The forces of evil cannot win. It's literally in the rules

Fuck off shill

>>134208795
Evil is a matter of relative. Your rule book is meaningless

What rules book?

File: yangyin.gif (2MB, 460x460px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x460px

>>134208795
The world is perfect. Good and evil chase one another perpetually. How would we know Good if it weren't for Evil? How would we know Evil if it weren't for Good? How could it be any other way?

>>134209356
Thats like saying light and dark or hot and cold is subjective.

>>134209414
Basic Occultism

>>134208795
Hmm, I have to say, that your rulebook is pretty evil. There is nothing more evil than torture and oppression for its' own sake, and it seems that it's exactly what you're doing.

>>134208795
It can win temporary, but only to create divides and force people to chose a side.

In the Bible Jesus says "I have come here to divide". People have to choose a side, embrace the world or reject it, and etc.

>>134209628
If the rulebook wasn't evil you wouldn't have free will.

Evil needs to exist for free will to be a thing.

hahahahahahaha this fag thinks that there are rules.

>>134209705
As above So below

Rules is the wrong word, I am using it rather loosely here. There are cosmic laws and forces that exists however.

>>134209554

Not at fucking all. That's the biggest false equivalency I have ever heard you moron

Evil and good are man made concepts and are indeed subjective. They're intangible and are not guiding principles in the universe or scientific or able to be scientifically quantified

>>134209869
>its relative whether fucking and torturing little kids for pleasure is evil

>>134208795
>The forces of evil cannot win. It's literally in the rules book. Evil only exist so Good can exert its authority over it.

Thats a lie and a psyop

Evil and good are mental entrapments. It's all about agency and exerting power over others

>>134209966
>its subjective whether fucking and torturing little kids for pleasure is evil

>>134209852
>There are cosmic laws and forces that exists however.

And none of them have to do with the concept of good and evil.

File: IMG_0892.png (342KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 640x360px

>>134209414
The superior battle tactic of random chaos. See genetic hotspots and marvel that what seems idiotic and random keeps you alive.

>>134210184
>The superior battle tactic of random chaos.

This anon gets it.

>>134209687
>Evil needs to exist for free will to be a thing.

That is a highly doubtful statement. But in that case, either evil is equal to good or the free will is temporary.

Still, I'm absolutely sure my free will would exist if nothing but my consciousness would exist.

>>134208795
Ahh the hero's conquest, cornerstone in the very cosmic soul progression program that is this reality. Strife builds and grows the soul with lessons, the light has already won, ((they)) just refuse to bow out gracefully.

>>134209983

Honestly yeah, it fucking is. Morality is subjective. At one point in history somewhere that could have been justified and accepted. Not saying it's right myself.

>>134210572
>if society justifies and accepts it that makes it ok.

This is why (((they))) appear to be winning.

>>134210737

You're a fucking retard.

You're strawmanning and misrepresenting my argument. Shut the fuck up.

The point behind that wasn't meant to say that it was right, but that morality is subjective and that good and evil don't exist.

>>134210737

Holy fuck manipulating idiots like you ruin arguments. You're so dumb that you can't even represent an argument correctly.

>>134208795

It's really hard for me to imagine what it's like to be stupid enough to spend your time posting about inane shit like this and think you're deep.

>>134210898
>>134210982
>its relative whether fucking and torturing little kids for pleasure is evil

Please go kill yourself

File: 1407573089780.png (36KB, 342x238px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 342x238px

>>134208795
>>134209554
>>134209687
>>134209852
>>134209983
>>134210046
>>134210283
>>134210572
>>134210737
this is what happens when someone overdoses on spooks

>>134211361
Yes. Fucking kids for pleasure was OK everywhere some 1000 years ago.

>>134211652
That was for legitimate reasons. You needed to breed at a younger age so family had more children so they had more workers on the farms.

There is a difference between marrying a 12 year old and fucking a dozen different 12 year olds in a month.

>>134211361

Keep strawmanning. Shows how much of a Neanderthal you are that can't hold a rational discourse or understand basic facts.

In fact. I hope your entire family gets raped by aborted fetuses, fa ggot.

>>134211818

So it isn't evil if it's for legitimate reasons??? Hmm..

