[email protected]

This is the place to shave off that long white beard and stop being philosophical; a forum for members to just talk like normal human beings.

[email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Dec 06, 2019 12:30 am

What's new?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Fri Dec 06, 2019 2:04 pm

What the hell is this?
An entire thread dedicated to me?
Is this typical?
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Dec 06, 2019 6:44 pm

It's unprecedented, what else is new?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:15 pm

So, what does one do in these situations?
Shuffle awkwardly making small talk?

Why do you people even do this to yourselves?
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:34 pm

Did you not come here of your own volition?

Is this not still a Philosophy forum, at least implied within the title?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:42 pm

I came here of my own free-will.
Unless it has been determined, by god, or the universe, that I would come here.

And?
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:46 pm

Aegean wrote:I came here of my own free-will.
Unless it has been determined, by god, or the universe, that I would come here.

And?

Free-will seems to be rare, ironically, in the Land of the Free.

And... I find entertainment here as much as you do. But it's still, hypothetically, a philosophy forum.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Fri Dec 06, 2019 9:04 pm

No it's not. That's the veneer. The painted glass at the entrance to a club.
Inside it's nothing more than a whorehouse/schoolyard.

This place was never been about philosophy, dude.
read through the self-proclaimed messiahs, and prophets and those that claim brilliance and all sots of strange insane shit.
This id a carnival pretending to be a library.
They ban anyone who is a killjoy, and drives its constituency of men-children, attention whores, and fools away. I love philosophy is like advertisement.
I love intellectual buffoonery, and not low brow shit. That's all it says.
I love more sophisticated idiocy, not the everyday infantile shit I can find every day.

Think of it like the US.
It started with good intentions. It wanted to be a new Rome.
What it became is a New Jerusalem. The experiment failed.
It gathered the rabble, like this place does....and went to the shithouse.
All it takes is one moron to ruin a conversation, and this place has only that - a variety of insanity all in one place. . All it takes is one speck of shit to ruin a nice glass of milk.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Dec 06, 2019 9:52 pm

Not all is lost.

Gloominary says some interesting things. Silhouette has potential, despite being almost completely nihilistic. At least he defends himself. Promethean, however, is a lost-cause, proving over and over that he can never take responsibility for himself or others. It shows in his rationale, thought, and anti-philosophy.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:45 am

The power of nihilistic judgment. The power of negation.
Once you go nil, you can't stay still.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby promethean75 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 1:20 am

Promethean, however, is a lost-cause, proving over and over that he can never take responsibility for himself or others.


Suppose you were an alien creature that didn't speak the language of human beings. So you wouldn't be able to understand what a human meant when he said 'i am responsible.' Now, what would a responsible human look like, and would you be able to spot one? That is, what about his actions would you be able to describe as responsible?

Would you understand what 'responsible behavior' was if you did not participate in the language used to describe it?

A trick question. Don't answer it.

What we are getting at here is that the concept of responsibility exists only in language, only in convention, custom and habit. And outside of these things being taken for granted, it is something entirely senseless. That is to say the philosophical/metaphysical notion of responsibility is founded on an extremely complicated series of conceptual errors.

It is enough for man to continue his convention of taking/giving responsibility as he usually does... so long as he does not question it philosophically. If he does, and does so properly, he will find that it does not exist in the way he thought it did.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 1:24 am

A test...I love tests.

I'm thinking that "responsible behaviour" means whatever the universe has decreed it to be...so there is no irresponsible behaviour, because nobody can behave other than how god created him and willed him to behave.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:12 am

promethean75 wrote:Suppose you were an alien creature that didn't speak the language of human beings. So you wouldn't be able to understand what a human meant when he said 'i am responsible.' Now, what would a responsible human look like, and would you be able to spot one? That is, what about his actions would you be able to describe as responsible?

You see it in language and action. A person who is responsible knows that he should not have drank 10 beers and gone driving. He's going to feel guilt when he slams into a minivan packed with kids. Because he knows the correlation between driving impaired, a choice, that he didn't have to make, but decided to do so anyway. He knew the risks. He played dice. He lost.

The one who is not responsible, will blame somebody else, blame the minivan, blame the system, blame the judge, blame the jury, and in the end, when it still doesn't work out... blame God! Or, if you prefer, Hard-Determinism, "Life and Existence" set you up to fail, in the end. Never your fault, always somebody else's.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:17 am

Responsibility means understanding and accepting personal choice, the choices you choose to make, and then gamble accordingly. Life is never perfect. No bet is certain. If you accept loss, when its your turn, you don't even have to admit it, just understand it, then you have a degree of self-responsibility.

