Tell me why this is objectively bad using morals which don't originate from God.
I guarantee you can't without appealing to some subjective standard.
(Hard mode: Aka atheist Libertarian/Liberalist mode)
(Explain why, as an individual, do you have the authority to tell another individual what to do with his body. Do this without appealing to a higher being and without appealing to a collective. What overrules his personal discussion?)
It's not objectively bad, just funny as hell.
HERETICS WILL BURN AT THE ST- uh I mean DEGENERATES WILL HANG ON DAY OF THE ROPE
> why this is objectively bad
>but you're not allowed to define what bad means
It's literally a nonsense question. Even if you say "bad is what god says" that's still a subjective standard.
Otherwise I can equivalently say "Bad is what contributes to the destruction of society"
Both of these definitions are equally subjective.
But as an individualist how can you appeal to a collective good?
Even as an indiviudal, i am a collection of cells.
The well being of the agent depends on the well being of the many cells that exist inside the agent.
Similarly, the well being of the individual depends upon the well being of society.
I flipped around the last sentence
This is the dumbest thing I've read in a while.
>implying you can read
"Objectively bad" isn't a thing, but severe mental illness, bestiality, physical self-destruction, evolutionarily counterproductive behavior, and manipulating society to accept and even encourage all these things are real.
Anyway, 45% chance he'll be dead in a few years, so no point thinking much about him.
>I'm a collectivist and an individualist at the same time
>can't read confirmed
I never said that
male != female
Therefore it is a lie (an evil) to insist a male is female.
Because she's suffering.
remember when Mr. Garrison on south park was just an over the top joke?
The rights of an individual outweigh the well being of society. Man can create his own fate and suffers when he is forced to be dependent on the state.
Let's go to school:
There is a difference between morality and ethics. Morality, in all its forms, is regionally based; it has boundaries. Ethics on the other hand is absolute. It's philosophical and almost a science, almost.
So ditch talking about morality, unless you're addressing a particular region or country or where ever. What is moral in one place is immoral in another place.
Stick to ethical principals.
No, I think the better framing is to say that in order to have a society that runs well in the longterm, we should give certain rights and freedoms to the individual.... because the individual is the primary unit of action within the society.
And we should not allow society to subvert those freedoms, even if it wants to, because it is not in society's interest to have that power.
The fallacy at the heart of your framing is that the individual knows what is good for him... and that the society knows what is good for it. Neither is true. Both are hopelessly confused, all the time.... and they should help eachother symbiotically.
That's collectivist thinking. You're trying to have your cake and eat it.
I'm not bound by your label. There's nothing inconsistent about what i said.
How the fuck would objective morals originate from God in the first place? If the rationale for acting "moral" is avoiding hell, that's just acting in self interest. By the same logic, jail is a source of objective morality.
What happens when there's a conflict between the right of an individual to change their gender and fuck a dog, and maintaining the moral fabric of society?
>What happens when there's a conflict between the right of an individual to change their gender and fuck a dog, and maintaining the moral fabric of society?
This depends on somebody smarter than me figuring out what is actually in the long-term benefit of society.
There may be situations where it goes one way, and situations where it goes another way. But obviously, since I brought it up, I think the answer will turn out that it's better to help the mentally ill in a better way.
>Morality is like people's tastes in stories.
We as human beings have different opinions if different stories are good or bad, but we all pretty much agree certain things make stories bad like: Deus Ex Machinas.
That's still prioritizing the well being of society over individual rights, which is collectivism.
Greetings.
Ascended master here.
I could make a long philosophically obfuscated post on the whens and whys behind the fact that belief in God doesn't actually change the validity of your ethics.
But that would be drag, and boring. No one likes that now do they?
So instead I'll cook your noodle with the following paradox.
1. You are living in the matrix
2. God comes to you in the matrix and tells you that murder is objectively wrong.
3. Is murder objectively wrong?
4. Explain how your answer to #3 does not contradict #1 and #2.
Have fun and try to not make a total brainlet of yourself.
Yea, Like I said, I'm not bound by your labels. You can define things as you like.
I'm for strong individual rights that society cannot contravene. And, in that sense, I am an individualist.
>I'm not bound by your labels.