>>134211939
>accuses me of strawmanning
>equates marrying 12 year olds with raping torturing and snuffing 12 year olds

>>134211818
It had nothing to do with breeding, retard
Cabin boys were young boys put on ships during long voyages specifically for the purpose of getting fucked
It was quite literally a rite of passage to manhood for sailors

File: 1498846245841.png (130KB, 536x593px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 536x593px

>>134208795

>>134212038
1000 years ago there was no malicious intentions in marrying a 12 year old, you did it since you needed more workers on the farm.

Pedophiles and sadistic torturers/killers have no legitimate intentions behind their actions.

>>134212110

Did you just admit you were strawmanning? You just said you supported molesting 12 year olds against their will

>>134212212

There was no malicious intention in marrying a 12 year old for their bodies. Only to molest them and rape them as an underdeveloped being. That's good!!

>>134212217
>>134212316
The autism is strong with you.

>>134212427

Says the one who approves of molesting 12 year olds. That's evil.

>>134210898
calling pedo-satanism evil seems pretty legit

>>134211652
so what
kys plz

>>134212515
It wasn't molesting you dipshit.

It was literally the norm. The child was ok with, her parents were ok with it and society was ok with it.

There is a difference between marrying a 12 year old and abducting and raping a 12 year old.

Holy shit kys

>>134211818
Hmm, no. There were brothels, and if you raided or invaded foreign nations, or did that to your slaves or serfs or servants, noone would do as much as twitch an eye.

>>134212702
So morality is a social construct, and not a constant and unchanging idea.

>>134212714

So a child is allowed to give meaningful consent at that age? It wanted this and approved of it 100% and not just by their parents? But oh wait..

>>134212881

Exactly, that's the nail I was trying to hit on the head the entire time. The other guy doesn't get it

>>134212714

"It was the norm." So in conclusion, evil and good are intangible concepts and aren't logical or scientific enough to describe the universe.

>>134208795
Evil can't win? Have you been in a coma for the past twenty years?

>>134212881
so what if it is or isn't? if a society wants to rid itself of pedo-satanists who the fuck should stop them?

>>134209553
There would be no need to name good without evil. If there weren't evel then only good would exist and it would have no name.

>>134212714
You need to be 18 or older to post on this board dude

>>134213096

Yeah it's not wrong to get rid of pedophiles. But that's why the argument was being made, because people here in this thread believed good and evil were actually a thing.

>>134213061
In the long run evil cannot win.

>>134212881
So by that logic if the population of the planet was reduced by 90% and the remaining 10% where satanic pedophiles, suddenly being a satanic pedophile is morally ok?

>>134213058
in conclusion: if there's a child raping pedo satanist lurking in the village, the villagers will eventually crucify it, no matter how good a philosopher it is.
- Socrates

>>134208795
>It's literally in the rules book
[citation needed]

>the universe will eventually correct itself.
muh mystic magical bullshit that allows me to justify my lazyness and letting me feel like my enemies will be punished just by me doing nothing

Stop being such a pathetic fuck that needs to rely on magic. Take control of your own destiny or just kill yourself already.

File: IMG_4095.jpg (296KB, 800x1305px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 800x1305px

>>134209553
>>134208795

Sounds like Zoroastrianism to me

Have you checked it out? It's a comfy faith.

>>134208795
>The forces of evil cannot win. It's literally in the rules book. Evil only exist so Good can exert its authority over it.

Welp, you heard him, lads.

Everyone pack up. We're gonna win anyway, so why even try?

How bout them Sox?

>>134213439
>muh mystic magical bullshit that allows me to justify my lazyness and letting me feel like my enemies will be punished just by me doing nothing
Strawman

>>134213329

Yes it would indeed be morally okay if they believed it to be morally okay. Society would deem it as acceptable. And in a lot of their minds, it would be acceptable by their own subjective standards of morals.

>>134213457
Those who do not struggle for the light will inevitably fall to darkness

>>134213131
Then what would signify to you that this state of affairs was actually good? Without evil to compare good to, how would you know?

By way of analogy, image a room filled with brilliant light so that there is zero darkness. Is it empty or full? Is it near or far? Is it good or bad? Is it positive or negative? Are there any objects in the room? Can any distinctions be made? How can one assign a quality to this space without the existence of at least some darkness?

Good and Evil are reciprocal qualities that need each other in order to be apprehended by human perception. The same is true of any opposites you care to name. They are two poles of one magnet.

>>134208795
Mystery Schools and their agents follow the ideas of Alestair Crowley and Madame Blavatsky.
" Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. "
Rebellion.

>>134208795

I don't know if you've noticed.

But the rules were broken a while ago.

