Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-08-2014, 10:22 AM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2014 10:27 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  No one has said that. And possibly no one here would say that because they wouldn't conflate law and morality.
Earmuffs said that. Muffs drew a clear line between "laws" and "rights" or something is "right". He said that a piece of paper enforced by gun gets to determine morality. And you nor Rev opposed him on that. So you must agree. Either that, or everyone is shifting the goalposts and definitions (are rights moral? If not, then don't talk about them!). But there is a gun in the room and you approve of me getting shot.
And I find that just as offensive, as when Christians want you to go to Hell or Muslims want to behead you, because it's in their book.

(02-08-2014 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  The death penalty is rare and applies only to one crime, not all. Your argument is just stupid. Grow the fuck up.
You grow the fuck up. Why? Because if you break even the smallest law that you morally disagree with, and get even the smallest fine, it never stops. If you insist on not paying the fine, never ever, whatever happens, then the government adds up to it until the fine is so big that it pays off to have armed forces raiding your house to abduct you. If you defend your house as everyone would, you get fuckin' shot. There is an undeniable and inevitable line between you consistently disobeying the smallest commandment and you getting shot. It may take years, lots of scary letters from the IRS, but at the end is a bullet in your guts. As long as there is the gun in the room, it's a question of when, not if.
Again, I find that Muhammadly offensive.

(02-08-2014 09:54 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Do you think stealing is wrong? Do you think that society as a whole has a right to protect itself from thieves?
The way society exists is a mere abstraction and abstractions do not have rights. When you start giving rights and powers to abstractions, this is where theocracy kicks in. I am not a friend of Yahweh, Allah, presidency, race, nation, football club or any other abstraction.

I don't merely think stealing is wrong, I know that for a fact and I can prove that and I don't need fake words on paper.
Property rights is a natural human attribute of our action, speech and thinking. The things we take or create for ourselves, belong to us. To take something from another person is to affirm the idea of property rights objectively, then to affirm my property rights, but to deliberately ignore his property rights. That is inconsistent and hypocritical and therefore immoral.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 10:25 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:22 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 09:54 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Do you think stealing is wrong? Do you think that society as a whole has a right to protect itself from thieves?
The way society exists is a mere abstraction and abstractions do not have rights. When you start giving rights and powers to abstractions, this is where theocracy kicks in. I am not a friend of Yahweh, Allah, presidency, race, nation, football club or any other abstraction.

I don't merely think stealing is wrong, I know that for a fact and I can prove that and I don't need fake words on paper.
Property rights is a natural human attribute of our speech and thinking. The things we take or create for ourselves, belong to us. To take something from another person is to affirm our property rights, but to deliberately ignore his property rights. That is inconsistent and hypocritical and therefore immoral.

Ok so stealing is wrong then, and by not paying taxes you have been stealing from the rest of us. So it is you who initiated any force that comes your way.

Oh and society is not an abstraction in the way that Yahweh or Allah is as it is a group of REAL ACTUAL PEOPLE and individual action affect the group as a whole so yes there needs to be a way to redress this.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
02-08-2014, 10:34 AM
Re: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Wow, you really do have this presuppositionalist attitude to your ideas. It's sad

I've seen your cases of absolute morality before and it's nothing but assertions tacted onto eachother. Not aware of how you can belief that's you proving something.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like ClydeLee's post
02-08-2014, 10:48 AM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2014 10:54 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:25 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Ok so stealing is wrong then, and by not paying taxes you have been stealing from the rest of us. So it is you who initiated any force that comes your way.

Oh and society is not an abstraction in the way that Yahweh or Allah is as it is a group of REAL ACTUAL PEOPLE and individual action affect the group as a whole so yes there needs to be a way to redress this.
Laugh out load Laugh out load Laugh out load You gave me a good laugh there, really. Took me a while to calm down. You are using quite a religious language here and I underlined the key words.

"the rest of us", "a group", "the group as a whole" are all WTF buzzwords. They're abstractions that don't really exist. You can not give me a name list, accounting books and then objectively prove how these people are associated together in joint interest, much less if I've been stealing from them. You're just flapping your gums here, just like Christians do with original sin, salvation and washing power of the blood of Christ.

Next bullshit thing is you calling a non-payment of taxes an individual "action".

