That's a red herring which fails to address the content of my reply. If you don't accept what I said as true, then make your case. But if you're going...
Hate crime, obviously, which is defined as a crime, typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, s...
No, it's not sorcery. You're being utterly ridiculous. The speeches of Martin Luther King Jr. and Hitler literally changed the world, and in significa...
I'm talking about real effects, too. It'd be daft to suggest that only sensory effects, like light and sound, are real. Hate speech can change one's o...
Of course they don't call for that! But that's the kind of thing that you'd get by abolishing the pillars of society. It is the height of naïveté to t...
How absurd. So, let's say that a young man who became engrossed with and joined a far-right anti-Islam group has just been convicted of a hate crime w...
So? That's obvious and beside the point. The fact that it's a reaction to the speech means that the speech had an affect on the listener. And that's a...
I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. The relevance of the example is that during that period there was no central government, which is what anarc...
Between the fall of Siad Barre's government in January 1991 and the establishment of the Transitional National Government in 2006, there was no centra...
Like I said, it depends what that means and what that logically entails. Until that's explored, I don't have a position on the matter, so yeah, agnost...
In common parlance, we could say that I chose to purchase the books. But whether or not that's true or false depends on interpretation and on what's t...
I've addressed this line of questioning from you about a million times before. You must like going around in circles to the point of absurdity. Absolu...
I don't think we'd even be arguing with the likes of Janus and the discussion creator if they just came out and admitted that their definitions are no...
Anarchism is great in theory, but it's just pie in the sky. No successful or lasting real world examples come to mind. There was a brief period during...
Which would mean the abolition of the State, which would mean disorder. That's what it would mean, unless you set boundaries protecting the State and ...
Yes, I agree, and one of those possible answers is, "It's impossible". Just saying, "I don't know", doesn't rule out that possibility; which, if true,...
Why would you expect me to grant a point I clearly disagree with, and why would you think that repeating it with more or less the same wording would h...
Oh yeah, well my definition of life is the best, most perfect definition of life imaginable, and it reflects the ideal, objective, scientific, utopian...
It comes as no surprise that you would say that. You two seem almost like sock puppets. I have, and not for the first time. It usually follows a patte...
No, I'm bored because you're getting repetitive, and because it seems like we're reaching a dead end with regards to how you're choosing to define you...
What's funny is that you're both just wishful thinking. Apparently the definition of life is whatever you want it to be! What nonsense, and Janus, you...
This is getting boring. Just because you can string those adjectives together, that doesn't mean they actually apply. It seems kind of mad or childish...
I'm not even disagreeing with you that life is oriented for dealing with things. That's obvious and either not a problem at all, or at least not a pro...
Maybe. My position on this issue isn't developed enough for me to say whether it is determinism or compatiblism or perhaps something else, but clearly...
But it isn't. The default is what you can find in a dictionary, not your favoured normative stance in ethics. That's not objective morality, or even m...
No it doesn't. The broadest and most readily understood definition of morality is that it's what's right and wrong. That has no implications whatsoeve...
What counts as the flourishing or languishing of a community is far from objective, nor the only possible basis for objective morality. That's but one...
That's just immorality as defined by collectivism. The title of this discussion seems misleading. Is it a normative ethical discussion where you argue...
No, that's not morality. That's a description of something which you judge to be moral. If you want to know what morality is, then consult a dictionar...
It is unreasonable for him to do as you ask as it is both impractical and unnecessary. If it is necessary for you to be convinced, then you yourself a...
Comments