>>134213609
>its ok to torture and kill little kids if everyone else is torturing and killing little kids

>>134213773
Why dont blackpills just kill themselves? What is the point in living in a state of such hopeless apathy?

>>134213451
Zoroastrianism is logically sound, unlike this bullshit. Because in it, good and evil are equal in strength and status.

File: Anglo Devil.jpg (39KB, 400x417px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 400x417px

>>134208795
>The forces of evil cannot win
Sadly, we win all the time. Aryans, beware!

https://archive.fo/hRd2u

>Hillary Clinton sided with Russia on sanctions as Bill made $500G on Moscow speech

https://archive.fo/BI4PA

>Germany’s Merkel Defends Russian Gas Pipeline Plan

>>134213824

Yes, it would most likely be okay by their standards if they were the ones doing it in your hypothetical scenario.

You just lost.

>>134213329
>So by that logic if the population of the planet was reduced by 90% and the remaining 10% where satanic pedophiles, suddenly being a satanic pedophile is morally ok?

Satanic pedophiles... That's some bullshit. But you know, everybody raped everything in the past, and most of the guys also made human sacrifices, and it was not just moral, but also pious.

>>134213557
'The universe will correct itself' is a statement that rejects logic and reason. We know gravity is a law of the universe because we fall down back to Earth when we jump regardless of where we are in the surface of Earth. The universe has no moral laws. People don't suddenly die when they do something evil and there is absolutely no evidence of heaven, hell, or a 'higher plane'. The only proper way to assess usch a statement is to analyze emotional reasons behind such a statement because, again, it purposefully defies logic and rejects empirical reality.

>>134208795
Evil's been winning for about 10,000 years now and is on the verge of forcing absolute surrender.

File: IMG_4132.jpg (94KB, 700x452px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 700x452px

>>134213912
Wellll

Not necessarily.
Zarathustra himself was a poor, wandering ascetic, much like Jesus or Buddha

Much of the religious aspects of Mazdanism were corrupted by the Persian Emperors who wamted to co-opt the faith to legitimize their rule (much like kings and popes), when in reality Zoroastrian theology is every bit as anti-materialist as Christianity

>>134209356
>Evil is a matter of relative.
If everything is relative, then your statement itself becomes relative, and therefore, meaningless.
Only with absolutes is meaning possible.

>>134214375
Not really, meaning can be temporary.

>>134213824
either troll or idiot

File: 1496488604188081199.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>134208795
Darkness shall reign!

>>134214560
your statement has 'temporary meaning', as you wrote it, it had meaning, but now that I read it, it is meaningless.
Again, meaning is only possible in absolutes.
The more you try to say otherwise, you only prove me right as you undermine your own theory to prove your theory.

>>134214375

I don't believe he ever claimed everything is relative, I may be wrong. But can't a lot of human concepts be considered relative? I don't think that's too hard to follow

>>134214826
Absolute meaning doesn't exists, cause as you claimed it only works as long as you can keep the illusion of coherence, this coherence it's temporary and depends of a number of factors.

If this doesn't have meaning to you then you are a simplistic buffon.

>>134214826

So every single meaning of every single thing? What kind of meaning are we talking about? And it's only able to exist as an absolute? What do you define as that?

/x/ is over there ----->
Also sage, kys fucking faggot.

>>134214971
that "relation" is a category, i agree with.
that morality is relative, i disagree with.
Someone may be less or more evil than another person, that I agree with.
That "good" and "evil" do not exist, because "morality is relative, and therefore nonexistent", I disagree with.
Is that too hard to follow? I can spoon feed it to you with smaller concepts if you need.

>>134215257
You got that one of the family by the truck with a deer hanging off it?

>>134215353

Morality is relative, and good and evil are just relative concepts. I don't know how you can't understand that

>>134215353

You still didn't put in the effort to define anything. You're speaking nothing.

>>134215580
Probably bacause he has horrendous acts to justify.

>>134214375

You misrepresented his argument and claimed meaning is only possible with absolutes with no supporting evidence. I'm starting to see you crack.

>>134215697

Who knows.

>>134210572
>justified back then
>so everything is relative
>you don't have tools like logic and reason in 2017 to make a difference unlike then
Now I understand why in america cuckolding is a national sport.

>>134209687
But free will isn't a thing. It's just a fantasy.

