Natural law vs man's laws

>I'z be thinkin' Mankind can escape natural laws
constructivist niggerwits are gonna play with their shit and try to splatter others with it in the process
always

how different is it from britain

whi says we're above laws of survival? we're exceptionally advance at survival but we are not above survival, not by a long shot.

what's the difference between an orangutan building a nest in the trees vs a human building a hut? a chimp uses rocks to bust open nuts, a human uses a nut cracker. the only difference you see is your ego making you think you are separate from nature, probably because those who have come before you have made your survival too easy.

with natural law you know what you're getting. With man's law, it never ends. Laws on top of laws and the smart abusing loopholes in the system. Never-ending taxes, used in ways that don't even benefit you. Bureaucracy that's more chaos than order.

Natural law is best. It is also know as the Law of Karma, every action has an equal and opposite reaction according to the intentions and effects of those actions.

The law of man should strive to best harmonize with the law of nature. However you must take into account the fact that Local Realism is false. Eliminative Materialism is False.

Reality is a non-local, atemporal, infinity made out of various densities of Mindness and each beings Mind is Indestructable, eternal, and Benevolent in it's true nature.

By natural law you mean natural law, not 'rules of the jungle', right?

well from what i hear about how politically correct it's gotten on the mainland with the hate speech laws and such, pretty much nonexistent here, although i haven't really seen people testing it. and there is a lot less non european migration here. but i think we are still on the same path eventually.

natural law being based on survival above else. not modern abstractions of morality.

Natural law is the only one that matters.

Well for godsakes man's law is infinitely better in every concievable way. If anything the most influence the rules of the jungle should have on society is the slightest acknowledgement of them when creating laws.

interesting. so would you value morality over natural instinct for your group/self to survive by dominating and exerting force over others even at your own expense?

Traditional laws and customs are based on natural law. For example, homosexuality being illegal or stigmatized because it goes against nature. Also the ideas of traditional gender roles and segregation of races coincide with natural law.

>homosexuality being illegal or stigmatized because it goes against nature
it also spread disease. despite what the left wants you to believe AIDS is a Gay disease spread by unprotected anal sex. it just is

won't be long until every disease is curable and then what's left to correct their unnatural behavior?
technology is a scourge that must be addressed.

Other than extreme circumstances yes, morality should prevail over natural instinct. The application of this 'natural law' you talk about is most prevalant in the most savage areas of society, such as ghettos and areas of low-iq. There is a reason the poor and the stupid have the most crime.

Nuclear arsenals, mate

>what's left to correct their unnatural behavior?

At that point it will be perfectly natural and good for keeping population levels low and quality of life high.

Godfags BTFO forever

The law of nature is nothing to do with philosophy, The law of nature is mathematic, 0 and 1. Three six and nine.

Mathematics is downstream from Logic which is downstream from pure experience you goat-fucking inbred Brainlet.

fair point. i suppose morality does have a role to create a functional society. it cannot be built on petty dysfunctional individual greed like you see in ghettos. when applied as a whole group i.e. nation, race would you still think morality supersedes group interest?

i mean in terms of building societies on. recognising natural law and adapting your society around it, or taking the path of modern ideas of morality. or a mixture of both.

What exactly does Man control that one would seek to obey his laws?

what the fuck is natural law? All moral philosophy is a creation of human psychology and culture, which is itself grounded in the laws of biology and physics etc

Attached: DbFaz7QUMAAEdwy.jpg (600x800, 120K)

The laws of nature are absolute, while man's laws are artificial constructs.
Fuck off

some value an ideology of morality/pacifism over might as a societal foundation. just different philosophies when we are so removed from primitive living i guess.

The fact is, the only morality that matters is assuring the long-run survival of humanity through space colonization and existential risk reduction. All other moral values are secondary and instrumental to this ultimate goal of sustainable space colonization.

Attached: o76czrh1kdh01.jpg (906x879, 99K)

Yes, and with even more strict adherence to man's laws than to natural law.

According to Jefferson, mans laws should act in harmony with natural law. Commies have destroyed this though.

>All other moral values are secondary and instrumental to this ultimate goal of sustainable space colonization.
why is that?

>existential risk reduction
some would argue that the idea of seeking pacifism as a goal is dysgenic.

Attached: 042.jpg (1024x768, 155K)

natural law as if you have to ask
>whether acknowledged or not, natural law exists; whether man adheres to it or not, natural law exists.

you sure you have been exposed to the truth of natural law?

youtu.be/ASUHN3gNxWo

Attached: 174.jpg (1024x768, 165K)

Attached: 187.jpg (1024x768, 115K)

Oh man Mark Passio's works are a breath of fresh air on this board, keep up the good work mate.

1. There's a high degree of uncertainty about what the correct normative philosophy is. Working on the problem will require time. The only way to guarantee sufficient time is to ensure the long-run survival of humanity. That requires space colonization, so that any local catastrophe on earth wouldn't wipe out the species

2. Existence is a precondition for every other normative value. The potential quantity of time in the future during which other values can be achieved and implemented is so vast that it means ensuring long-run survival is the biggest determinant of every other value. In other words, anything in the near-term, good or bad, is simply swamped by the vastness of future time. The amount of future people is potentially so huge that securing their existence must be a priority

3. Elimination of the human race would be very bad for the people alive at that time (i.e. billions would die in a big asteroid strike, pandemic etc)

Attached: 1470446094996.jpg (946x710, 69K)

The Parkway is a slog at rush hour though, huh.

thanks. reminded me of this.

47:55

youtube.com/watch?v=Yat0ZKduW18&t=47m55s

interesting take.

is that something in new jersey? i've only briefly been in newark. We are the OG jersey.

good clip. might watch the rest later.

Nick Bostrom has written a bunch on this and related issues; there are lots of videos, articles, books etc., but this short essay is a good read:

nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html
nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html
nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html

Attached: 1470446302845.jpg (800x407, 90K)

bumping

he should get more attention for sure

Attached: how reality is built.jpg (1140x776, 123K)

Attached: TAYLOR FASCISM NATURE.jpg (707x960, 98K)

last bump

Natural Law is the law of my ass.