>I am an individualist.
You are not an individualist and I already explained why. A libertarian would maintain that the rights of one person cannot be imposed upon unless that person violates the rights of another. Self destructive behavior and weakening the moral fabric of society do not meet this criteria.
She is a beautiful Aryan princess
You made an assertion, and I rejected it. The space of philosophies is much more complicated than your little brain can imagine.
Homosexuality, transgenderism, and bestiality are all mental disorders thus they are objectively bad.
Yeah, ethics is made up.
>What is moral in one place is immoral in another place.
Relativism? LMAO!
Yeah, cannibalism is OKAY in African and other shit holes.
(AKA they are immoral.)
The biggest question besides "How" is "WHY".
Nobody cares how an ant moves food to its colony unless they care "why". "How" is always within the margin of "Why".
You ought to know that we care more about the ontological purpose for something rather than the physical reason, and that says a lot. Keep this in mind.
So God, thousands of years ago, told a man in a desert some rules.
Don't murder..
Don't cheat.
Don't steal..
Etc.
Normie shit, basically.
Why OUGHT we follow those rules?
I would not dream of killing, lying to, or cheating on, a loved one; god didn't tell me that; and I'm not following that rule because God said so. I'm following the rules because my heart says so.
Humans feel more validated and respected by those they validate and respect; it's a giving process, and we are naturally giving. By giving respect, our brains LEARN because they validate the information given to us by those we respect; we learn language skills, moral skills, cultural skills, etc; they are ALL subjective.
Similar to how there are people with no capacity to empathize (and thus learn poor morals), there are people with a low capacity to socialize (autistic people often) who also learn poor morals.
A psychopath's aptitude for society is his necessity to live and his fear of death; he lives by God's rules only to suit himself.
>do you have the authority to tell another individual what to do
>What overrules his personal discussion?
Take a wild guess. No I am not making an argument I am acquainting you with reality.
Getting raped and murdered is subjectively bad
is OP picture bait or did it actually a dog?
But am I aware of the matrix?
And If god, as entity or idea, could manifest itself in a way that it's existence couldn't be denied, then all objectivism would lose relevance and as order dictates, murder and whatever law god tried to subject humans to would have actual meaning.
As it stands now, god and morality are just spooks that we subject willingly to, and as such, can willingly choose when to abide by them.
I actually made myself watch the last video there some time and it's basically a story about a dog humping the dude's leg or something. Overblown youtube titles as usual.
without appealing to religious morals, tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to go on youtube and tell little boys to start hrt before puberty. Protip you can't. Mind your own business.
It is, it's only bad for the person getting raped and murdered
Yes
>spooks
The universe has a finite amount of resources and any waste is considered an objective sin. Killing any living thing is a sin if it isn't for food, because it is a waste of resources. Ejaculating without making a baby is a sin because semen is supposed to be a very refined substance according to esoteric sources, and is produced ising precious resources.
If you think of the universe as an economy with a restricted amount of resources but with the ability to grow, almost every religions sin is regarding wastefulness. It's not about things being "shameful" or "bad", it's just a matter of contributing or not. Gay people are a waste of resources because they don't have children etc. #REKT
I genuinely lol'd
Based aussie.
>I would not dream of killing, lying to, or cheating on, a loved one; god didn't tell me that; and I'm not following that rule because God said so. I'm following the rules because my heart says so.
Why comes down to practicality. The reason why is to give a moral reason to punish liars, murders and cheaters.
People who find themselves lying murdering and cheating more often will suffer a negative penalty to reproduction. Hence the next generation is less likely to lie murder and cheat.
It's a selection process.
PLEASE READ THIS
Decent answer.
Just so you know, that pic was for people who talk about 'spooks'. Dumb shit. It's only a deconstruction (pic related)
Oh I know, it was fun reading it.
The fact that by deconstructing things you aren't disproving them is what I find most funny.
Or maybe am I just too full of myself to recognize actual debunking?
Only time will tell.
Thanks
>Never dream of cheating on...
>never dream
>cheating
Hah sure , do that leaf thing where you brag about having impossibly strong moral fibre. Nobody is fooled.
My man!
Must suck not having anyone care about you
depends, do I know I'm in the matrix or not?