File: 1500472158140.png (666KB, 844x636px) Image search: [Google]

666KB, 844x636px

>>134208795
>17 replies to own thread
>philosophical mumbo jumbo
Is this you in this thread aswell?
>>134200260
>33 replies to own post
>philosophical mumbo jumbo
See what you did you faggot, you made the orc upset!

>>134215157
>absolute meaning doesn't exist.
If that were true, your statement becomes false.
If your statement was true, it makes the statement itself false.
Any statement made must also be applied to itself.
If "morality is relative, and therefore doesn't exist absolutely", is a true statement, then why do the same people who hold to this theory even bother trying to make judgments against anything?
For example:
"Trump is evil, racism is evil, Nazis are evil" ... etc, are all value judgments that assume morality is absolute.
Yet the very people that make those statements don't believe in absolute morality, only relative morality, which is to say, they don't believe morality actually exists.

tl;dr
you can't make value judgments without a belief in absolute morality.

Humans are inherently evil

TAKE OFF THOSE GLASSES FAGGOT AND TAKE THE BLACKPILL

>>134208795
Anarchists are deranged sub-average children.

Grow up.

>>134215965

I said morality is relative and changes as societies change. You haven't proven me wrong.

>>134216122
And you are a dirty nigger

>>134216078
>why do the same people who hold to this theory even bother trying to make judgments against anything?

Nietzche stated that we needed morality as an equal intellectual playground, in order to make the best use of every member of society, in an absolute morality all discussion dies before happening and some people will never be right.

>>134209356
>moral objective laws don't exist
>but somehow truth is a meaningful, pursuable concept

No thanks kike.

>>134213420
Socrates was a pedo

we have no free will and only act on the impulses of a neurology that subsists by repeating what its witnessed before, and all good people have had good done to them while the bad have been harmed by the actions of others or their own body so that they only thing they know to do is act on the impulses that occur to them for reasons that aren't really their own

wouldn't you all like to be paid just to go to school and study philosophy and argue this shit all day? all the jobs are going to robots so thats really all were good for right now

>>134216078

So you're saying just because people say that morality is relative, that they shouldn't be making judgments against anything.

Because they understand morality is relative to them self and everyone has different opinions. You might think Trump is evil but I don't, morality is relative to the viewer. And your statement is wrong in the following sentence. Those value judgments do not make it so morality is absolute. It's relative to themselves.

You keep strawmanning and generating fake points of views and misrepresenting things wrong.

>>134216368
>absolute morality doesn't exist, there is no good or evil.
>it's wrong to do X, it's good to do Y.
Pick one.

"The passage describes, in narrative form, the development of self-consciousness as such in an encounter between what are thereby (i.e., emerging only from this encounter) two distinct, self-conscious beings; the essence of the dialectic is the movement or motion of recognizing, in which the two self-consciousnesses are constituted each in being recognized as self-conscious by the other. This movement, inexorably taken to its extreme, takes the form of a "struggle to the death" in which one masters the other, only to find that such lordship makes the very recognition he had sought impossible, since the bondsman, in this state, is not free to offer it."

>>134216788
You can declare that something it's wrong and that doesn't has to be an absolute judgement, it can be right in other circumstances or even in the same circumstances but by a different individual.

Absolute morality it's religion, not science.

>>134216788

I got to go, but hopefully you'll be able to not be so dense and unable to understand things next time.

Morality isn't everything. Morality is morality. And that my friend, is subjective.

truth is a conversation that must take place between equals, as "neither a slave nor a master can be considered as fully self-conscious", and the assertion that one thing is right or wrong or good or bad does not explain things as they exist but provokes a positive/negative emotional reaction in the minds of people you want to control

>>134208795
They've tricked us since bce. All mythology is a telling of real events, they used it as religion to control you. They also love that all humans identify as their mind and believe that who they are is limited to their mind and body. The truth is you are consciousness experiencing life in your body/mind, these are simply tools.

>>134217097
>I pursue my subjective judgement of what truth is because I like it. Not because its correct.
>Okay, argument over, I got the last word, lololololololol XD byeeeeeeeee, tip*

a lotta you people just want to argue with each other instead of reading the books that explain this shit: "In the "First Treatise", Nietzsche demonstrates that the two opposite pairs "good/evil" and "good/bad" have very different origins, and that the word "good" itself came to represent two opposed meanings. In the "good/bad" distinction, "good" is synonymous with nobility and everything which is powerful and life-asserting; in the "good/evil" distinction, which Nietzsche calls "slave morality", the meaning of "good" is made the antithesis of the original aristocratic "good", which itself is re-labelled "evil". This inversion of values develops out of the ressentiment of the powerful by the weak.

