Evil in the Eye of the Beholder?

Re: Re: Re: meph

Do keep up, twit. I've already covered that.

Yes, twit. oppinion. I said valid argument.
As for harsh, well.. i must have missed that part.

yes, I've acknowledged that your illiteracy already, twit.

Tell me, are you actually, truly that delusion?

Itching to pick a fight? Grow up, twit.
While it is true that I have grown to intensely dislike you, you aren't worthy or hate.

Yup, a simple comparison.
mephura's argument=substance
Spoodle's argument= no substance

Evil? I guess that would depend on who's standards you went by.

This has gotten old, fast, twit.
Because of you apparent lack of any point, substance, subject, or actual merit in general, this shall be my last reply to you.

Have fun with the mindlessness, twit.
Stick to it. You have what it calls for.

(BTW- You may consider this a victory if you like. )

Jan
Now this is a case where stupidity won.
Study Spoodle's example if you want to win that badly.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

what do you do whore?
hang at the edge of your seat, face in the monitor, hitting refresh?

While it is true that I have grown to intensely dislike you

is this what motivates you? huh dog? stop the hate? is that what you asked me to do?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

me whore ra

Sociopathic, eh? I think I am detecting a bit of projection. If anyone seems antisocial here spookz, it's you.
Try again.

ok

"But the main varying point is who's pain I should be concerned with." and "As for my judgements, they are biased towards me and mine"

these two statements prompted the sociopathic accusation. quite apt if i might say so (oops i already did)

Put a little effort into it this time.

tired old gambit, moron

Do you realise that they don't need your respect for their lifestyle for it to exist?

complete non sequiter perhaps you meant "approval for their lifetyle?. in any case, whore....

I don't care what you respect and why.

heh, i am approving, you are respecting (dolt

You can be as bigoted as you want. It doesn't bother me one bit, twit.

now this is geting juvenile. my views cannot be that strange to you. do not pretend it is the case. i am quite mainstream when it comes to human rights, i support various measures take by orgs to minimize violations. (in general)

you advocate a hands off policy due to some poorly rationalized ideas of fairness. you are the fucking moron and bigot. comprehension fucker!

Racist? nope.

there is an inherent racism involved when a american baby cannot be left out in cold to die and and a chinese one can. this is not a superficial difference that should be accepted and enjoyed for its contrast. rather it should be an instance where alternative solutions should be offered. it about being humane and being part of a larger society. you do not seem to understand that concept

You show me where leaving a baby out to freeze in our society is tolerated, and I will admit I was wrong. Last I checked, it was slightly illegal in our society.

fuck and why should i do this? lost more brain cells? what prompted this? (probably something that implied the complete opposite - heh)

Besides that point, how is me being tolerant of other societies racist? That one doesn't fly to good, twit. Try again.

heh
you mean.....more effort into it? fuck, read a book, moron, go to school

Do you understand that it isn't about educatoin and family planning. It's about survival.

mo fucking ron. cant you even connect the dots b/w the two? you gotta be deliberately obtuse. no one can be this stupid

Personally, I feel about the same towards you, but for completely different reasons.

very good. lets party fucker

Waste of space? Not my words, twit. You are on your own now.

heh
my empty threats have a little more flair than that crap!

Horrific acts of violence? How cute.

yah, got carried away

It isn't violent. They just lay them outside in the snow. It isn't like we are talking about bashing their heads open with rocks.

the methods are irrelevant. it is the death that is the issue. you lack imagination and that bit, speaks volumes about your pathology

As for why I excuse it, it isn't out of notions of fairness, twit.
It is because I have respect for other peoples' ways of life and societies.

sure it is. cant you put the two words (fairness/respect) in a single sentence and spin something similar. you lack imagination.

here is the bottom line. respect is fine if the "ways of life" are abided by some objective standards of right and wrong. you do not stand by and watch people getting butchered. you do not let human rights ( as constituted by a general consensus of world opinion) violations occur without some form of action....relief/censure/sanctions/humanitarian intervention

in order for this to happen, all you gotta do is move out of that little village you live in your head. your priorities are skewed and you have adopted a position that is quite damning. it appear however you do not recognize this fact. i recommend death

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Re: Re: whore!

Spell what out? That you obviously can't read?
The topic isn't ethics in general. It is whether evil is subjective or not.

did i tell you not to distract with trivialities. i will define the topic anyway i see fit. truth be told i only read the post that came immediately before my entry into this thread. it was yours and i commenced reading from....When that baby girl is left outside, ....

i still do not intend to read the rest as this subjective shit is for dullards and simpletons

i came to fuck with you and your bullshit that you pass off a reasoned discourse. an attempt to keep things civil was rejected. now you run

No where did I say that ethics has nothing to do with it. I said ethics isn't the topic, twit.

another example of your inabilty to comprehend the implications of what you right. you have made the most minor of distinctions. you are dishonest and a fraud. i believe you are familiar with this accusation yes?

