Total Posts:187|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

objective morality for idiots.

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 9:05:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I am going to try to simplify this that so far down that cerebral has a .5% chance of getting it and man-is-good has a .2% chance of getting it.

Now first of all I would like to apologize for my 2 debates, I took for granted that everyone understands that you can draw logical conclusions from statements made by a person. This is so obviously above your head, I am sorry, it is my fault not knowing my audience.

Now, lets move on to something that should not be above most of your heads, except the 2 exceptions above.

First lets look at what types of things are generally considered morally good. The key word here is generally.

giving to charity
saving a life
reporting a crime

Ok, now lets look at some things that are generally considered morally bad. Again I stress the word generally.

murder
stealing
lying

Now, first of all we should all agree that everybody does not find these morally bad or good. Now I know there are more examples and we can go on all day, but these show some of the moral questions.

Now, we must ask ourselves what do all these moral questions have in common and why are they labeled as moral questions. When you look at the good ones, they generallly always benefit society and that is why they are good. You have to add something like donating to a charity that is stealing the money to make it bad. So, hence you added a moral bad too it. Making such a different situation.

Now, I know, I know you are all be intellectually dishonest enough to ask but why should we benefit society and why is that what we should am for. Well the reason for this is obvious to a person with any common sense, so I will have to explain it to all of you. The reason is this, we survive based on our ability to work as a group. We are not the biggest, fastest, strongest animal. Our intelligence and ability to work together is the reason we survive. To show this all one has to do is look at people who get trapped in the wilderness by themselves, their survival rate drops tremendously. So, why we need to society is for survival. If you don't grasp why survival is important please jump off a bridge and don't respond. That means your chances of getting this are less then or equal to man-is-good.

Now, that we know the moral questions are based on benefit to survival and why benefit to survival is important, we can ask if, benefit to survivial is objective or subjective. Now, the answer to this is simple for anyone with common sense, so again I will have to explain this to you guys since you lack any. Now, I am going to use murder for the example since this is what started all your stupidity. We have societies that murder is considered morally good and murder is considered morally bad, which one is going to survive better. Well we can actually study this and come to a conclusion of the truth value. I would hope no one would need to see a study that societies that murder don't survive and have a lower standard of living then those that find it wrong. So, yes their is an objective answer to moral questions.
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.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 9:16:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:05:36 AM, izbo10 wrote:
I am going to try to simplify this that so far down that cerebral has a .5% chance of getting it and man-is-good has a .2% chance of getting it.

Now first of all I would like to apologize for my 2 debates, I took for granted that everyone understands that you can draw logical conclusions from statements made by a person. This is so obviously above your head, I am sorry, it is my fault not knowing my audience.

Now, lets move on to something that should not be above most of your heads, except the 2 exceptions above.

First lets look at what types of things are generally considered morally good. The key word here is generally.

giving to charity
saving a life
reporting a crime

Ok, now lets look at some things that are generally considered morally bad. Again I stress the word generally.

murder
stealing
lying

Now, first of all we should all agree that everybody does not find these morally bad or good. Now I know there are more examples and we can go on all day, but these show some of the moral questions.

Now, we must ask ourselves what do all these moral questions have in common and why are they labeled as moral questions. When you look at the good ones, they generallly always benefit society and that is why they are good. You have to add something like donating to a charity that is stealing the money to make it bad. So, hence you added a moral bad too it. Making such a different situation.

Now, I know, I know you are all be intellectually dishonest enough to ask but why should we benefit society and why is that what we should am for. Well the reason for this is obvious to a person with any common sense, so I will have to explain it to all of you. The reason is this, we survive based on our ability to work as a group. We are not the biggest, fastest, strongest animal. Our intelligence and ability to work together is the reason we survive. To show this all one has to do is look at people who get trapped in the wilderness by themselves, their survival rate drops tremendously. So, why we need to society is for survival. If you don't grasp why survival is important please jump off a bridge and don't respond. That means your chances of getting this are less then or equal to man-is-good.