But if your mind plays tricks, on yourself, always the Innocent one, always somebody else's fault, then you have a deficiency, a blind-spot, where it's always win-win in your favor and lose-lose for everybody else. That's not reality. That's delusion. And much of humanity falls into delusion when they systemically support shifting responsibility, blame, and punishment onto others. As it is, currently, today, it's "Victim-Hierarchy" and politicking, about who gets to be the biggest Victim on Planet Earth.

Aren't you near the top?


OR,

Isn't it your fault that your life is as it is? It's not "the system". It's not "the judges". It's not "the police". It's just you?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:20 am

Like I said...a Christian distrusts an atheist because he knows that without fear of god he would rape and kill and do all kinds of terrible things.
Same with those who deny free will.
They take themselves as an example and conclude that if there were free-will they would accuse and blame everything and everyone other than themselves.
This is what they would do if free-will were a fact. To preserve irresponsibility - innocence - they give up their blaming. They sacrifice it.
Brian did so only after someone pointed out that he blamed the police, the judge, while claiming there was no free-will - a contradiction. But he did not accept some degree of free-will. Innocence was more important to his well-being. He had to be innocent of his own circumstances. The idea that he made things happen with his conscious and subconscious choices, is devastating. That his life could have been otherwise, is too hard to even consider. He needs to believe that his life could only have been as it is...and no other way. He needs to preserve his ego, and his high opinion of himself. Because if he fucked up, then this also puts his mental quality into question. Is intelligence enough? What of self-control - will? What of wisdom, sophrosyne?
What of reading and adapting to circumstances?
What of accurately evaluating the possible consequences?

Most people understand others by using self as a standard. they an unable to empathize, so they only sympathise or antipathize. They project themselves into the others shows.
But this is not objective empathy. Empathy is indifferent, and takes self out of the equation, to understand other as he/she is.
Last edited by Aegean on Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Artimas » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:23 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:
promethean75 wrote:Suppose you were an alien creature that didn't speak the language of human beings. So you wouldn't be able to understand what a human meant when he said 'i am responsible.' Now, what would a responsible human look like, and would you be able to spot one? That is, what about his actions would you be able to describe as responsible?

You see it in language and action. A person who is responsible knows that he should not have drank 10 beers and gone driving. He's going to feel guilt when he slams into a minivan packed with kids. Because he knows the correlation between driving impaired, a choice, that he didn't have to make, but decided to do so anyway. He knew the risks. He played dice. He lost.

The one who is not responsible, will blame somebody else, blame the minivan, blame the system, blame the judge, blame the jury, and in the end, when it still doesn't work out... blame God! Or, if you prefer, Hard-Determinism, "Life and Existence" set you up to fail, in the end. Never your fault, always somebody else's.



I was going to make a similar example regarding guilt stemming from responsibility.

Even nothing, is something.
If one is to live balanced with expectations, then one must learn to appreciate the negative as well, to respect darkness in its own home.

All smoke fades, as do all delicate mirrors shatter.

"My ancestors are smiling on me, Imperials. Can you say the same?"

"Science Fiction today ~ Science Fact tomorrow"

Change is inevitable, it can only be delayed or sped up. Choose wisely.

Truth is pain, and pain is gain.


Image Image
User avatar
Artimas
Emancipator of ignorance and also Chameleon upon the stars
 
Posts: 3809
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:47 pm
Location: Earth, Milky Way

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:42 am

It's an interesting state-of-mind isn't it, disconnected from reality, never having to eat the costs of poor judgment???

Not only is it "Victim-Politicking" dominating this Modern-Post-Modern Era, it's also "Privilege". A generation of spoiled brats, without one adult to guide the mass. A truly soft generation, attempting to push costs and consequences down the road, down the road, down the road, until the price accumulates and becomes to big to pay. Who's going to pay for it? "Don't know! Don't care!" Eventually, everybody pays for it.

Morality is a type of science, really, about these 'hidden' costs accumulating until they reach a breaking point. There are 'soft' and 'hard' generations of people, 'soft' and 'hard' events in history.

Infantilism.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:46 am

I think you can put a criminal in-jail, but if he is somebody who can never be responsible for himself, he's not actually "in-jail", not yet.

First you would have to be accountable, have Autonomy, before you could be 'punished' in any form. You're not "in-jail" until you realize that some people, at least one, somewhere, somebody has to bear the costs for decisions.

It was long, long ago that Civilization began this system of 'privilege' where a mountain of somebody else's choice and problem added up.


"It's not my fault!" even when it is. There can be no "Morality" in such a mindset, one that cannot properly or accurately account for when people choose to do something, and also accept the consequences both when they win and especially when they lose.

