What is your moral compass? Mine: Everything that benefits Whites

Mine: Everything that benefits myself is good, everything that is harmful to myself is bad.

File: 1495362467040.jpg (228KB, 1280x880px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1280x880px

>>128642514
Very good.

>>128642615
Very short-sighted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pgnng3bVlc

>>128642514
Anything that reduces suffering and increases well-being is good. The bigger the scale the better.

Generally this will lead to "everything good for whites is good", because the better off whites are, the better off the rest of the world will be.

Anything that annoys me should be removed from the Earth

File: opo0328a.jpg (393KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1280x1024px

>>128642514

>Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself, within reason
>But before anything else, protect your family, even if you have to go to hell doing it or kill everyone else on Earth

t. Jew.

I used a revised neo-classical 6 point morality compass ranging from totally good to really bad

>>128642910
nice cuck sets, cuck boy

slave off for others benefit, yes this pleases me

File: 1469926017557.jpg (193KB, 714x960px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 714x960px

>>128642514

>>128642514
All things are permissible. All things are not beneficial.

What does the government say?I do the exact opposite.

File: 1495353365965.jpg (58KB, 600x395px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 600x395px

>>128643893
>Helping your people = "cucked slavery"
McTomahawk detected

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reAvWtL4ecE

>>128643745
You sound like a chink.
>flag
Oh right. A chink pretending to be a Jew.

File: Ancient_Celts_11.jpg (170KB, 822x1136px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 822x1136px

>>128644751

Chinese people aren't really into moral philosophy in the Western sense with an emphasis on individual ethics.

>>128642514
So if a Chinese person murders a whole family of Africans by pulling them apart with metal hooks, then sets fire to a pit full of kittens, and then proceeds to cut off his dick and fuck himself in the ass with it, and this all happened on some obscure island far away from any whites and had no significant effects on any white people, you would have no moral opinion on any of that whatsoever?

>>128646421
The kittens should not be harmed, because it would cause emotional pain inside me - also killing these kittens probably does not benefit the White race. I do not really care too much about the Blacks though, they are usually a great plague. But as long as it does not benefit the White race and there is no threat of getting harmed I do not want any living beings to suffer or get killed unecessarily.

>>128647407
>The kittens should not be harmed, because it would cause emotional pain inside me
Why? Also, this reflects a blatant egoism; do you consider egoism to helpful to the white race?

>also killing these kittens probably does not benefit the White race
Nor does it harm the white race, so you should be morally indifferent. Yet you assert that the kittens "should not" be harmed.

>I do not really care too much about the Blacks though, they are usually a great plague
So what about keeping them as slaves? That would surely serve the white race if theey were never to be freed

>But as long as it does not benefit the White race and there is no threat of getting harmed I do not want any living beings to suffer or get killed unecessarily.
This is inconsistent with your rule. If they don't help or hurt the white race, you should be entirely indifferent as to whether or not they die or suffer according to your rule, no matter how brutal the death or how extreme and prolonged the suffering.

>>128642514
>everything that benefits whites
i'd say everything that benefits whites and hurts non whites

>>128648466
I feel compassion with the kittens because it is an evolutionary trait of Whites to preserve nature and animals, I am born with this. I am a part of the White race so it is not a situation of indifference.

Yes, slaves are fine. Actually slavery was never abolished, Jews just managed to make it invisible by there double interest debt slavery.

In a situation of indifference I add the rule no unnecessary sufferings or killings because it is an unpleasant feeling.

>>128649112
Someone's pain is often someone others gain.

>>128649566
>I feel compassion with the kittens because it is an evolutionary trait of Whites to preserve nature and animals, I am born with this. I am a part of the White race so it is not a situation of indifference.
The tendency to hit people who make you angry, to consume what you have now and not save it, and to shrink from danger are all evolutionary traits inherent to some degree (varying by race) in all people. Considerable willpower, patience, and fortitude are required to overcome these traits and exhibit traits traditionally considered to be virtuous by white peoples. Therefore to simply site the evolutionary nature of a trait is no proof of its moral efficacy. Anger makes a man fight when he must, consumption makes greatest use of resources when scarcity of the same or death is imminent and unavoidable, and fleeing from danger is pragmatic on a self-evident basis, and conversely compassion towards animals and nature can prevent a person from doing what they must to survive in a desperate situation. Thus there is no direct logical reason to assume that traits evolved are good or bad for whites in their current settings.

>In a situation of indifference I add the rule no unnecessary sufferings or killings because it is an unpleasant feeling
Pain, humiliation, and shame are unpleasant feelings yet they have produced the men who have built white civilizations. Why are unpleasant feelings bad for whites?

Further, why care about whites? If it is because they are like an extended family and you are biologically designed to care about family, you have to readdress my first point about biological traits not necessarily being virtuous or helpful in themselves. Some traits are helpful, others not, and some can only be considered good as being means to another end, which would shift the moral from the traits themselves to what they serve.