Now, that we know the moral questions are based on benefit to survival and why benefit to survival is important, we can ask if, benefit to survivial is objective or subjective. Now, the answer to this is simple for anyone with common sense, so again I will have to explain this to you guys since you lack any. Now, I am going to use murder for the example since this is what started all your stupidity. We have societies that murder is considered morally good and murder is considered morally bad, which one is going to survive better. Well we can actually study this and come to a conclusion of the truth value. I would hope no one would need to see a study that societies that murder don't survive and have a lower standard of living then those that find it wrong. So, yes their is an objective answer to moral questions.

Even by breaking it down this far, I feel I may be overestimating the intelligence of this board.
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
9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.
"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
9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will 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.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 9:47:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will troll

Get a hobby, get a girlfriend, get a job, do something just stop trolling like a moron who is drowning in hubris.
"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
9/18/2011 9:49:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:47:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will troll

Get a hobby, get a girlfriend, get a job, do something just stop trolling like a moron who is drowning in hubris.

A troll is someone who comes on the board with no arguments and just harrasses people. Out of the 2 of us that would be you.
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
9/18/2011 9:51:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:49:09 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:47:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will troll

Get a hobby, get a girlfriend, get a job, do something just stop trolling like a moron who is drowning in hubris.


A troll is someone who comes on the board with no arguments and just harrasses people. Out of the 2 of us that would be you.

Under normal circumstance, you would be right, but since you are such an epic jack@ss, I'm justified, and of the two of us, the initial troll is the abomination with the audacity to insult an entire website of intellectuals.
"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
9/18/2011 9:53:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:51:34 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:49:09 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:47:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will troll

Get a hobby, get a girlfriend, get a job, do something just stop trolling like a moron who is drowning in hubris.


A troll is someone who comes on the board with no arguments and just harrasses people. Out of the 2 of us that would be you.

Under normal circumstance, you would be right, but since you are such an epic jack@ss, I'm justified, and of the two of us, the initial troll is the abomination with the audacity to insult an entire website of intellectuals.

I will not respond to you in this post after this, but you guys have earned this type of thread, you show no common sense and everything must be dumbed down to stupidity. I mean seriously cerebral has been begging for this type of thread. He actually has asked prove that murder is 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.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 9:56:48 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:53:20 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:51:34 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:49:09 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:47:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:42:56 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:40:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
Free entertainment for all! Come see the troll in its natural habitat.

exactly 000ike is too retarded to even comprehend it so he will troll

Get a hobby, get a girlfriend, get a job, do something just stop trolling like a moron who is drowning in hubris.


A troll is someone who comes on the board with no arguments and just harrasses people. Out of the 2 of us that would be you.

Under normal circumstance, you would be right, but since you are such an epic jack@ss, I'm justified, and of the two of us, the initial troll is the abomination with the audacity to insult an entire website of intellectuals.

I will not respond to you in this post after this, but you guys have earned this type of thread, you show no common sense and everything must be dumbed down to stupidity. I mean seriously cerebral has been begging for this type of thread. He actually has asked prove that murder is wrong.

"I will not respond to you". Who says that? lmao. The intelligent thing to do would be to actually not respond than to make a response that you won't respond....but I think I'm expecting too much from you
"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
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:03:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 9:05:36 AM, izbo10 wrote:
I am going to try to simplify this that so far down that cerebral has a .5% chance of getting it and man-is-good has a .2% chance of getting it.

No way... you are still going on about this? You are still presuming to talk down to us.

Now first of all I would like to apologize for my 2 debates, I took for granted that everyone understands that you can draw logical conclusions from statements made by a person. This is so obviously above your head, I am sorry, it is my fault not knowing my audience.

Unfortunately you didn't present logical arguments, I did.


Now, lets move on to something that should not be above most of your heads, except the 2 exceptions above.

First lets look at what types of things are generally considered morally good. The key word here is generally.

giving to charity
saving a life
reporting a crime

Ok, now lets look at some things that are generally considered morally bad. Again I stress the word generally.

murder
stealing
lying

Now, first of all we should all agree that everybody does not find these morally bad or good. Now I know there are more examples and we can go on all day, but these show some of the moral questions.

Now, we must ask ourselves what do all these moral questions have in common and why are they labeled as moral questions. When you look at the good ones, they generallly always benefit society and that is why they are good. You have to add something like donating to a charity that is stealing the money to make it bad. So, hence you added a moral bad too it. Making such a different situation.

