Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

I will defend any part of Spinoza's Ethics

ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 1:06:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Either here or in a debate (a debate is preferrable).

I'm most comfortable with the first part, but I can do any part if necessary.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,866
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 7:14:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 1:06:45 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either here or in a debate (a debate is preferrable).

I'm most comfortable with the first part, but I can do any part if necessary.

Interesting quote,
"[W]hatsoever is contrary to nature is also contrary to reason, and whatsoever is contrary to reason is absurd, and, ipso facto, to be rejected
Omnivores are a part of what is nature
Omnivores eat meat also
People are omnivores
People eat meat
Peaople are animals
People are also meat
Eating meat is reasonable, so people eating people is reasonable?
Or I'm hungry and am not following what contrary to nature means? Lol
After all, numerous examples of cannibalism in humans have resulted in survival of said humans.
Btw, I am so on board with adopting cannibalism worldwide to combat world hunger.
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 7:26:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 7:14:38 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 10/27/2015 1:06:45 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either here or in a debate (a debate is preferrable).

I'm most comfortable with the first part, but I can do any part if necessary.

Interesting quote,
"[W]hatsoever is contrary to nature is also contrary to reason, and whatsoever is contrary to reason is absurd, and, ipso facto, to be rejected
Omnivores are a part of what is nature
Omnivores eat meat also
People are omnivores
People eat meat
Peaople are animals
People are also meat
Eating meat is reasonable, so people eating people is reasonable?
Or I'm hungry and am not following what contrary to nature means? Lol
After all, numerous examples of cannibalism in humans have resulted in survival of said humans.
Btw, I am so on board with adopting cannibalism worldwide to combat world hunger.

Uh, I mean, I guess? I actually have no problem with cannibalism, but your argument relies on the assumption that all types of meat are inherently equatable.

I don't really see how this is supposed to be a problem...
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,866
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 7:33:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 7:26:41 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 10/27/2015 7:14:38 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 10/27/2015 1:06:45 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
Either here or in a debate (a debate is preferrable).

I'm most comfortable with the first part, but I can do any part if necessary.

Interesting quote,
"[W]hatsoever is contrary to nature is also contrary to reason, and whatsoever is contrary to reason is absurd, and, ipso facto, to be rejected
Omnivores are a part of what is nature
Omnivores eat meat also
People are omnivores
People eat meat
Peaople are animals
People are also meat
Eating meat is reasonable, so people eating people is reasonable?
Or I'm hungry and am not following what contrary to nature means? Lol
After all, numerous examples of cannibalism in humans have resulted in survival of said humans.
Btw, I am so on board with adopting cannibalism worldwide to combat world hunger.

Uh, I mean, I guess? I actually have no problem with cannibalism, but your argument relies on the assumption that all types of meat are inherently equatable.

I don't really see how this is supposed to be a problem...
As long as you agree. Seems reasonable to me. And when I refer to meat, I am using the generic term in which it refers to all kinds of meat which are edible, digestible, free from disease, etc. And yes, that would qualify the majority of meat. I'm sure there might be animals that carnivores don't eat because they will die, such as that Chinese fish that needs proper preparation or it has poison that can kill you....but in general the point is people can eat people and survive and get nourishment from them so Spinoza thinks human cannibalism is reasonable.
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 11:30:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Debate with Insignifica: http://www.debate.org...

If anyone else wants to debate the same resolution, I can just copy my argument from that debate.
"This site is trash as a debate site. It's club penguin for dysfunctional adults."

~ Skepsikyma <3

"Your idea of good writing is like Spinoza mixed with Heidegger."

~ Dylly Dylly Cat Cat

"You seem to aspire to be a cross between a Jewish hipster, an old school WASP aristocrat, and a political iconoclast"

~ Thett the Mighty

"fvck omg ur face"

~ Liz