 

Perhaps if i was stressing those differences to show the superiority of my own (like you are doing).

ok the brain dead always fall for this fallacy of reasoning. holding on to the validity of certain objective truths does not a neccesitate a corresponding idea of the inherent rightness of your position. for instance, it does not mean my way is always right or america's moral position is infallible. all one has to do is read up on some american history to understand that adopting such a position is not viable and is inconsistent.

you punks simply do not understand some cultures can be more wrong or more right that others. when the rwandans indulged in genocide, condemnation/action has to be forthcoming. you cannot write those actions off as some cultural preference that has to be respected.

viv la difference? i'll shove that difference up your ass, whore!

secondly i notice you also assume that reason is similarly up for grabs. each person has their own style and is valid as any other according to them. bullshit! logical thought processes take similar forms no matter what culture it arises in. a will aways equal a. anywhere!

poorly developed and random arguments are all that relativists got. holding out cannabilsm in some remote peak as an example of ethical relativism is indicative of the confusion. dragging out instances of temporary aberrations due to special circumstance does nothing for the wider argument which is.... can we as humans agree on a certain codes of conduct where all can benefit. we have! that laws adopted adhere to certain objective standards. you wann know what these are, go to fucking school!

transgress at your own risk!
you have been warned

I'm not. I'm simply stating how things are. .

yes, messiah meph. yes you are

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

objective truth

sociopaths suck

 

hed

did you not msg me all puffed up wanting to debate? step the fuck up

 

The what do you regard as "evil."

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

So you have a problem with moral relativism?

/ok the brain dead always fall for this fallacy of reasoning.

:bugeye:

/holding on to the validity of certain objective truths does not a neccesitate a corresponding idea of the inherent rightness of your position.

That is SO muddled. An 'objective truth' as you put it... is only as YOU put it. You objective truth may not be mine. It might be as well, obviously, or there would be any fucking wars eh? To a muslim, the fuckin quran is objectively true. To a christian, the stupid assed fucking bible is objectively true. How is it not obvious then, that indeed morals ARE relative. The only way they are NOT is if you're too stupid to understand that the other guy believes his shit just as much as you do.

/for instance, it does not mean my way is always right or america's moral position is infallible. all one has to do is read up on some american history to understand that adopting such a position is not viable and is inconsistent.

I wholly disagree. Moral relativism isn't an excuse and doesn't invalidate your personal morals, it's merely a realization that the only way to survive is to avoid taking that shit too seriously until you have no other choice. It is the realization that you are fundamentally opposed to certain choices of perspective. To deny moral relativism is to adopt a policy of denial and superiority.

/you punks simply do not understand some cultures can be more wrong or more right that others. when the rwandans indulged in genocide, condemnation/action has to be forthcoming.

While I would agree that your choice "condemnation and action must be forthcoming" is valid to your perspective, I refute it personally, as I believe understanding to be the imperative. Perhaps you can see why.

/you cannot write those actions off as some cultural preference that has to be respected.

LOL. Can so. It must be respected or you may not properly dilineate the propagator as friend or foe. To respect it doesn't mean to forgive it.

/viv la difference?

No. I think you're wrong spookz.

/each person has their own style and is valid as any other according to them.

each persons style IS fucking valid to THEM, that's the point you seem to miss in the name of continuing your argument. each take on reason is ultimately subjective as it is always based on a set of assumptions. It is these assumptions that unyieldingly propagate themselves throughout a perspective, and there is no escaping it. now i'm not saying that stupid people don't suck, I'm sayign to them they don't suck.

Let's say you hypothetically limit the topic to two perspectives. One very very stupid, one very very smart and logical. To each perspective, which is more valid? The stupid ass can't fathom the integrity of superior reasoning. I mean, the stupid person's brain literally cannot fathom anything the smart person sees. Tell me who exists to objectivly validate the smarter person's reasoning? How then is that intellect more right? Where does this objective standard exist? Standards of logic only exist in a mind, so it is your conception of objective truth that is subjective, though you convince yourself by your ability to percieve harmony in it's consistency that there exists a compenent of truth just 'floating around out there' meaning that cannibalism is wrong, or whatever random moral crap you've deemed to be objectively true from your analysis. YOUR ANALYSIS. Dig? Sure it may be quite similar to other peoples, so what?

