Jump to content

QOTD IV!! 884: Who should be next QOTD master and why, or should it die?


Recommended Posts

perhaps you'd like to join me in subscribing to the morality of "Darros This Question Sucks-ism"?

i already apologized im over feeling bad about it now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

perhaps you'd like to join me in subscribing to the morality of "Darros This Question Sucks-ism"?

well hey you quoted me agreeing on that already!

(I forgive you though Darros, I saw your post)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

believing requires faith, and faith is destroyed by evidence. i'd agree with your uncle, the moment god is proven, i don't need faith to believe in it, since... there's nothing to believe in. god is real in this scenario, and it would be fact

i don't need faith to believe that we are composed of subatomic particles, it has been proven

i do however need faith to believe in a god, since it hasn't been proven

i think it really comes down to the personal preference of whether you choose to have faith or not, which is a completely subjective matter; i don't have a right to encroach on one who believes in a god as much as that same person doesn't have a right to enforce his beliefs onto me

I mean, yeah, that's...kind of as far as the argument can go, you know?

Really though, this might be a decent qotd

the-glass-is-always-full-technically.png

Unless you want to put it in a vacuum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah I know what I mean is they're wrong and losers because even though greys exist black and white still exist too

Can objective black and white exist if there is even one person who sees your black as their white, or as a grey? It may be really close to black or white on average, but it's still grey. Even then, the average depends who you sample from. If all you know of is your local town, is it sufficient to extrapolate that everyone has the same values as your town? What about one city? One country? One time, one planet? Even if every single person happened to believe in the same blacks and whites, people could be born who have a different set of values. There could be sentient aliens with different values. Even universal agreement about what is black and white can only exist relative to a certain time, a certain place, or a certain group of people.

Edited by Makaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the-glass-is-always-full-technically.png

Unless you want to put it in a vacuum.

This was actually why I wanted to see it as a qotd.

Specifically to see if anyone would figure this out.

EDIT: And also for the optimistic/pessimistic side of this perception/

Edited by Soledai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can objective black and white exist if there is even one person who sees your black as their white, or as a grey? It may be really close to black or white on average, but it's still grey. The average also depends who you sample from. If all you know of is your local town, is it sufficient to extrapolate that everyone has the same values as your town? What about one city? One country? One time, one planet? Even if every single person happened to believe in the same blacks and whites, people could be born who have a different set of values. There could be sentient aliens with different values. Even universal agreement about what is black and white can only exist relative to a certain time, a certain place, or a certain group of people.

that's a lot of words to say that some people out there can be bad \o/

my viewpoint has nothing to do with everybody agreeing on the same morals

maybe that's just me having the wrong definition on the word morals~ (since apparently its idea has to be that it's different for each person) then maybe I have a different word for my viewpoint that I don't really know

I guess if that's the case then I don't really care about "what kind of morals" if morals gets to be so fluid? because then how can that get anything done?

Edited by Freohr Datia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although upon further reflection I change my mind

The only reason I didn't like this question at first was because I thought the options were too narrow because I thought absolute meant absolutely absolute but after Euklyd explained it, it means this question covers more than I thought. And people clearly don't all agree on the same thing (after seeing Makaze even when knowing the true definition of both moralities) which means this question is doing what it should be.

So yeah you're fine Darros

but I'm still disagreeing on this type of argument even existing in the first place

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's a lot of words to say that some people out there can be bad \o/

my viewpoint has nothing to do with everybody agreeing on the same morals

maybe that's just me having the wrong definition on the word morals~ (since apparently its idea has to be that it's different for each person) then maybe I have a different word for my viewpoint that I don't really know

I guess if that's the case then I don't really care about "what kind of morals" if morals gets to be so fluid?

It's more about whether you're saying "these things profit everyone" or "these things profit me". What you and another believes is objectively right may bring you both pleasure (i.e. you feel better about the state of the world when the result reflects your values) even if your views contradict. We have no choice but to follow our own compasses. What I want is better because it's me. Me, me, me. Your compass is inferior to mine. Why? Because it's my compass. My enemy thinks the exact same thing about me. To a third party observer, my enemy and I must look fundamentally the same. When two people are both saying "this is moral" and they both mean "this makes me feel better about the world", how can you blame them for what is, in essence, who they are?

I feel indignant when my values are violated and happy when they are respected just like someone who believes their values are objective. What makes following my own compass different from believing in traditional morality? When I feel good because the world matches my compass, I do not let myself feel righteous about it.

Edited by Makaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

maiming and killing is wrong, no buts

If killing is wrong, why do some countries have the Death Penalty? Also, what about warfare? Were the Allies morally wrong to wage war on Hitler and Nazi Germany?

Edited by NinjaMonkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not so sure, as my absolutes are pretty much arbitrary - they depend on my beliefs, my upbringing, my surroudingsit is my understanding that even if possibly godly-inspired, they are human-set - i.e., they're choices, we choose what's right and wrong in this world (the next one is another matter entirely)the debate doesn't end when, for instance, you say "killing people is wrong" - what is "killing"? what is "people"? those answers change greatly depending on time (which would be a minute) and place (which could be across the street)

No. There are a number of concepts/ideas that are universally accepted(if, perhaps, very difficult to define). Such as what a human, death, killing and theft, to name a few examples. (another would be anger, but that's a different cup of tea) Their definitions have transcended through thousands of years of written history, and even if you ask some African tribal who's never been in contact with the world outside, these will be familiar to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. There are a number of concepts/ideas that are universally accepted(if, perhaps, very difficult to define). Such as what a human, death, killing and theft, to name a few examples. (another would be anger, but that's a different cup of tea) Their definitions have transcended through thousands of years of written history, and even if you ask some African tribal who's never been in contact with the world outside, these will be familiar to them.

Are you forgetting that sociopaths are a part of the pool?

Edited by Makaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellen, those concepts may be semi universal but also maybe not fully so. For example, there are probably still some people who don't consider blacks to be humans. I know my friend said he met a Chinese woman who considered japanese subhuman. Theft probably isn't universally the same either - iirc while few jews,may go by it, I believe they have different laws regarding lending. Killing and death are very different things depending on the belief or lack of belief in an afterlife. While most religions i know of mostly condemn killing a person even if they are destined for heaven, there's a substantial difference between believing a death will bring a person to heaven or hell and believing that their consciousness will vanish, never to return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the conversation ends now, it is time for a new qotd. conversations are OGRE

Whatever I want is correct.

the correct answer, also mine

QUESTION SEVEN HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-THREE: What is your favorite PSY video?

oppa gangnam style, shoutout to some guy a few pages ago as a palette cleanser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...