Now, I know, I know you are all be intellectually dishonest enough to ask but why should we benefit society and why is that what we should am for. Well the reason for this is obvious to a person with any common sense, so I will have to explain it to all of you. The reason is this, we survive based on our ability to work as a group. We are not the biggest, fastest, strongest animal. Our intelligence and ability to work together is the reason we survive. To show this all one has to do is look at people who get trapped in the wilderness by themselves, their survival rate drops tremendously. So, why we need to society is for survival. If you don't grasp why survival is important please jump off a bridge and don't respond. That means your chances of getting this are less then or equal to man-is-good.

Now, that we know the moral questions are based on benefit to survival and why benefit to survival is important, we can ask if, benefit to survivial is objective or subjective. Now, the answer to this is simple for anyone with common sense, so again I will have to explain this to you guys since you lack any. Now, I am going to use murder for the example since this is what started all your stupidity. We have societies that murder is considered morally good and murder is considered morally bad, which one is going to survive better. Well we can actually study this and come to a conclusion of the truth value. I would hope no one would need to see a study that societies that murder don't survive and have a lower standard of living then those that find it wrong. So, yes their is an objective answer to moral questions.

How many times do we need to address this...

It is your personal choice to value human survival. Such a valuation is made according to your personal taste. There is no logical reason for you to value human survival, you simply like the idea of human survival.

You may be able to determine that certain actions are objectively more beneficial to human survival, but it is still an example of moral subjectivism because your foundation is a subjective value judgement.

A transhumanist eugencist might decide that human survival is not the highest virtue, but instead that human genetic quality is the highest value. Their moral system might involve creating or increasing natural selection. They might be able to determine that certain actions were objectively more beneficial to increasining natural selection.

Neither system would be objective.

OBJECTIVELY which system is true, neither.

The problem is that we misunderstand you, the problem is you fail to understand the terms we use or any counter-arguments. For you to still be 'lecturing' us after total defeat in two debates on this is quite frankly pathetic.

Challenge me to another debate if you are that much of a masochist.
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
9/18/2011 10:14:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:03:35 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:05:36 AM, izbo10 wrote:
I am going to try to simplify this that so far down that cerebral has a .5% chance of getting it and man-is-good has a .2% chance of getting it.

No way... you are still going on about this? You are still presuming to talk down to us.

Now first of all I would like to apologize for my 2 debates, I took for granted that everyone understands that you can draw logical conclusions from statements made by a person. This is so obviously above your head, I am sorry, it is my fault not knowing my audience.

Unfortunately you didn't present logical arguments, I did.


Now, lets move on to something that should not be above most of your heads, except the 2 exceptions above.

First lets look at what types of things are generally considered morally good. The key word here is generally.

giving to charity
saving a life
reporting a crime

Ok, now lets look at some things that are generally considered morally bad. Again I stress the word generally.

murder
stealing
lying

Now, first of all we should all agree that everybody does not find these morally bad or good. Now I know there are more examples and we can go on all day, but these show some of the moral questions.

Now, we must ask ourselves what do all these moral questions have in common and why are they labeled as moral questions. When you look at the good ones, they generallly always benefit society and that is why they are good. You have to add something like donating to a charity that is stealing the money to make it bad. So, hence you added a moral bad too it. Making such a different situation.

Now, I know, I know you are all be intellectually dishonest enough to ask but why should we benefit society and why is that what we should am for. Well the reason for this is obvious to a person with any common sense, so I will have to explain it to all of you. The reason is this, we survive based on our ability to work as a group. We are not the biggest, fastest, strongest animal. Our intelligence and ability to work together is the reason we survive. To show this all one has to do is look at people who get trapped in the wilderness by themselves, their survival rate drops tremendously. So, why we need to society is for survival. If you don't grasp why survival is important please jump off a bridge and don't respond. That means your chances of getting this are less then or equal to man-is-good.