Nietzsche rebukes the "English psychologists" for lacking historical sense. They seek to do moral genealogy by explaining altruism in terms of the utility of altruistic actions, which is subsequently forgotten as such actions become the norm. But the judgment "good", according to Nietzsche, originates not with the beneficiaries of altruistic actions. Rather, the good themselves (the powerful) coined the term "good". Further, Nietzsche sees it as psychologically absurd that altruism derives from a utility that is forgotten: if it is useful, what is the incentive to forget it? Such meaningless value-judgment gains currency . . . by expectations repeatedly shaping the consciousness."

File: Darules.jpg (20KB, 400x302px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x302px

>>134209414

>>134217097
your opinion on morality is subjective, because you only see the superficial changing of societal norms.
Raping children is not "moral in one century" and then "immoral in another century".
Raping children is immoral. Period.
Just because some people/cultures (e.g. Jews, Muslims) think raping children is morally acceptable, doesn't change the fact that it's wrong.
Morality is more like a mathematical law. People can be bad at math, that doesn't make math relative or nonexistent.
Learn to logic.

>>134217691
This is retarded rambling

>>134209414
>rules
You keep what you kill.

>>134217449
ikr, his argument is basically
>i'm right, you're wrong.
>right and wrong are subjective.
um... wouldn't that then make me right too? And him wrong, too?
He's literally saying he's right (by his metric) and wrong (by my metric).
>morality is subjective, but your version of morality is FLAT OUT WRONG.
that is literally a contradiction in terms, and it's amusing that he's too low-iq to see it

>>134217839
not an argument, friendo

File: IMG_1165.jpg (133KB, 640x724px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 640x724px

>>134217839

>>134218000

So you're confusing being right and wrong in an argument with morality, and how that is relative. Do you realize that they are not the same thing?

i'll give another example, for the low-iq people on here:
>morality is relative.
>Misogyny is wrong, always.
Always is an absolute, and you just said that there are no absolutes in morality.
If you say there are no absolutes in morality, then you're also saying you have NO PROBLEM with people doing "evil" things to you, since...
>from their perspective, they're actually doing good.
People who think morality is relative LITERALLY have no room to make any sort of value judgments, whatsoever.

>>134217449

I'm back, sorry getting an oil change. How retarded are you to misrepresent my argument? That's all green text usually is.

>>134217449

Did I say anything that was wrong about morality?

>>134218358
>morality has nothing to do with being right or wrong.
say again?

File: IMG_1834.jpg (113KB, 680x709px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 680x709px

>>134208795
Simple fool, talking about the world like Donnie darkos talks about the lifeline

>>134217691

Yes my opinion is considered subjective. And raping in different places can be considered moral, depending on the person or even deemed by society to be moral. Morality is not mathematical law. It can not be measured or quantified in the same way.

>>134208795
The only reason you can safely say this is because there are good people putting in the work to stop evil shit.

All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

>>134218730
so you're okay with someone killing you then?

File: IMG_0149.jpg (56KB, 599x315px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 599x315px

>>134210898
If you think evil don't exist I have bad news for you chump

Good and Evil are a social construct. In the end, there is no good and evil.

Remember that those that others would call evil would call themselves good. Anything that is "Evil" thinks itself as good, and its enemy evil. It's completely up to subjectiveness.

Read Hegel and then Marx. Communism is literally inevitable. Its in the rules book.

>>134213964
that is literally communist think of morality being subjective, they pushed this too.

if you believe that, then you can say that there is no true good and evil, but then you just degenerate into a mindset of an animal. Where you have no right, no wrong, your actions you take are not morally wrong and you can do whatever fits you best, like an animal, like a communist

File: IMG_0056.jpg (48KB, 398x312px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 398x312px

>>134218998
As I said before my D in your deep in your ass is a social construct Twinks

>>134219059
fucking communist flags always boils my blood
useful idiots like you are the reason i never met my father

>>134218998
>there is no good and evil
>please don't torture me, or rape my family members, that would be wrong.
PICK ONE, FAGGOT

>>134218506

I already disproved you earlier on this. You really must be a special kind of stupid. You're strawmanning a different kind of person that isn't me. You're saying people that believe in relative morality are wrong because a person in your hypothetical situation that you created used the word always. I don't think of things done to me in a negative way (negative being relative to me) as a good or bad thing morally. I have an issue with it not because of morals, because it threatens something I want, need, have, myself, etc.

