is one of my favourite series. I remember all of it.

How about actually telling me what you're trying to say. Dune says believing in conceptual absolutes is bad because one can never know the entirety of existence themselves. Not that things aren't absolute but that the warrants people build impede ones ability to openly accept facts as they appear

>>91823077
That's just half of it though

>>91823209
What's the rest you fucking tit. I've asked you to clarify and you tell me to read 6 books like a smug cunt. Turns out I've read them and know them better than you and you still won't give me a fucking reply.

>>91823253
It's on the first one
Go re-read it
It might also be the third or the fifth one, I don't remember

>>91823317
I want you to know in your heart that not only were you wrong but you went out like a bitch- throwing a tanty.
Universe is absolute.

File: 46456465456456875789678[.jpg (72KB, 720x690px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 720x690px

>>91823405
It's not
Don't narrow your mind like that, it's bad for humans to deal in absolutes

>>91823740
>accpeting the observable reality
>instead of meme shit
>narrow

>>91824937
Your observable reality is just momentarily

File: 1482415626501.jpg (46KB, 437x501px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 437x501px

>>91815879
He's always been /ourguy/

>>91819858
People like you scare me. You really lack reading comprehension. This is why dopes like Nick Spencer think it's alright to be a cryptofascist.

>>91810261
well that's the thing the second wouldn't be able to sue unless like he was gay and then that discrimination
people most certainly get fired for that kind of thing if it benefits a company, but just like the first example it would go under "the employee was let go for views not aligning for company standards" and people would probably protest just like people protest places like Starbucks for having rainbow cups for pride week or what ever.
thats the thing, the right does ostracize and attack those who don't align with their views just as much as the left does they've just been doing it longer so it doesn't seem special.

>>91826705
yes?