Points you can't argue against?

[NeutralMunchHotel]

I was born in Scotland.

Actually your mother herself could argue against that point, saying you were born in Italy and your birth certificate is a false one for example.

But lies don't equal an arguement.

 

[Flap Jack452]

"You can't prove it doesn't exist/didn't happen"

 

[Cowabungaa]

Wow, why am I not arguing with you on this matter?

Because I'm so awesome *flex*

"You can't prove it doesn't exist/didn't happen"

Except in mathematics. But the rule especially counts for vague subjects like quantum-mechanics and the likes. Our world is mighty freaky if you zoom in a lot.

 

[Go Fighting In The War Room]

My girlfriend.

*Ba-Dum-Tish*

That posting this post on this thread would give me one more post to my post count due to the act of posting.

And that Poor literacy is Cool!

Cookie for refrence.

 

[cartzo]

chubacca is a wookie from the planet kashyyk, but he lives on endor with a bunch of teddy bear people, THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!

 

[keybird]

When someone says "Your mom"

Giggity

 

[sauerkraus]

The non-existence of magical gods cannot be argued against. Also the fact that 9/11 was allowed to happen by the U.S. gov cannot be argued against.

The first, they argue with "miracles" and things that aren't solid evidence.
The second, it's "FLAGFLAGFLAGFLAGFLAG" or "MURIKA FUCK YEAH"

 

[Carboncrown]

(1)Well, if none of your thoughts have real world applications, then why are we talking about the real world at all?

No... You said "may or may not"

(2)That's why they ARE evil. Real evil isn't the bad guy in a Michael Bay film, who's just rotten to his core for no good reason. Revenge, greed, ignorance and envy are all causes of real evil.

Ok, so the bad sides of human nature are the cause of evil, but could you describe, what evil is?

(3)"Arbitrary directives." I've already addressed this on this thread twice. I don't even understand how it can be considered arbitrary. We'll address this when we get to rape and murder.

Really? Ok, you said in your first post that "Evil is a real phenomenon and not just a characterization of the mind." now, why can't it be exactly that?

(4)I believe you're referring to murder, not rape and if you are, it was not seen as acceptable under certain circumstances. Rather, it was defined somewhat differently, because of the differences between a democracy today and a backward feudal society.

Actually to both,

but exactly! So my point was that if true evil exists, the common view of it can't change, and it shouldn't need to be taught.

And I guess I'll go ahead and ask this again: If some dick despot in a hellhole in Africa thinks it's okay to kidnap children and turn them into child soldiers, does that make something ok in your book? Does that un-evil the act in your book? If a dictator is using rape as a war crime, would you defend him at Geneva because "the government" decided it was okay? Remember, in mideval times, it was hardly a system of, by and for the people.

So you missed the part where you said "I don't think you could effectively characterize rape and murder as anything but evil."

And I said "Right, I can't."

(5)A.Relevance?
B."The Human Mind." I think you're venturing dangerously close to "human nature"/"common sense" territory. I'm not a mystic and neither are quite a few other rational people.

A)You said" if good and evil are just constructs then there should be no incentive to obey any laws or any moral code whatsoever, and if you and I met in person who was bigger would kill the other and steal his belongings." to that I think my answer was perfectly relevant, it doesen't change anything if they are just constructs, they still affect everyone the same way.

Kinda like the fact that, everyone knows that the earth orbits the sun, but if someone mentiones the sun, I'll still think about that shiny little thingy that crosses the sky every day, around earth, and still say that the sun has moved a lot, before saying that we rotated a lot, and it'll never affect my mental image of the sun.

B)What?

(6)It seems you don't believe in good, either.

No true evil, but true good? Yeah, seems a little controversial.

(7)Is that really what you think of us? Maybe we are herd animals, but we're a helluvah lot more than that.

No, we aren't.

You said just said basically "Maby we are this, but we are more than we are."

And I know what kinda ring "animal" has to it, but to me that's just silly.

(8)Why? I don't believe in a soul at all, and I still believe in free will. Because, once again, why would I not trust any of my senses? I may as well kill myself right now!

(9)I must confess, I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Lets try smaller scale then.

And lets assume you could make 2 perfect clones, and two exactly same kind of isolated huge halls, where you could control every aspect of the environment.

Then you let clone A live his life under random events right away, but you "freeze" clone B. After clone A has died, you let clone B live his life on the other hall, where you duplicate every single detail of A:s life.

Now do you think B would do anything differently than A?

Could you predict B:s whole life?

When your senses send your brain that electric signal of this post, without any further outer influence, is there actually a diffrent conclusion wich your brain could come up with, than the one I could predict if I knew every detail of this scenario?

 

[BENZOOKA]

Monty Python's Flying Circus and the Monty Python movies are one of the most influential things in the field of comedy.

 

[funguy2121]

blah blah

No sir, I don't believe that at any point I said "maby" anything. Anyway, I'm glad we agree that good and evil, like all concepts, can be deconstructed. I guess where we disagree is this: I don't believe simply because you've separated concretes, turned them into abstractions and recategorized them (arbitrarily so, by the way) in your own mind that that means it is so out here, in the real world, where things are actually happening.

The arrogance with which you argue this just smacks of a certain pretentiousness. We can pick away at each other's arguments all day long, or we can deconstruct everything we can think of and do a whole bunch of nothing with the resulting mess, but that won't take away from the fact that what we call "good" and what we call "evil" are very real phenomena and not some ruse that our favorite political party has pulled on us.

People are neither inherently good or inherently bad. Any one can choose to be either, even the mentally deranged, to a degree, and those decisions will have real world consequences. I mean, if you don't believe in good then how do you relate to people; why talk to others on the internet at all? Does it chap your ass to know that there are doctors who work their whole lives to curing cancer?

 

[Metroid]

What can't be argued, is the use of fingers.

 

[Carboncrown]

blah blah

No sir, I don't believe that at any point I said "maby" anything. Anyway, I'm glad we agree that good and evil, like all concepts, can be deconstructed. I guess where we disagree is this: I don't believe simply because you've separated concretes, turned them into abstractions and recategorized them (arbitrarily so, by the way) in your own mind that that means it is so out here, in the real world, where things are actually happening.

The arrogance with which you argue this just smacks of a certain pretentiousness. We can pick away at each other's arguments all day long, or we can deconstruct everything we can think of and do a whole bunch of nothing with the resulting mess, but that won't take away from the fact that what we call "good" and what we call "evil" are very real phenomena and not some ruse that our favorite political party has pulled on us.

People are neither inherently good or inherently bad. Any one can choose to be either, even the mentally deranged, to a degree, and those decisions will have real world consequences. I mean, if you don't believe in good then how do you relate to people; why talk to others on the internet at all? Does it chap your ass to know that there are doctors who work their whole lives to curing cancer?

Getting a little emotional I see.

Now, since you suggested that I might have something against doctors who dedicate their lives for cancer, and I can only imagine thats because I disagree with you on a question that no man should ever claim to know the answer to. And that's uncool so I suggest we just leave it at this.

And I argue about these things because I enjoy it, it's therapeutic, and it helps me shape my beliefs.

And it's weird that you mentioned politics two times for no apparent reason, aand you did say maby.

But anyway I don't think this'll go anywhere anymore.