Now, that we know the moral questions are based on benefit to survival and why benefit to survival is important, we can ask if, benefit to survivial is objective or subjective. Now, the answer to this is simple for anyone with common sense, so again I will have to explain this to you guys since you lack any. Now, I am going to use murder for the example since this is what started all your stupidity. We have societies that murder is considered morally good and murder is considered morally bad, which one is going to survive better. Well we can actually study this and come to a conclusion of the truth value. I would hope no one would need to see a study that societies that murder don't survive and have a lower standard of living then those that find it wrong. So, yes their is an objective answer to moral questions.

How many times do we need to address this...

It is your personal choice to value human survival. Such a valuation is made according to your personal taste. There is no logical reason for you to value human survival, you simply like the idea of human survival.

You may be able to determine that certain actions are objectively more beneficial to human survival, but it is still an example of moral subjectivism because your foundation is a subjective value judgement.

A transhumanist eugencist might decide that human survival is not the highest virtue, but instead that human genetic quality is the highest value. Their moral system might involve creating or increasing natural selection. They might be able to determine that certain actions were objectively more beneficial to increasining natural selection.

Neither system would be objective.

OBJECTIVELY which system is true, neither.

The problem is that we misunderstand you, the problem is you fail to understand the terms we use or any counter-arguments. For you to still be 'lecturing' us after total defeat in two debates on this is quite frankly pathetic.

Challenge me to another debate if you are that much of a masochist.

Did I not say in the beginning you would not get this, that pretty much stated you are too stupid to have a debate with. Sorry, a I said in the argument if you don't understand why valuing in survival is important this topic is not for you, you should jump off a bridge. This topic was not intended for you as I can't possibly dumb it down enough for you. It is my choice to value life in much the same way I made the point your argument valued truth. You didn't get that either idiot. My whole debate argument was mocking and taking your position to its logical extreme. But, again this type of retardation is why I specifically called you out as too stupid to get this.
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
9/18/2011 10:16:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:14:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Did I not say in the beginning you would not get this, that pretty much stated you are too stupid to have a debate with. Sorry, a I said in the argument if you don't understand why valuing in survival is important this topic is not for you, you should jump off a bridge. This topic was not intended for you as I can't possibly dumb it down enough for you. It is my choice to value life in much the same way I made the point your argument valued truth. You didn't get that either idiot. My whole debate argument was mocking and taking your position to its logical extreme. But, again this type of retardation is why I specifically called you out as too stupid to get this.

This is what happens when you give him a serious and tolerant reply.
"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
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:19:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Izbo--do you have nothing better to do than dwell in your mother's basement and harass people?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:14:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:03:35 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 9:05:36 AM, izbo10 wrote:
I am going to try to simplify this that so far down that cerebral has a .5% chance of getting it and man-is-good has a .2% chance of getting it.

No way... you are still going on about this? You are still presuming to talk down to us.

Now first of all I would like to apologize for my 2 debates, I took for granted that everyone understands that you can draw logical conclusions from statements made by a person. This is so obviously above your head, I am sorry, it is my fault not knowing my audience.

Unfortunately you didn't present logical arguments, I did.


Now, lets move on to something that should not be above most of your heads, except the 2 exceptions above.

First lets look at what types of things are generally considered morally good. The key word here is generally.

giving to charity
saving a life
reporting a crime

Ok, now lets look at some things that are generally considered morally bad. Again I stress the word generally.

murder
stealing
lying

Now, first of all we should all agree that everybody does not find these morally bad or good. Now I know there are more examples and we can go on all day, but these show some of the moral questions.

Now, we must ask ourselves what do all these moral questions have in common and why are they labeled as moral questions. When you look at the good ones, they generallly always benefit society and that is why they are good. You have to add something like donating to a charity that is stealing the money to make it bad. So, hence you added a moral bad too it. Making such a different situation.

Now, I know, I know you are all be intellectually dishonest enough to ask but why should we benefit society and why is that what we should am for. Well the reason for this is obvious to a person with any common sense, so I will have to explain it to all of you. The reason is this, we survive based on our ability to work as a group. We are not the biggest, fastest, strongest animal. Our intelligence and ability to work together is the reason we survive. To show this all one has to do is look at people who get trapped in the wilderness by themselves, their survival rate drops tremendously. So, why we need to society is for survival. If you don't grasp why survival is important please jump off a bridge and don't respond. That means your chances of getting this are less then or equal to man-is-good.