/bullshit! logical thought processes take similar forms no matter what culture it arises in. a will aways equal a. anywhere!

Your a and my a may be similar, but they are NEVER the same. Don't forget that a logical thought process is based on definitions. Say you have 1,000 definitions and a resultant logical process based on inquisitions of that structure. Change any of the definitions and your logical process follows. Now consider that between any two humans all definitions are at best extremely similar and you'll see that a logical thought process only yeilds results pertinent to the (assuming a quality of analysis, which i believe to be rare (in other words, i don't think many people are consistent within themselves as denial is apparently rampant the human condition) definitions assumed by the process.

/poorly developed and random arguments are all that relativists got.

You have demonstrated a poorly developed and random argument from my perspective. Should I refuse to respect it? What if I like you and want to be your friend more than i care about being right? What if I'm willing to overlook your inherent flaws to see something more in you?

/holding out cannabilsm in some remote peak as an example of ethical relativism is indicative of the confusion.

Yet you have not shown what is wrong with cannibalism. It only means eating humans for food, not inherenly killing them for it. If they are already dead and you have no other way to survive, what is wrong with cannibalism? Sure it's gross but look at the morons on fear factor. Is that wrong too... objectively even?

/dragging out instances of temporary aberrations due to special circumstance does nothing for the wider argument

What is special circumstance about the question I posed above (it's equivalent to the scenario you're objecting to I believe)? Your argument is weak brother.

/which is.... can we as humans agree on a certain codes of conduct where all can benefit. we have!

What fantasy is it that you're living? Show me a single example where "we as humans agree on a certain codes of conduct" (which includes ALL humans) and I'll illustrate an exception. Maybe some humans aren't human? Now who is the fucking sociopath?

/that laws adopted adhere to certain objective standards.

You can't be serious.

 

Janal:

The burning desire to skin a poodle and then choking the life from its body with sodium panthenol just for existing.

"Kidding."

I'm about to say something that's likely to be blasphemous in your little book.
"Evil" and "good" are those blurry terms that should never be marginalized and that, dear girl, is what you're doing.

Someone here has tried debating with you his denial of 'evil' being some kind of will-robbing supernatural force, and frankly its both profitable and absurd to think that it is some kind of supernatural force.
Profitable because of all those excuses you can make with it, and absurd because you and I know the reasons why you stole that money was not because Baphomet bid it but because you were fucking broke.

Never think a man killing another is evil until you know why. Mr. Dahmer was a sick man who came to terms with himself and verbalized his disease in such a way I actually felt for the man.

Never think infanticide is evil until you know why. Those dead Eskimo girls are a culture's way of naturally curbing a population explosion in a barren place where food and shelter mean a hell of a lot fucking more to its people than they do to someone like you sitting at home in furry bunny slippers watching Oprah.
Aztec and Mayan children were sacrificed in love.
London's slum children were abused because the familiy would starve otherwise and the Industrial Age was an Ignorant One.


Never think adultery is evil until you know why. Cleopetra saved her empire twice from the claws of greedy Romans with her pussy.

Its all a matter of person a wagging his ignorant finger at person b, and all the Jan's and spooky's of the world will go on wagging and marginalizing the world down to rot, looking a brown nose down on things they won't understand not because of ignorance but for uglier reasons of not wanting to.

 

Wes:

True enough. But this would imply there's a negetive there to forgive.

I'm trying to think if I would find an Eskimo icicle baby strangely fascinating, funny, or forgivable.

Frankly, pogroms are fascinating. Aushwaitz was seductive.

The best thing you did here other than nailing it is putting the bitch up in bold.

Well said.


Lastly, I have a vision of this:

and this:

Inscribed in Times New Roman on Spooky's tombstone 2 years from now. Fucking Maggot.

 

You see that's just fucking talent. Words words words. If you do not make a shitload of money pissing people off with your words I am going to be pissed off at you Gendy.

 

Wes:

Muha-ha.

You'd be amazed at the pools of philistines who have no fucking clue I am a gendanken.

This is the part where I'm supposed to show gratitude. Blink and miss it.

 

Well, to comprehend the validity of moral relativism is not to negate one's own perspective. As a simplistic example: If I sense dishonesty, I'm gone for practicality and there will almost surely be an associated negative emotional component.