If you care about whites because of their achievements, then you must explain why the things achieved are good in themselves.

>>128651973
Nigger, I already stated that I only act based on a pure rational basis in the sense of considering benefit and harm for Whites. In the special situation of indifference, where there is neither harm nor benefit I added the rule that nobody should suffer unnecessarily simply because it makes me feel well.

And I want Whites to exist because we are the only race created in God's image. We are literally half Gods and this world was just created to be inhabited and ruled by us. Moreover, I think my genes are worth to be preserved and alone the thought that my race will continue to exist and prosper gives me great joy.

>>128646421
i could literally care less except for a vague appreciation that chinese are also a high-tier race and therefore sort of vaguely approve

>>128651973
shut up shekelberg

>>128642514
Everything that I instinctively recognise as good is good. Everything that I instinctively recognise as bad is bad.

(This is the true moral compass of everyone btw)

However, a technique that I often use when I'm not sure is trying to identify the form and substance of a given phenomenon. If the form dominates the substance, it's good, otherwise it's degenerate.

For example, in politics, the state is the form and the people the substance; if the state derives its legitimacy from the people (democracy) it's degenerate.

>>128642514
We /nogvalues/ nao!

>>128653674
Your thought process seems very disorganized and lacks a fundamental basis.

>Nigger, I already stated that I only act based on a pure rational basis in the sense of considering benefit and harm for Whites
You said nothing of any rational basis, but even if you had you'd be wrong. No person is capable of acting on a pure rational basis because human beings posses non-ration traits that are inherent to our biology. This is, in fact, a point I was trying to make; traits we posses as evolutionary developments consist of a blend of rational and irrational. Those traits that are irrational must be consciously overcome in order to create traits that are more consistently and reliably advantageous to us in civilized societies. Therefore, just because we developed a trait via evolution doesn't mean we should consider it good. If that's the case, then "good" must be rooted in something other than evolution or biology. What is that thing in which the good is rooted?

> In the special situation of indifference, where there is neither harm nor benefit I added the rule that nobody should suffer unnecessarily simply because it makes me feel well
Again, why is it good to feel well? We don't feel well while exhausting ourselves for the sake of fitness or defeating an enemy, or when we undergo shame to convince us to change our bad behavior or face ostracism. Feeling well is not a good in itself, so your feeling are fucking arbitrary and not "purely rational".

>And I want Whites to exist because we are the only race created in God's image. We are literally half Gods and this world was just created to be inhabited and ruled by us
Then isn't morality rooted in God and not what is beneficial to White people? Shouldn't you strive foremost to please God and not your race? If God only cares about your race, then unnecessary suffering of other races shouldn't matter to you in the slightest. If God cares about other races, then shouldn't you strive to do so as well?

>>128653674
Moreover, I think my genes are worth to be preserved and alone the thought that my race will continue to exist and prosper gives me great joy.
So joy is good in itself? That would not be logically consistent with your rule as there is great joy to be had in degenerate behavior like non-marital anal sex, which I'm certain you would argue is bad for whites.

Your values are not grounded in a solid logical basis and you should get to work on changing that or risk being a detriment to the white race by dint of your reckless or stupid motivations. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

File: stirner.gif (10KB, 279x305px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 279x305px

>>128642615
/thread

>>128642910
>Very short-sighted
the human life isn't that short

>>128654773
Debate me you stupid fag.

>>128642987
>Anything that reduces suffering and increases well-being is good. The bigger the scale the better.

This would mean that good and evil are relative because everyone has a different utility function.

Which is, in my opinion, false because I believe in the unicity of truth (nothing, empirically, has ever been both true and false) and because in the sense of this debate ("moral compass"), we're asking the question: "what are good and evil as NORMATIVE and UNIVERSAL concepts?" - otherwise it doesn't make sense to debate our conception of good and evil since they're equally true / equally false.

>>128655552
>No person is capable of acting on a pure rational basis

I would go even further: reason itself is irrational because it is always based on postulates which can not be proven right or wrong in a rational way.

>>128642514
Op is, was, and will always be a fag

>>128656284
no because you're just talking in big annoying pseudointellectual circles like a jew

>>128657978
It is at least incomplete as it does require non-rational axioms to sustain itself. I think it's pretty arrogant though to assume that a model which contradicts its foundations is ultimately sustainable, let alone the only good way to draw conclusions.

>>128658703
>a model which contradicts its foundations

Are you referring to OP? I was only talking in general because I'm tired of the rationalist superstition.

I don't agree with the idea that good and evil are relative, so I can't agree with a racial conception of good and evil, even as a racist.

>>128659367
No I'm referring to rationalism. It's founded on non-rational axioms, yet assumes its a rational basis. The model contradicts the foundations, which I think we agree on.

>I don't agree with the idea that good and evil are relative, so I can't agree with a racial conception of good and evil, even as a racist
This is what I'm trying to make OP understand.