You will probably not understand this, this is logical reasoning, but it requires study and training. But maybe someone else will.
A not doing something is not an action, it is just the opposite. This non-action is only called a "crime" because some assholes in capital city made up a law that the positive action of paying taxes is moral, so my non-action is immoral. But there is no way to prove that such a positive obligation is moral. If positive obligation was truly, naturally objectively moral, it would be immoral to do anything but paying taxes, 24 hours a day.
No political asshole can give objective proof why paying 20 % tax is moral but paying just 19 % lands you in jail or gets you shot if you resist. That is just biblically idiotic.

Of course another reason why you are so full of crap that your eyes are brown is, that I do pay taxes, because I don't have choice. And I'm from another country anyway, so there's no way I could be stealing from anyone.

We're just talking ideas here. Fortunately you only get arrested for ideas in USA if you post them on Facebook, like Brandon Raub.

(02-08-2014 10:34 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Wow, you really do have this presuppositionalist attitude to your ideas. It's sad

I've seen your cases of absolute morality before and it's nothing but assertions tacted onto eachother. Not aware of how you can belief that's you proving something.
I think it's objectivism, not presuppositionalism. What kind of training in logic do you have? Any moral philosophy in there? Or is your only encounter with logic when you tried to disprove biblical arguments?
If you don't think objective reality exists, then please wear a straight jacket while typing to imaginary persons out there.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 10:59 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  I think it's objectivism, not presuppositionalism. What kind of training in logic do you have? Any moral philosophy in there? Or is your only encounter with logic when you tried to disprove biblical arguments?
If you don't think objective reality exists, then please wear a straight jacket while typing to imaginary persons out there.

And objectivism is a failure pile. We need only look at your pathetically disingenuous attempt at justification right there.

"Existence exists, therefore I am right".

That's what objectivists have to work with. And it's invalid, because you can't draw inferences from a tautology. Not that that stops you...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
02-08-2014, 11:22 AM
Re: RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 10:25 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Ok so stealing is wrong then, and by not paying taxes you have been stealing from the rest of us. So it is you who initiated any force that comes your way.

Oh and society is not an abstraction in the way that Yahweh or Allah is as it is a group of REAL ACTUAL PEOPLE and individual action affect the group as a whole so yes there needs to be a way to redress this.
Laugh out load Laugh out load Laugh out load You gave me a good laugh there, really. Took me a while to calm down. You are using quite a religious language here and I underlined the key words.

"the rest of us", "a group", "the group as a whole" are all WTF buzzwords. They're abstractions that don't really exist. You can not give me a name list, accounting books and then objectively prove how these people are associated together in joint interest, much less if I've been stealing from them. You're just flapping your gums here, just like Christians do with original sin, salvation and washing power of the blood of Christ.

Next bullshit thing is you calling a non-payment of taxes an individual "action".

You will probably not understand this, this is logical reasoning, but it requires study and training. But maybe someone else will.
A not doing something is not an action, it is just the opposite. This non-action is only called a "crime" because some assholes in capital city made up a law that the positive action of paying taxes is moral, so my non-action is immoral. But there is no way to prove that such a positive obligation is moral. If positive obligation was truly, naturally objectively moral, it would be immoral to do anything but paying taxes, 24 hours a day.
No political asshole can give objective proof why paying 20 % tax is moral but paying just 19 % lands you in jail or gets you shot if you resist. That is just biblically idiotic.

Of course another reason why you are so full of crap that your eyes are brown is, that I do pay taxes, because I don't have choice. And I'm from another country anyway, so there's no way I could be stealing from anyone.

We're just talking ideas here. Fortunately you only get arrested for ideas in USA if you post them on Facebook, like Brandon Raub.

(02-08-2014 10:34 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Wow, you really do have this presuppositionalist attitude to your ideas. It's sad

I've seen your cases of absolute morality before and it's nothing but assertions tacted onto eachother. Not aware of how you can belief that's you proving something.
I think it's objectivism, not presuppositionalism. What kind of training in logic do you have? Any moral philosophy in there? Or is your only encounter with logic when you tried to disprove biblical arguments?
If you don't think objective reality exists, then please wear a straight jacket while typing to imaginary persons out there.

Maybe I would feel any reason explain my past experience to you if you didn't fill most posts with pointless generalizations... And assuming things about someone isn't active philosophizing or how we judhe societies as you've tried to use as a defense before.