 

Never think infanticide is evil until you know why. Those dead Eskimo girls are a culture's way of naturally curbing a population explosion in a barren place where food and shelter mean a hell of a lot fucking more to its people than they do to someone like you sitting at home in furry bunny slippers watching Oprah

unfortunately dankass, it is you that post crap in ignorance. there are ways of controlling overpopulation without resorting to infanticide. it is intellectual laziness that prevents traditional societies from adopting new strategies.

secondly, it is merely an assumption that female infanticide occured solely due to population pressures. why were males not killed?. this indicates a partriachical structure that devalued females. now it is not simple expediency (which by the way i can understand) anymore but false ideologies that are at play here. that is bogus! i demand all to move into the modern age and show some reverence for the sanctity of all life

In Roman law, the Patria Potestas granted the father the right to dispose of his offspring as he saw fit. In Sparta the decision was made by a public official.

stupid fuck! you think i respect this? these are human rights violation. for instance when these muslim/hindu kids are given in marriage in the us, do we allow them to? the adult parties will face charges. why do we do this? it is because we have concern for the kids. the parents now take em home and marry them off. your punk ass interest in their welfare has ended because....""i respect their culture"!. fuck you bitch! just dont bring it around these parts eh?

shallow, pretentious and provincial. i shit on your dank ass!

i do not advocate gross interference in other societies ala "ugly american style". i rather employ other subtle strategies... education being the main one.

back to your ignorant assertions of .... food and shelter mean a hell of a lot fucking more to its people

"Balikci (1967: 623) has discussed the various cultural strategies, including child betrothal, adaption, and importation of wives, that were employed to ensure satisfactory recruitment of females into the adult population. Interestingly, such practices existed alongside female infanticide, the very practice that contributed above all others to the shortage of women!"( Freeman, Milton M. R. (1971) A social and ecological analysis of systematic female infancide among the Netsilik Eskimo. American Anthropologist 73, 5: pp. 1013)

yesiree bob
indeedly doodly doo
ahh the smart and rational, one with nature, savages! i spit on them! i spit on you!

 

I'm trying to think if I would find an Eskimo icicle baby strangely fascinating, funny, or forgivable.

Frankly, pogroms are fascinating. Aushwaitz was seductive.

the adults on this board have your number, little girl
flounce, toss, pout, whine and throw tantrums. it is expected and comes as no surprise

 

infact it is not ecological necessities that prompt most infanticide but rather is due to psychopathic and bogus customs of old. in parts of india, the bitch is murdered simply because the dowry is too expensive. some s.a indians... merely cos they feel like a snack.

 

Aztec and Mayan children were sacrificed in love.

and this somehow make it better? if this is a reason, it is fucking pathology!

"mom! if you love me you will buy me a barbie".
"hon, if i love you i'll slit your throat and throw you down a pyramid"

fucking cultural tolerance taken to mad frikkin extremes due to the cancer of
ethical relativism!

 

Click tack tack and the litte canine can paw his way into some website he's barely read-

Here:
http://www.humanevolution.net/a/inuiteskimo.html

...we can read about the part spooky's put up concerning Occidental strategies being employed in a culture it has no business nosing in.

...found in some nondescript place on that page.

What's left is for the fucking idiot to explain to us in the clearest bark he can muster what taurodontism, Down Sydrome and Greek preference for righthandedness dating back to the paleolithic ages has to do with Inuit family planning.

Now here:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/i1/infantic.asp

....we can read about the "Patria Potestas" and Spartans our little spooky poo barely glanced at in his rush for ~evidence~.

The same page that if given the same time he does to porn sites and ignorance he would have picked up on the clause stating that human sacrifice was reserved for the appreciated members of its societies- those same timeless reasons our mesoamericans, Native Americans, Celts, Egyptians, Assyrians......why all kinds of people throughout the world sought to appease their gods with the truest treasures they could- human life.

Here's the part where tightassed little Westernized pukes come in wagging their skinny finger at these folks for not knowing its a warm front and homogenized density that brings rain and not gods.

Uh-hu. And its gendankass kiddo.

And "Martha Stewart's Fabulous Guide to Cleanliness" would mean what to a native who's lived his whole life in a place where its a guarantee you'd die in a hearbeat without him and all that he knows?

I picture you trolling up to his igloo and freezing to death on his doorstep trying to sell him a fucking blender.

You're like Woodrow Wilson and his pathetic attempts for a League of Nations. Have a seat brother.

Never seen a shit take a shit before. Suprise me.

I'd doubt you want to call me spooky. If text can do as much imagine what you'd be with the spoken word.

 

What's left is for the fucking idiot to explain to us in the clearest bark he can muster what taurodontism, Down Sydrome and Greek preference for righthandedness dating back to the paleolithic ages has to do with Inuit family planning.

ahh ha!
why should it? i am cracking up
ok
who says it should? you? the author? authors?
heheheh

what are you doing?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!