| @traed And all of that isn't a critique of basing morality on 'faith', that is simply a critique of some morality not being able to appeal to everyone. What I find baffling is your inability to conflate the concepts of objective morality and moral relativism. It's not too hard to conceptualize there being a truth but people, in their inability to pinpoint it, contriving their own versions of truths and thus deviating from the truth. Astros said: xEmptiness said: That joke is bad, and you should feel bad. It's this simple to understand traed.... you aren't even traeeeenng! *feeling bad* Insightful on? Matters. |
xEmptiness said: TheBrainintheJar said: It is. If you go on and on how the world is more terrible now than it was before, then what era do you compare it to? I'm not saying the situation isn't bad, but now we ignore people and cage them schools. That's a slight improvement over conducting vivsections without anesthetic. Whether it is terrible or not comes later. What we're concerned with is simply the uncertainty which exists for the sake of existing. You can, very easily, dismiss comparison with past ages by bringing up wars and whatnot because they've been recorded and so are in front of everyone but that wouldn't change the fact that the world, as it is now, seems to be heading nowhere. traed said: Morality goes hand in hand with a sound reasoning. Pure reason or practical reason? The latter is impossible, the former leaves room for all kinds of morality. Abrahamic religions builds their morals on shaky grounds of faith. Faith based morality is a failure. It lacks the ability to convince those outside a religion and faith is something that always wavers at least briefly even in the most devout. Abrahmaic Religions lacks the sound reasoning needed to convince people to be truly moral. Faith is the only absolute ground. The morality of a religion simply doesn't apply to individuals outside that religion; the relationship of a religion and disbelievers is that of convincing each other that I am right. What you are saying is comparable to: "I don't accept United States' constitution because I live in Pakistan''. Of course you don't. Your 'argument' only answers the question 'Do you accept such-and-such moral code?', not the question, 'Is such moral code moral in nature or not?'. Uncertainty is integral to existence. There's no Just World and no one can promise you things will be alright. It has nothing to do with the change in time. The difference is, now the probability of you being sent to gas chambers is lower. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: Uncertainty is integral to existence. There's no Just World and no one can promise you things will be alright. It has nothing to do with the change in time. The difference is, now the probability of you being sent to gas chambers is lower. No, it isn't. The problem of existence has no intrinsic value so its solution need not have one. If you ask me, 'Why do you exist?' then 'ooolalala hoompa loompa' is just as valid an answer as any garrulous philosophy. Yet the probability of your getting randomly droned is pretty damn high, don't ya think? |
xEmptiness said: TheBrainintheJar said: Uncertainty is integral to existence. There's no Just World and no one can promise you things will be alright. It has nothing to do with the change in time. The difference is, now the probability of you being sent to gas chambers is lower. No, it isn't. The problem of existence has no intrinsic value so its solution need not have one. If you ask me, 'Why do you exist?' then 'ooolalala hoompa loompa' is just as valid an answer as any garrulous philosophy. Yet the probability of your getting randomly droned is pretty damn high, don't ya think? I'm talking about how nothing is promised. Even in the old times, no one can promise you a job or a marriage or a good life. Things are always on the verge of falling apart. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
Nico- said: TheBrainintheJar said: I'm talking about how nothing is promised. Even in the old times, no one can promise you a job or a marriage or a good life. Things are always on the verge of falling apart. Because you have to actually work to get those things and it's you that's holding yourself back. Forget looking at it philosophically, this is just babby's Darwinism and babby's determinism right here. It's amazing how easy some parts of antinatalism are to debunk. inb4waawaaimnotgiftedenough What? This doesn't really have much to do with antinatalism. That's just the nature of the world. It's not unstable, uncertain and nothing is promised. Whether or not it makes it worth living in is a different story. Hard work doesn't necessarily guarantees results - but it does raise the probability of achieving them. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
More topics from this board
» Most painful experience in your lifeST63LTH - Yesterday |
25 |
by Adverrito
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» how do you guys feel about summer?JessicaKari - Yesterday |
49 |
by ProtoSelf
»»
48 minutes ago |
|
» Do you collect trading cards?Malkshake - Apr 30 |
48 |
by Technopunk
»»
60 minutes ago |
|
» Oddly specific thing in your house that isn't really hurting you but it's super annoying to deal with?StrawberryBlxxd - 3 hours ago |
8 |
by rohan121
»»
1 hour ago |
|
Poll: » are women inherently smarter than men? or is it the other way around?FruitPunchBaka - 11 hours ago |
29 |
by KayKimii
»»
2 hours ago |