I've never seem you demonstrate the most important thing any student of logic or philosophy needs to understand first. That they're highly capable of being wrong... And not knowing the answer. I may be wrong, but I've never seen you admit doubt and it makes your claims of your logic/philosophy credentials arrogant and disregarded.

But.. I have to add another thing. Implying others that don't agree with you aren't worthy of your discussion is exactly indicative of acting like religious pompous debaters. Which is what you've done here and why I say you're like a presuppositionalist.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
02-08-2014, 11:24 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 10:25 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Ok so stealing is wrong then, and by not paying taxes you have been stealing from the rest of us. So it is you who initiated any force that comes your way.

Oh and society is not an abstraction in the way that Yahweh or Allah is as it is a group of REAL ACTUAL PEOPLE and individual action affect the group as a whole so yes there needs to be a way to redress this.
Laugh out load Laugh out load Laugh out load You gave me a good laugh there, really. Took me a while to calm down. You are using quite a religious language here and I underlined the key words.

"the rest of us", "a group", "the group as a whole" are all WTF buzzwords. They're abstractions that don't really exist. You can not give me a name list, accounting books and then objectively prove how these people are associated together in joint interest, much less if I've been stealing from them. You're just flapping your gums here, just like Christians do with original sin, salvation and washing power of the blood of Christ.

Where to begin with this failure pile? So other people do not exist? Is that what you are trying to say? Never go full retard. If you owe taxes you live in that society. This is not a controversial point. By living in a society you are using the public resources paid for by the group (roads infrastructure etc) again not a controversial point unless you are full blown libertarian retard. The group as a whole pays for these things and as a member of the group you owe your share.

(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Next bullshit thing is you calling a non-payment of taxes an individual "action".

How could it be anything else? You are choosing to steal from the rest of us. You bring down any penalties upon yourself.


(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  You will probably not understand this, this is logical reasoning, but it requires study and training. But maybe someone else will.
A not doing something is not an action, it is just the opposite. This non-action is only called a "crime" because some assholes in capital city made up a law that the positive action of paying taxes is moral, so my non-action is immoral. But there is no way to prove that such a positive obligation is moral. If positive obligation was truly, naturally objectively moral, it would be immoral to do anything but paying taxes, 24 hours a day.

Try not eating or drinking. Inaction has consequences the same as actions do. Not a controversial point.

(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  No political asshole can give objective proof why paying 20 % tax is moral but paying just 19 % lands you in jail or gets you shot if you resist. That is just biblically idiotic.

Not talking about morality. Things have inherent cost and as a member of a society you are partially responsible for those costs. You ducking out of your share is the same as stealing from the rest of us. You are the one at fault.

(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Of course another reason why you are so full of crap that your eyes are brown is, that I do pay taxes, because I don't have choice. And I'm from another country anyway, so there's no way I could be stealing from anyone.

WTF dude really? This is a rather universal argument. I never said you were in the US or anywhere else you fucking moron. Not paying your taxes where you live is the same anywhere. You are stealing for the rest of your society.


(02-08-2014 10:48 AM)Luminon Wrote:  We're just talking ideas here. Fortunately you only get arrested for ideas in USA if you post them on Facebook, like Brandon Raub.

Check your sources, you already posted 1 satire page here and now you linked to a conspiracy website that had a 2 paragraph story with no sources. The fail is strong with this one.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
02-08-2014, 11:41 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
He really isn't worth talking to. Trying to get him to give up his faith is like trying to teach a lizard calculus.

He really is a true believer.

Paleoliberal • English Nationalist • Zionist • Rightist • Anti-Islam • Neoconservative • Republican • Linguistic Revivalist and Purist

Happily Divorced from the Left!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 11:57 AM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2014 12:12 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 11:22 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Maybe I would feel any reason explain my past experience to you if you didn't fill most posts with pointless generalizations... And assuming things about someone isn't active philosophizing or how we judhe societies as you've tried to use as a defense before.
Philosophy is the thing that deals with generalizations. Assuming is the valid method in mathematics and philosophy as well. You know, this "let there be X that is twice the amount of Y, at which amount of Y the X equals 32.5?" That is the rational method that is used both in mathematics and philosophy and it deals with general properties of reality, not any specific X or Y cut out of a newspaper.
People here are so hung up on empiricism that they tend to forget that.

But now that you see that my generalizations aren't pointless, feel free to explain your past experience to me.

