I think reddit is becoming redpilled

>subjective economic morality
>red pilled

I think people post their own reddit posts on here

you're retarded

A grape is like 3 calories. Not going to make or break a starving person

You have to go back.

Being groped/groping is subjectively worse

Having the grape stolen/stealing is objectively worse

Einstein remarked that he didn't know what the weapons and battlefields of ww3 would be.
It is a war of words.
A battle for the mind, who will define reality?

These fucking retarded fags/faggetes that have no actual clue what words mean other than to grasp at the one which will do the most damage.

In this way they will destroy language, the tower of Babylon will be abandoned as no one will speak in an objective tongue, or to be more accurate they will speak the subjective as if it were objective.

Know the difference and all the lefts entire arguement can be boiled down to one thing.

'We, a collective of 'I's, should have domain over all'
Vs
'I, a collective of the 'we', should have domain over all'

>Boys become girls
>Girls become boys

The poorest 'I' having the most power as a representative of the lowest common denominator of the subjective.

That's why it is so alluring, this devils deal. For all you have to do to receive the blessings is not some test or challenge, no, all you have to do is kneel.

Become the subject.

Ask not what are our duties, instead ask what are my rights?

nice moral subjectivity, reddit

What is this ayn rand bullshit?

Only a Jew would think the monetary value of one grape is worth more than getting groped....

How to understand and argue with these people.

If you don't know the core causal mental fuck-up that has happened then talking to a these people and debating becomes just two pigs mud wrestling with no productive outcome other than bad blood.

For instance, to apply this to the gun control debate;

The subjective emotional arguement is that guns can kill me therefore guns are bad and should be banned

Whereas objectively, banning guns only means that law abiding citizens are the one who don't have access as the criminals will have access regardless.

Banning guns from a subjective standpoint is completely logical

Banning guns from an objective standpoint is completely illogical

If you don't have that understanding then you are not even speaking the same language and will never achieve anything productive.

When they say it would be better to ban guns, they are neither right or wrong until it is understood what perspective they are arguing from.

These people aren't wrong, you have to get over that so you can appeal to them and win them over rather than just clash.

10 years in and no one is close to doing that, winning any of these people over, in fact, we were objectively losing big time until recently.

I will put it this way; everyone (hundreds) I take on a certain line of inquiry, left or right, man or woman even the most staunch pity pimp will admit to me at the end of it that racism does not exist objectively.

Anyone.

Can you do the same?

>If we use the word "objective" in the sense of majority societal agreement, which we should
The word “objective” has an objective definition and it’s objectively not what you say it should be

fag

Being false pilled used disingeniuos argument tactics.

I thought the red pill was about "unjewing" your life.
Yet all the people who engage in red pill are like pilpul , and engaging in the worst sort of semantic kikery.

The fact that reddit fag bring this up lets see

>a grape can be measured by financial markets. And weihed by supply and demand
>human expierence;positive or negative is intrinsic. The value of an expierence is just as valued as an object of importance like a family heirloom or a stuffed animal friend to a little kid.
>while saying "groping" is acceptable becuase there are some, which are a such a tiny percentage of the population, that actually enjoy such unwanted advances is condoning risky behaviour.
Like you have a 20% chance of robbing a bank and getting away with it so its totally okay, like do what thou wilt bros, amirite?

i mean i guess i can understand where you comkng from.
I mean atleast you wont get any std for pinching a girls ass outside her clothes right.
No way is it risky on your part, no way.
But her she may like it or hate it, regardless shes gotta put up with all your stupid ass bullshit.

Like what
the
fuck

Subjectively, racism does exist in that various races have certain attributes and characteristics assigned to them. Hence why it is so easy to classify them and build a profile or stereotype out of them.

Objectively racism doesn't exist because we're all human and can ascend to our full potential if certain conditions are met. This would be the ideal as it would cease all conflict and misunderstanding.

It doesn't matter how the society judges the grope. It's how the individual woman judges it.
Imagine being harrassed by ugly women and justifying it as normal because of muh society. It's still disgusting.

damn reddit is so redpilled

Attached: 1565086304711.png (796x1044, 460K)

It's really a trick question. In a hypothetical situation where someone absolutely must choose between the two, this would be a choose the lesser evil / pick your poison type of thing. However, in reality this is extremely unlikely as you would have the option to walk away and NOT grope or steal in the first place, thus making this a really baseless, senseless comparison, and false argument to begin with. And so we see reddit in its natural habitat again with its usual cringe and bluepilled NPCs.
In conclusion, OP is a faggot and needs to go back immediately.

We need to have a thread on objectivism vs subjectivsm or "critical rationalism" / "logical postivism" vs A priorism.
The left doesnt believe in reality. They think all statements are either an utterance of emotion (that must be ignored) or a hypothetical question or scenario that can be tested. They can never be wrong, because the hypothesis can be appended (real communism has never been tried) or the definition of words altered (diversity is our strength)

The entire explanation is difficult to condense into a few words even a 2000 character post isnt enough a whole thread might not be enough, its long and its boring. No normie or even chankid wants to listen to an hour of epistemology and praxeology. But the elites all know how to play the game

Attached: 1442727557301.png (1366x1218, 737K)

Agreed

I think the elites understand it intuitively but not explicitly and therefore exploit it as a nescient predator.

Also, that's where I see the mistep in even the smartest people who do understand the concept, nothing is truly and purely objective not is anything truly and purely subjective. It isn't subjective Vs objective, it's more subjective + objective.

Maybe it is the same as object permanence and reflection identification, that it is only understood at a certain cognitive capacity.

In the field I simply always frame everything in the objective and refuse to leave that frame regardless of invitation, goading or trickery.
I only acknowledge the subjective after they acknowledge the objective which is as I see it natural. The subject submits.

Is the guy goodlooking chad or ugly?

Reddit spacing nigger

Reblogging your own shitty posts isn't evidence of Reddit being redpilled.