Value judgments and thinking that good and evil don't exist morally are not the same thing. I can make a judgment based in opinion but that doesn't mean it's absolutely right everywhere. I realize it's my opinion.

>there is no good and evil.
>morality is relative.
no wonder why with leftists they always condemn things in the white community, that they tolerate in non-white communities.
>rape is wrong when white men are doing the raping.
>rape is okay when it's a Muslim doing the raping, since rape is acceptable in their culture.

>>134219091
He's half right. The recognition of good and evil is based on perception, but that is not to say that it's impossible to discern good from evil because it's based on perceptions. There are logical means by which to help determine what is good and what is evil, but it requires a certain amount of wisdom to discern. Postmodernists are right in that things can be interpreted in different ways, but they're wrong in claiming that there is no underlying truth that informs those perceptions.

>>134218582

You just misrepresented my argument once more. I pointed out that you confused morality of what is deemed "right and wrong" with the very different concepts of being right and wrong in an argument.

>>134219480
>2+2=4 is not a true, all the time. It can be true in some cases, and false in others.
>i'm okay with someone murdering me because from the perspective of the murderer, he's in the right.
>please kill me

>>134218861
No, but that doesn't come from a moral place. I'm not okay with it due to my body's evolutionary instinct for survival and wants and desires.

>>134218937

Not an argument.

>>134218358
Right and wrong has a moral foundation.

The statement starts,
>morality is subjective
How did we arrive at this point? Someone used their senses(sight, touch, hearing, taste, smell) to perceive the world, then used this information, along with the cognitive tools in their head, to piece it together.

Where did these tools come from? Well chances are in the context of this argument(and at large), moral subjectivists come from a materialistic world view... So these senses and cognitive traits arrived out of the sexual and survival of our ancestors, aka Evolution.

Now here's the tricky part. How do we know this has any value? Survival, according to the moral subjectivist, is purely a amoral thing. A chemical process. Whether one survives based on accurately perceiving a consistent world view(truth), or dies following a convoluted one(false), or even visa versa(dying over something true, living in pursuit of something false) is entirely relevant as one state, life, is just as morally subjective as another, death. If the "scientific method" or "consistency" wasn't useful, it would be without merit.

The tools used to make the argument that all morality is subjective is a absolute moral statement, because it relies on placing moral value in the foundation that has lead up to it.

>>134219728
why should I, or anyone, care what your thoughts on the matter are?
If morality is subjective, why should your opinions matter at all? Are you saying you're the ONLY person with opinions?
If you can't step outside your subjective self for a moment and look at things in an abstract, objective manner, and see how certain behaviors are bad IN AND OF THEMSELVES, for the person or for society, or both, then you're low-iq.

>>134219548

What are those logical means?

>>134219728
Morality is informed by logic and experience.

>Moral: a lesson, especially one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience.

You, having the information that someone killing you would be detrimental to you, and them understanding that the same applies to them; you both agree to not kill each other. This is an example of morality.

>>134219675
You are equating morality with mathematics. They are not the same.

And I already approached a similar situation earlier and explained my position on it and why I believe I'm right.

>>134220068
Common sense, mostly. I don't steal from you because I wouldn't want you stealing from me. There's a reason humans have evolved with a capacity for empathy.

File: gNtrOIKxab26z3Fs-VC9OzSljRj4zkgZNHgZ-zRhhS4.jpg (163KB, 663x768px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 663x768px

Rule book is here:

http://riggedit.com/2017/05/01/mkultra-documentary-cia-mind-control-research-human-experiments-in-the-united-states/

>>134208795
They killed God so the rule book went out the window FYI

>>134220114
agreed.
people who think morality is subjective are, in essence, saying that any behavior is acceptable.
>Do as thou wilt.
That's called satanism.
If people start going around doing WHATEVER they want, the world will lapse into anarchy, a literal hell.
Laws aren't even possible without the implicit understanding that certain behaviors are detrimental.
Laws aren't made with the assumption that they're only for certain people, but rather for everyone, always.
>b-but, different cultures have different laws.
On a very superficial and low-iq understanding of morality, yes, this is true.
It does not, however, mean that all cultures are equal.
Some cultures are qualitatively and quantifiably better. This is because as they align with Absolute Morality to a closer degree, the culture becomes that much better.
The funny part is the very people that say morality is relative usually have NO INTENTION of living in a culture other than a western culture (where absolute morality is accepted).