(02-08-2014 11:22 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I've never seem you demonstrate the most important thing any student of logic or philosophy needs to understand first. That they're highly capable of being wrong... And not knowing the answer. I may be wrong, but I've never seen you admit doubt and it makes your claims of your logic/philosophy credentials arrogant and disregarded.
If you say this has anything to do with logic or philosophy, then please prove it logically or philosophically. What I see are social commands to act as if I felt unsure and guilty somehow, while I don't really feel that way. I don't see anything logical or philosophical about it. Acting with certainty is not offensive in itself, insulting people is, and you see people insult me a lot.

What I see is a sheer terror of people when they see anyone claiming anything for certain. Because certainty means responsibility. If nothing is real, nothing is certain (except evolutionary biology and so on), nobody is responsible and nobody is guilty for the very sad state of humanity. What I see is whole school of students claiming together in a very convincing way that a herd of camels ate their homework and then me saying I did my homework and proving that camels don't eat paper. Obviously the students are going to get mad, because that would mean an obligation on their part to do their homework. Suddenly I am the traitor and threat, because it is somehow my fault that they must do homework, not their fault that they did not do their homework. What I see is a whole planet full of bad conscience and undone homework. A person who did his homework on such a planet is a public enemy.

How do I know that? Nobody is curious. Not in the slightest bit, not once they learn what is actually the topic. They immediately get defensive and offensive. But no curiosity Wink
Trust me, I had this many times at school, this terrible feeling of not having done my homework or not having studied for exams and then making excuses, collective excuses even. This is not an argument, just a feeling you can relate to. Don't worry, we're big now, there are no homeworks and teachers around, you can allow yourself to feel that sinking in your stomach, that old school missed homework feeling.

(02-08-2014 11:22 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  But.. I have to add another thing. Implying others that don't agree with you aren't worthy of your discussion is exactly indicative of acting like religious pompous debaters. Which is what you've done here and why I say you're like a presuppositionalist.
If we were in a school of airplane piloting, or surgery, plumbing, biochemistry or software programming, you would not be saying that. Just like me, so far, I have accepted every piece of specific positive scientific evidence that Cjlr bashed me on head with. I am not worthy to discuss mathematics with Cjlr or Chas Bowing

But there is somehow this feeling, that in philosophy, ethics, law, education, parenting and so on, there is nothing is real, nothing is certain, nobody knows anything. So we feel we are all equal in these particular disciplines without really studying them and nobody can claim superiority. And we determine the truth by majority vote. See, that is what I mean by collective denial of homework and thinking that this is somehow equivalent to everyone having done their homework. I call bullshit. I am one person in 1,000 or maybe 10,000 who does his homework and there is about one person in 200 who is neurologically capable of doing his homework in these disciplines without bailing out because of emotional and cultural excuses of paper-eating camels. The other 199 people bail out at the first sight of discomfort and are backed up in their camel claim by the other 198 people. And they call this philosophy, logic, ethics and culture. And they teach this on the most prestigious universities and on every public school and church school.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2014, 11:58 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-08-2014 10:22 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-08-2014 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  No one has said that. And possibly no one here would say that because they wouldn't conflate law and morality.

Earmuffs said that.

No, he didn't. Provide a quote or apologize for defaming the Kiwi.

Quote:
Muffs drew a clear line between "laws" and "rights" or something is "right".

There you go conflating again. "Rights" does not mean morality.

Quote:He said that a piece of paper enforced by gun gets to determine morality.


Once again, no he didn't.

Quote:And you nor Rev opposed him on that. So you must agree.

Well, there's a Logic 101 failure. That is a non sequitur.

Quote:Either that, or everyone is shifting the goalposts and definitions (are rights moral? If not, then don't talk about them!). But there is a gun in the room and you approve of me getting shot.
And I find that just as offensive, as when Christians want you to go to Hell or Muslims want to behead you, because it's in their book.

You need to read a book. Google 'social contract'.

Quote:
(02-08-2014 09:02 AM)Chas Wrote:  The death penalty is rare and applies only to one crime, not all. Your argument is just stupid. Grow the fuck up.
You grow the fuck up. Why? Because if you break even the smallest law that you morally disagree with, and get even the smallest fine, it never stops. If you insist on not paying the fine, never ever, whatever happens, then the government adds up to it until the fine is so big that it pays off to have armed forces raiding your house to abduct you. If you defend your house as everyone would, you get fuckin' shot.

Your reasoning is simplistic and childish. Grow the fuck up. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: