Total Posts:94|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

If you are moral nihilist!

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:25:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.:

Then who is the ultimate decider of right and wrong?
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:25:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

"If you are a moral nihilist!" is not a sentence. Try again.

"admit their is something beyond..." is bad grammar. Try again.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:27:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:25:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

"If you are a moral nihilist!" is not a sentence. Try again.

"admit their is something beyond..." is bad grammar. Try again.

First is the name of a topic does not need to be and what does grammar have to do with the point, oh thats right nothing. Do you like fishing this much you tend to love red herrings.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:29:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:27:30 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:25:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

"If you are a moral nihilist!" is not a sentence. Try again.

"admit their is something beyond..." is bad grammar. Try again.


First is the name of a topic does not need to be and what does grammar have to do with the point,

Run-on sentence. Try again.

oh thats right nothing. Do you like fishing this much you tend to love red herrings.

That is a question not a statement. Bad grammar. Try again.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:29:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:25:22 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.:

Then who is the ultimate decider of right and wrong?

If god can be a brute fact, so can moral values you have no way to show someone had to decide.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:32:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If god can be a brute fact, so can moral values you have no way to show someone had to decide.:

Intellectual laziness. You're the one that posits that morals are absolute. The burden of proof is therefore on you to prove how and why that is.

So let's have it, or retract and admit that you cannot.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:34:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:32:18 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
If god can be a brute fact, so can moral values you have no way to show someone had to decide.:

Intellectual laziness. You're the one that posits that morals are absolute. The burden of proof is therefore on you to prove how and why that is.

So let's have it, or retract and admit that you cannot.

So before god created morals was he immoral?
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:41:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:34:18 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:32:18 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
If god can be a brute fact, so can moral values you have no way to show someone had to decide.:

Intellectual laziness. You're the one that posits that morals are absolute. The burden of proof is therefore on you to prove how and why that is.

So let's have it, or retract and admit that you cannot.


So before god created morals was he immoral?:

Immaterial!!! Stop f*cking deflecting and answer the goddamn question. Theists bear no relevance to the question asked to you.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:54:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:41:49 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:34:18 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:32:18 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
If god can be a brute fact, so can moral values you have no way to show someone had to decide.:

Intellectual laziness. You're the one that posits that morals are absolute. The burden of proof is therefore on you to prove how and why that is.

So let's have it, or retract and admit that you cannot.


So before god created morals was he immoral?:

Immaterial!!! Stop f*cking deflecting and answer the goddamn question. Theists bear no relevance to the question asked to you.

no body came and whined when moral nihilism was brought up in the theist worldview.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 1:57:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
no body came and whined when moral nihilism was brought up in the theist worldview.:

Because you can't be a theist and also a moral nihilist.... They're mutually exclusive positions. Can you please stop shifting the goal posts now and answer the question directly?
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:00:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Did I somehow fail to address trollsh1t's criticisms of moral nihilism? No, it was pretty clear that I addressed the issues very well. Why then do we imagine that there is any hope for intelligent discussion on this thread? Why do we even presume that is the intention?

If you find a pot of crap at the end of the rainbow nine times in a row, is it reasonable to assume that the tenth time you will find gold?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:00:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:57:39 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
no body came and whined when moral nihilism was brought up in the theist worldview.:

Because you can't be a theist and also a moral nihilist.... They're mutually exclusive positions. Can you please stop shifting the goal posts now and answer the question directly?

Different factors cause the objective morality. It is not complicated. You are basically asking a question as stupid as why does logic work.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:00:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:57:39 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
no body came and whined when moral nihilism was brought up in the theist worldview.:

Because you can't be a theist and also a moral nihilist.... They're mutually exclusive positions. Can you please stop shifting the goal posts now and answer the question directly?

Actually sorry to interject I don't believe that they are mutually exclusive.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:04:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Different factors cause the objective morality. It is not complicated. You are basically asking a question as stupid as why does logic work.:

These fictitious rules you've arrived at are entirely based on your own presuppositions. You're either the dumbest person on this forum or you're flailing wildly because you understand the implications.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:04:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:02:26 PM, Kinesis wrote:
*sees sentence fragment*

Doesn't bother reading thread.

Hmm, the irony of this comment occurred to me the moment I pressed 'add post'.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:05:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

Barely English. And the title is a sentence fragment, so....that isn't even basic English at all.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:06:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Actually sorry to interject I don't believe that they are mutually exclusive.:

So you believe there can be a God who provides the basis for objective morality and also believe that objective morality does not exist because there is (presumably) no God to give said objective moral in the first place?

That wouldn't make much sense because it's a contradiction.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:06:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:05:46 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

Barely English. And the title is a sentence fragment, so....that isn't even basic English at all.

stop posting in my threads if you are going to troll.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:08:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Fucks you bitch stop posting in my threads if you are going to troll.:

You brought all this upon yourself. Deal with the consequences or stop being a douchebag.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:08:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:00:04 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Did I somehow fail to address trollsh1t's criticisms of moral nihilism? No, it was pretty clear that I addressed the issues very well. Why then do we imagine that there is any hope for intelligent discussion on this thread? Why do we even presume that is the intention?

If you find a pot of crap at the end of the rainbow nine times in a row, is it reasonable to assume that the tenth time you will find gold?

No you fuckin special pleaded that murder is subjective but how a debate should be formed is objective and you weren't going to take the debate because it is wrong. You are as clearly as possible special pleading.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:08:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:04:01 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Different factors cause the objective morality. It is not complicated. You are basically asking a question as stupid as why does logic work.:

These fictitious rules you've arrived at are entirely based on your own presuppositions. You're either the dumbest person on this forum or you're flailing wildly because you understand the implications.

It is worth pointing out that he does not understand what the word objective means. He believes that objective morality is both what most people believe, and also what can't be changed. A very vague self-refuting position. You won't get anywhere with him.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:08:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:08:12 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Fucks you bitch stop posting in my threads if you are going to troll.:

You brought all this upon yourself. Deal with the consequences or stop being a douchebag.

No, there stupidity has brought this on and your stupidity as well.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:09:11 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:06:23 PM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/11/2011 2:05:46 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:
You don't get the right to complain about the rules of a debate as it is all subjective, the debate rules may be subjectively right to the other person, so to complain is to admit their is something beyond our own opinion we need to turn to on right and wrong.

Barely English. And the title is a sentence fragment, so....that isn't even basic English at all.

Fucks you bitch stop posting in my threads if you are going to troll.

There is no more reason to address your point if we already pointed you out to moral nihilism, which isn't subjective--at least in my perceptive. In moral nihilism, NOTHING is right or wrong, so therefore one who is moral nihilist is not cherry pickign what is right or wrong or claiming something about objective morality.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:10:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
No, there stupidity has brought this on and your stupidity as well.:

Everybody's crazy, and Izbo the only person who knows what's really going on. Clearly Ockham's Razor is on his side.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:11:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:06:20 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Actually sorry to interject I don't believe that they are mutually exclusive.:

So you believe there can be a God

No

who provides the basis for objective morality

How... no.

and also believe that objective morality does not exist because there is (presumably) no God to give said objective moral in the first place?

I believe that objective morality does not exist, but I don't believe that because there is no God.

That wouldn't make much sense because it's a contradiction.

No it wouldn't make any sense.

Basically if I suddenly became a Christian I would still be a moral nihilist.

A very powerful individual who lays down moral laws does not make for objective morals. I've never understood the God as a source of morals argument.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:15:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:

WAAH! I can't make a debate with anything approaching fair terms for burden of proof. WAAAAH!! If I actually just put a resolution and an argument, I will get my a$$ handed to me! WAAAAAAH!

Go change your tampon.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:17:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/11/2011 2:15:24 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/11/2011 1:24:01 PM, izbo10 wrote:

WAAH! I can't make a debate with anything approaching fair terms for burden of proof. WAAAAH!! If I actually just put a resolution and an argument, I will get my a$$ handed to me! WAAAAAAH!

Go change your tampon.

This.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2011 2:17:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Basically if I suddenly became a Christian I would still be a moral nihilist.:

But I'm failing to see how you can believe that no objective morals could exist while simultaneously believing that an objective moral giver provides them. Am I missing something here?

A very powerful individual who lays down moral laws does not make for objective morals. I've never understood the God as a source of morals argument.:

Because being a Christian means believing that what the God of the Bible says is true. Since the bible declares YHWH the moral law giver, it would stand to reason that it is a prerequisite.

At most, you could be a deist, but not a Christian, no? A deist can believe in a God who is completely indifferent, but a Christian bases everything on the bible. Indeed, a Christian cannot be a Christian without the bible as a reference for all that is allegedly known about Jesus/God comes from that source alone.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)