Now, that we know the moral questions are based on benefit to survival and why benefit to survival is important, we can ask if, benefit to survivial is objective or subjective. Now, the answer to this is simple for anyone with common sense, so again I will have to explain this to you guys since you lack any. Now, I am going to use murder for the example since this is what started all your stupidity. We have societies that murder is considered morally good and murder is considered morally bad, which one is going to survive better. Well we can actually study this and come to a conclusion of the truth value. I would hope no one would need to see a study that societies that murder don't survive and have a lower standard of living then those that find it wrong. So, yes their is an objective answer to moral questions.

How many times do we need to address this...

It is your personal choice to value human survival. Such a valuation is made according to your personal taste. There is no logical reason for you to value human survival, you simply like the idea of human survival.

You may be able to determine that certain actions are objectively more beneficial to human survival, but it is still an example of moral subjectivism because your foundation is a subjective value judgement.

A transhumanist eugencist might decide that human survival is not the highest virtue, but instead that human genetic quality is the highest value. Their moral system might involve creating or increasing natural selection. They might be able to determine that certain actions were objectively more beneficial to increasining natural selection.

Neither system would be objective.

OBJECTIVELY which system is true, neither.

The problem is that we misunderstand you, the problem is you fail to understand the terms we use or any counter-arguments. For you to still be 'lecturing' us after total defeat in two debates on this is quite frankly pathetic.

Challenge me to another debate if you are that much of a masochist.

Did I not say in the beginning you would not get this, that pretty much stated you are too stupid to have a debate with. Sorry, a I said in the argument if you don't understand why valuing in survival is important this topic is not for you, you should jump off a bridge. This topic was not intended for you as I can't possibly dumb it down enough for you. It is my choice to value life in much the same way I made the point your argument valued truth. You didn't get that either idiot. My whole debate argument was mocking and taking your position to its logical extreme. But, again this type of retardation is why I specifically called you out as too stupid to get this.

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.
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
9/18/2011 10:28:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:14:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Did I not say in the beginning you would not get this,

What am I not getting?

that pretty much stated you are too stupid to have a debate with.

http://www.debate.org...

Sorry, a I said in the argument if you don't understand why valuing in survival is important this topic is not for you, you should jump off a bridge.

Where did I say that I did not understand why you would value survival?

My point is that such a valuation is SUBJECTIVE not OBJECTIVE.

This topic was not intended for you as I can't possibly dumb it down enough for you. It is my choice to value life

Exactly YOUR choice. It is YOUR choice to value life. YOUR SUBJECTIVE CHOICE.

in much the same way I made the point your argument valued truth. You didn't get that either idiot.

No I understood the statement, the problem was that you failed to substantiate it.

My whole debate argument was mocking and taking your position to its logical extreme. But, again this type of retardation is why I specifically called you out as too stupid to get this.

But you did not take my position to its logical extreme, you consistently show you have no understanding what my position is. Your 'mockery' bore no relation to anything I have ever said. Not a single person voted for you in any way shape or form. Before you claim that it is because the population of this site are deficient I'll argue again on another debate site.
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.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.
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.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:39:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
This is what Izbo is doing to DDO.
"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
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:49:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:39:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
This is what Izbo is doing to DDO.

What the hell was that!

But anyway I give up, how many times can I try to teach him the same basic concepts.
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.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 10:53:04 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:49:51 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:39:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
This is what Izbo is doing to DDO.

What the hell was that!

lol its the official youtube troll song

But anyway I give up, how many times can I try to teach him the same basic concepts.

I prefer to ignore or insult Izbo ( I or I I, just noticed that). Though I do feel sorry for him a little bit since a few people unfairly votebombed against him in your debate, but got away with it because no one likes him.
"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
9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.
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
9/18/2011 11:12:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:53:04 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:49:51 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:39:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
This is what Izbo is doing to DDO.

What the hell was that!

lol its the official youtube troll song

But anyway I give up, how many times can I try to teach him the same basic concepts.

I prefer to ignore or insult Izbo ( I or I I, just noticed that). Though I do feel sorry for him a little bit since a few people unfairly votebombed against him in your debate, but got away with it because no one likes him.