File: IMG_0152.jpg (81KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 736x736px

>>134219778
no its not.. its a fact I have bad news for you fiend..."בשוק סמייא צווחין לעווירא סגי נהור

File: spiritCooking.jpg (59KB, 800x420px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x420px

I think we need more Spirit Cooking to cleanes ourselves form this idea

>>134219786

Incorrect, the weird thing is, survival doesn't necessarily rely on an accurate perception of the world. I can forward an Atlantic article but I'm kinda at work right now.

I don't think survival is based on world views.

And the tools used to make the argument that all morality is subjective is not an absolute moral statement. It does not rely on placing moral value on what has created it. Just because it's useful does not mean it's inherently moral

>>134220962
Best not to bring satanism into it, because, ironically enough, different people will have different definitions of what that is and it causes a lot of talking past each other.

"Do as thou wilt." Is, sometimes, not only desirable, but necessary. It's not a refutation of truth or morals, but a willingness to act against "morals" that aren't governed or informed by common sense, logic and wisdom. It's perhaps one of the only things satanism gets right.

>>134220043

I've already proved you wrong on multiple occasions but I'll respond again just for you. My opinions don't have to matter. That's up to you. These certain behaviors might be considered bad in certain ways, but that doesn't mean it's morally bad or good. And what is good for society can be subjective along with what's good for the person, in some cases.

>>134221519
>survival doesn't necessarily rely on an accurate perception of the world

Yes, I stated that within the brackets of my previous post. And yes, the tools used(your senses and mind) if used to claim morality is subjective, must have value or its a crap shoot without merit. And if the most basest of morality(survival is good, death bad) isn't a objective value, then the events that lead up to the use of these tools to inform the statement that "morality is subjective" is both BROKEN LOGIC.

Otherwise a blind, deaf, paraplegic drooling is as meaningful a statement as this conversation we're having. Consistent logic is demanded.

>>134208795
Plato had it right with his notion of the good, the true and the beautiful. Truth and good are hard to define so it's beauty that we must always strive for. If it is beautiful then a thing will be true and good. Always look to nature

>>134217551
>Nietzsche

Stopped reading there

File: 1489455261113.jpg (17KB, 313x286px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 313x286px

>>134222670
And beauty isn't hard to define?

File: IMG_0090.jpg (111KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 480x480px

The time you arguing you get nailed in the ass like good little Twinks you are since 1666 ..

>>134222940
That all depends on your taste m8. Nature is beautiful. It's mathematical in a sense. Pi is beautiful for example

File: IMG_0057.jpg (76KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 480x360px

And you don't get half nailed .. it's full fledged nailed and crusify ... take your seeeeeet fucking time fAggots

>>134223194
>That all depends on your taste m8

Wouldn't that mean that which is true and good is subjective? I personally think truth should be the operative characteristic. That which is true is, imo, the easiest of the three because you can at least quantify it to some degree. You can test for logical consistency to help determine what is true. You can't do the same for beauty.

Gravity works consistently, even though it's just a theory, so there is at least some truth behind it. Not everyone likes the Mona Lisa.

File: 41234234.jpg (17KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 640x480px

>>134214375
>If everything is relative, then your statement itself becomes relative, and therefore, meaningless.

File: IMG_0139.jpg (36KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 480x360px

You deserved every inch you will get for your pussyness

File: 123423423.png (76KB, 1280x1182px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1280x1182px

>>134216408
Truth is relative too.

File: Peterson_Campbell.jpg (64KB, 806x348px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 806x348px

>>134210483

I wish Joseph Campbell's name was thrown around here more often. His idea's could help out a lot of confused, misguided anons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxrEdH1Evik

>>134222940
you don't need to define it if you experience it. Seek it, don't try to waste your time proving it to others.

>>134209966
>>134208795
>Evil and good are man made concepts and are indeed subjective. They're intangible and are not guiding principles in the universe or scientific or able to be scientifically quantified
Let me rape your mother then let's see how you objectively feel retard

>>134220962
>that certain behaviors are detrimental.
>says country that worship killing innocent people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE2vM66buxQ

>>134223826
No. Truth by definition is objective. Peoples perceptions of the truth is what's relative.

>>134224065
While that may work on a personal level, we're kind of talking about it's effects on a societal level. How do you stop people who find "beauty" in suicide bombing the west without infringing their pursuit of "truth" and "goodness"?