It's like setting up a game, and whenever you come close to losing, you just keep changing the rules.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 2:53 am

Urwrongx1000 wrote:It's an interesting state-of-mind isn't it, disconnected from reality, never having to eat the costs of poor judgment???

Not only is it "Victim-Politicking" dominating this Modern-Post-Modern Era, it's also "Privilege". A generation of spoiled brats, without one adult to guide the mass. A truly soft generation, attempting to push costs and consequences down the road, down the road, down the road, until the price accumulates and becomes to big to pay. Who's going to pay for it? "Don't know! Don't care!" Eventually, everybody pays for it.

Morality is a type of science, really, about these 'hidden' costs accumulating until they reach a breaking point. There are 'soft' and 'hard' generations of people, 'soft' and 'hard' events in history.

Infantilism.
Yes....it prevents adaptation. the individual never has to change, because he is never responsible. He is innocent, or all occurs as it has been determined, so Stoicism is the only option. Enduring one's fate.
Preferable to the alternative. Taking responsibility begins with blaming self. What did you do or fail to do?
It pute your judgment and the brain you are so proud of, in question. It disturbs the ego.
To self-correct requires admitting something; it requires humility.

Trauma makes egos fragile. it surrounds itself with a defensive verbal perimeter, not allowing anything to pass through. This is why he laughs.
Laughter is a release of stress, kept on stand-by for the fight/flight mechanism.
It imitates sexual orgasms, with its spasmodic hyperventilating. Relief follows such events. A sense of calmness.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 3:01 am

Why are some people Autonomous, and others not?

Why are some people aware of "cosmic" accounting, of accurately pointing to the cause of this or that phenomenon, whether they apply to humans or simply the world?

Is it nature? Genetic? Is it nurture? Memetic?

What about masses of people sitting in Church, who need a Guide, a Priest, a Leader, to delineate who is responsible for what, on their behalf?

Better to leave the thinking, the blaming, the judge and jury, to somebody else, a "higher" authority?

Is it sexist? Men or Women are more responsible than the other? Racist? White or black, one set is more responsible than the other? White Man's Burden, where'd that come from, what's it mean?
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 3:08 am

We can trace it back to sexual roles...and further back to the fear of death, which sex evolved to deal with.
Centuries of uncontrolled reproduction - un-culled replication of a species named human - has propagated mutations that would otherwise have result in the individual organism's demise.
Feminization.
A psychology of dependence...due to the female's role in reproduction and her long periods of vulnerability, during gestation and weening.
The feminine needs a master. A dominating protecting and providing Will.
If not God, then the State. It needs roder, certainty, safety - predictability. All attributes of domestication. Institutionalization.
A desire for a controlled, enclosure, with predictable routines.
Determinism.
God secularized as absolute order.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby promethean75 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 3:39 am

Brian did so only after someone pointed out that he blamed the police, the judge, while claiming there was no free-will - a contradiction. But he did not accept some degree of free-will.


https://voca.ro/1SVOkExhiif
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Aegean » Sat Dec 07, 2019 3:42 am

I do not click on those.
I'm sure you were brilliant.
Aegean
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby promethean75 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 3:50 am

No, because your errors - those I point out - are fairly simple. To me anyway.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: [email protected]

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Dec 07, 2019 4:32 am

Is ignorance an excuse for responsibility?

Or why is it that people attempt to know more and learn in the first place? What does knowledge have to do with morality or free-will? Does the more you know make you more free, or less free?

Morality is very extensive if and when you take it seriously. Innocent people can be jailed and punished. Guilty people can beat the system. The critique against you, Prom, is that you have/had a tendency to deny or diminish any moral judgments, dating all the way back to ILoveOpinions. And you repeat the same mistakes in your thinking, to-this-day, regarding Determinism or "Free-Will". I think most people are beyond the black-and-white, absolute yes or no. You can deny Free-Will. You can claim Determinism. You can accept or reject Responsibility. But objectively, what's the difference?

The example I used, cannot be compared, in the sense that some people do setup their situation, and then deny the outcomes. Doing this routinely and repeatedly, and endlessly justifying flawed premises from the start, is never going to work. Because even if a person were to lie to him or herself, then it only makes another mistake inevitable. It will happen again, eventually, because no lesson was learned. No knowledge was gained.


Freak-accidents is not a counter-argument, at least not a reasonable one. There's always a degree of far-out randomness. That's beside the point. The point is, when it's mostly in your control, and you slant your mind to always win-win and never lose-lose, then you're going to fail or crash hard, eventually. The only way not to fail, is to skew a subjective system, in your favor, hence a domesticated society.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2396
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Next

Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users