I only saw one vote bomb, I don't care because he did not deserve a single point. In any case I don't know what the best way to handle him is. Attempt to reason with him he trolls, ignore him he trolls, insult him he also trolls. The game is getting a little boring.
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.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.
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.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 11:16:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 10:28:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:14:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Did I not say in the beginning you would not get this,

What am I not getting?

that pretty much stated you are too stupid to have a debate with.

http://www.debate.org...

Sorry, a I said in the argument if you don't understand why valuing in survival is important this topic is not for you, you should jump off a bridge.

Where did I say that I did not understand why you would value survival?

My point is that such a valuation is SUBJECTIVE not OBJECTIVE.

This topic was not intended for you as I can't possibly dumb it down enough for you. It is my choice to value life

Exactly YOUR choice. It is YOUR choice to value life. YOUR SUBJECTIVE CHOICE.

in much the same way I made the point your argument valued truth. You didn't get that either idiot.

No I understood the statement, the problem was that you failed to substantiate it.

My whole debate argument was mocking and taking your position to its logical extreme. But, again this type of retardation is why I specifically called you out as too stupid to get this.

But you did not take my position to its logical extreme, you consistently show you have no understanding what my position is. Your 'mockery' bore no relation to anything I have ever said. Not a single person voted for you in any way shape or form. Before you claim that it is because the population of this site are deficient I'll argue again on another debate site.

Why is this being ignored, you don't like being nailed down and forced to defend your views do you?
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
9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.
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
9/18/2011 11:20:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

Can you not read? You demanded that I cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue... and cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue! You beat me to it.


http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.

Utterly bizarre.
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
9/18/2011 11:22:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:20:45 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

Can you not read? You demanded that I cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue... and cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue! You beat me to it.


http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.

Utterly bizarre.

Utterly stupid you are.
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.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 11:27:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:20:45 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

Can you not read? You demanded that I cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue... and cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue! You beat me to it.


http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.

Utterly bizarre.

beyond well being and survival, you have no reason to value health over non-health, yet you don't sit here and throw a goddamn fuckin temper tantrum if someone asserts eating vegitables is better for you then eating rat poison. Who the f*ck is to say being poisoned is not preferred? See how stupid you sound, in that instance you would be laughed out of a conversation about health, just as I am laughing you out of a conversation about morality. Then again this comparison fails only in that we know you are too stupid to comprehend it.
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
9/18/2011 11:39:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:22:06 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:20:45 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

Can you not read? You demanded that I cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue... and cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue! You beat me to it.


http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.

Utterly bizarre.


Utterly stupid you are.

You believe that Atheists may not use inductive reasoning, so the next time you stub your toe you believe it equally likely that it will hurt or that it would turn into a unicorn that will fart skittles over your face.

You believe that only Christians may talk about morality, though now you are a moral preacher.

You do not understand what the word objective means, I've had to try and teach you repeatedly yet still you stand there mouth wide open and the space between your ears up for rent.

You call yourself a moral objectivist but you can not provide the most basic of definitions or defence of that concept on account of not understanding the meanings of the words moral, or objective.

You fail to understand moral nihilism even despite repeated attempts to educate you on this simple concept.

You believe that everyone must accept an objective moral requirement to believe in the truth, for no apparent reason. It is just a cosmic law.

You set up two intellectually bankrupt debates with the intention that it would be impossible for your opponent to affirm their case, yet somehow you manage to lose both. Not just simply lose, but get entirely destroyed.

You demand that people respect your arguments not because they are logically valid, but on the contrary they should ignore your many mistakes and fallacies because you have completed logic courses... even though you have never done such a course in your miserable failure of a life.

You are correct, I am stupid and emotionally immature for entertaining you, but I am still so far advanced compared to you that you are not fit to be my pet.

I have explained numerous times how utterly worthless you are, but my words are superflous to your disjointed illogical rants and your pathetic 'debates' on moral objectivism. They provide a far superior testimony to your mental and moral deficiences to any commetary that anyone could ever provide.