File: IMG_0021.jpg (741KB, 961x615px) Image search: [Google]

741KB, 961x615px

Twinks theme for retarded major politicaly corrected faggots of 2017 : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bbEoRnaOIbs

>>134224299
> Peoples perceptions of the truth is what's relative.
People can only perceive things by perception, so by definition everything they perceive is relative.

>>134225573
Oh shit dude you certainly sound like a fucking rocket scientist! Take 10m years of evolution congrats!!

File: 1499455146962.png (301KB, 794x564px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 794x564px

>>134208795
You need to learn something. No one is a good person, and no one is innocent. There are merely varying degrees of guilt. The nature of man is that we are corruptible. You too have the potential to become just like the things you fight against. God smiles on those who do his will, so do your part to make this world a better place.

>>134225573
Except we have material and intellectual tools to enhance and improve those perceptions, boosting their accuracy and predictive power
Don't fall for the anglo ultra subjectivism bullshit

>>134225573
I should have said views. And simply because the equipment(perception) is flawed, doesn't mean the thing your viewing doesn't exist, nor that getting as close of approximation that you can means you won't* align correctly with it.

File: IMG_0098.jpg (52KB, 500x308px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x308px

Have a good one chump and please take you time to figure out the exit of your maze ... stupid koks

>>134215157
So you mean to say that the feeling which kicks in towards pedophile is because my social construct and not because something deep inside me says that its un natural and immoral,its more of a mental gymnastics in which you predict that somethings are best kept illegal.

Because yeah if everyone turns pedophile then your children can say goodbye to the freedom.

>>134225928
A very deep and thoughtful comment for the one who chose to post under the nazi flag.

>>134226528
>is because my social construct
Of course. Try to talk to Muslim in sharia country about this mater.

File: IMG_0157.jpg (49KB, 311x294px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 311x294px

Before I leave her a little hint for you clueless fags

>>134209554
it is subjective you fucking mong

t. work in a commercial kitchen

File: BeautyIsSubjective.jpg (48KB, 608x505px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 608x505px

>>134222940
beauty isn't subjective.
And now relativists finally understand the meaning of pic related.
Or they don't, because they're too low-iq.
In which case, I give up trying to educate an orc.

>>134223826
holy fuck, how do idiots like this even survive in the world?

>>134224140
every country has committed atrocities. I agree, the US government foreign policy has been complete shit.
That doesn't change anything.
Laws can be changed, and should be changed when a better law is found.
Better laws make for a more harmonious world.
Discussions like these are how we discover said better laws.

>>134225573
the flaw in your argument is that you assume that perception is the ONLY means of acquiring knowledge of the outside world.
Hint: It isn't.

Morality is eternally objective. All you need to have peace on earth is a bunch of sensibly moral people.

>>134227054
No one is saying that peoples perceptions of hot and cold aren't subjective.
OBVIOUSLY a cup of coffee could be cold to one person, warm to another, or hot to a third. That is the basic, low-iq stuff that everyone agrees on.
What you fail to grasp is the fact that a SPECTRUM exists, on which one end is Hot, and on the other end is Cold.
Hot----------------Cold
Moral relativists deny the spectrum itself exists, since people have different perceptions of it.
Moral absolutists acknowledge the spectrum exists, acknowledge that people fall on various parts of the spectrum, and also acknowledge that there is a "sweet spot" that, on average, most people can agree is the "right" temperature.
With morality the spectrum is:
Good-------------------Evil
In terms of individuals AND society, things are functionally BETTER when it falls under Good.
Evil societies are objectively worse, as proven by the fact that no liberal wants to emigrate to the Middle East or Africa, they only emigrate to other white countries. It's proven by the fact that non-white countries risk their own lives just for the chance to move to a white country.

>>134209553
Well said, as things are right now good & evil is interdependent, there is no winning.

>>134209554
They are subjective you dolt

>>134228719
>Laws can be changed, and should be changed when a better law is found.
Change is codename for relativism. Absolute doesn't change. So go buy yourself some slaves and bag of poppy.

>>134208795
Ultimately, Evil is subjective. Good is subjective.
Can a person factually declare selfishness to be subjective? Can a person factually declare selflessness to be subjective?
Is it Good to be selfless? Is it Evil to be selfish?
If you are compassionate to people who are poor but have a sense of responsibility for themselves, is that Good? If you are compassionate to people who are poor but have no sense of responsibility for themselves, is that Evil?

Never forget
>>134218778