Suffice it to say I am bored of repeating the same simple lessons to you. Please go away, maybe a read a book and return with a humility more appropriate to your intelligence. I am finally done feeding you.
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
9/18/2011 11:46:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/18/2011 11:39:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:22:06 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:20:45 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:16:25 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:14:23 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 11:09:54 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:32:31 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/18/2011 10:23:22 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Morality is a bi-product of a set of living organisms that has cognition and is predisposed for survival, created by such things, but not limited to, as evolution. Much like the existence of ocean life is the bi-product of a world that is suitable for life and has oceans that this life lives in. Now because you are a fuckin moron, you should be made aware that cognition is nothing more then the result of physical brain activity. The human mind is not a separate entity, it is part of brain activity a physical thing such as an ocean, jackass.

1: Morality is not always conducive to human survival.
2: None of what you said supports your argument.

As you have been quoted, in order to debate there must be common ground. There is no common ground if survival is not basic common ground. You fuckin want common ground when your presups are questioned but won't allow anything with mine.

But survival is not the common ground of all moral systems, in fact survival is often a secondary or even absent virtue.

YOUR system values survival, what make it objective.

Name a moral system that doesn't base on survival, bet you are so retarded you haven't even attempted to read my discussion of how religious moral systems corrupt the facts about our benefit or "survival" to change what we view as right.

they are based on survival, they just corrupt the facts about our benefits, you are simply retarded.

Can you not read? You demanded that I cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue... and cite a moral system that does not place survival as the primary virtue! You beat me to it.


http://atheistbebil.blogspot.com...

read this i wrote it, educate yourself, think of me the teacher, you the failing student.

Utterly bizarre.


Utterly stupid you are.

You believe that Atheists may not use inductive reasoning, so the next time you stub your toe you believe it equally likely that it will hurt or that it would turn into a unicorn that will fart skittles over your face.

I have never fuckin said this, I keep telling you this and you keep failing to grasp that. I have used inductive reasoning time and time and time and time again in my reasoning. This shows your lack of learning ability, you keep rerunning this same bull$hit lie. Demonstrate that I have said this, or that anything i have said leads to this logical conclusion.

You believe that only Christians may talk about morality, though now you are a moral preacher.

Wow, you are fuckin retarded, i have said atheists and christians get morality from the same place, quit the bull$hit.

You do not understand what the word objective means, I've had to try and teach you repeatedly yet still you stand there mouth wide open and the space between your ears up for rent.


Objective morality is absolutely existent outside of personal opinion.
You call yourself a moral objectivist but you can not provide the most basic of definitions or defence of that concept on account of not understanding the meanings of the words moral, or objective.

You fail to understand moral nihilism even despite repeated attempts to educate you on this simple concept.

That would be you, you assert that I ought to be fair, yet claim to be a moral nihilist which does not believe morality exists. If you want societal morality, you may want to try defining yourself as a moral relativist. Please fuckin educate yourself.

You believe that everyone must accept an objective moral requirement to believe in the truth, for no apparent reason. It is just a cosmic law.

You set up two intellectually bankrupt debates with the intention that it would be impossible for your opponent to affirm their case, yet somehow you manage to lose both. Not just simply lose, but get entirely destroyed.


I fully expected this read my sig which implies this board is full of idiots with the brain compacity of a earth worm.(exceptions exist geo, Iamgreat(not sure exact name), and a few others).
You demand that people respect your arguments not because they are logically valid, but on the contrary they should ignore your many mistakes and fallacies because you have completed logic courses... even though you have never done such a course in your miserable failure of a life.

You are correct, I am stupid and emotionally immature for entertaining you, but I am still so far advanced compared to you that you are not fit to be my pet.

I have explained numerous times how utterly worthless you are, but my words are superflous to your disjointed illogical rants and your pathetic 'debates' on moral objectivism. They provide a far superior testimony to your mental and moral deficiences to any commetary that anyone could ever provide.

Suffice it to say I am bored of repeating the same simple lessons to you. Please go away, maybe a read a book and return with a humility more appropriate to your intelligence. I am finally done feeding you.

Stop repeating your nonsense and failed understandings then, it is the moral thing for you to do.
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.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/18/2011 11:59:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would also like to note how cerebral failed to address the point about health requiring a presupposition that well being and survival are important and that he doesn't throw a sissy fit over that.
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.