Also, I might add. Any human makes sense. But ALL humans don't, without this explanation. A fallacy of composition WoD, which assumes that if any indi...
A misrepresentation, which suggests you have not read the thread Soylent. I expected better from you. An argument is fleshed out through out the threa...
No. Ethical significance is not expressed by a thing itself, but rather by its connections to everything else. A relation is not something one sees wi...
Yes there is deriving. Because whether something is good or not is not a property of the thing itself, but rather of how it relates to everything else...
No. What is deviant is defined as what is unlikely to occur in a standard distribution (it's more than two standard deviations from the mean). Homosex...
No - that argument is incoherent, and that is not the argument that I have made. The operation of derivation is an intellectual operation of extractin...
This is again a very complicated way of trying to get away with it. Ethical significance is an expression of states of the world = "ought" derived fro...
My natural theory has nothing to do with immanence or transcendence - therefore this is nonsense. Sure. So what? I never said the opposite. Yes, it is...
Yep -> deriving an "ought" (ethics) from a set of "is"'s (facts) :) Nope, it doesn't hold this. Gay people make sense as they are an inevitable occure...
They could. If you grant and make explicit all the premises. I don't intend them to in my discourse. But you could read something like Philippa Foot's...
Nope. This is not what a naturalistic fallacy is. Neither is my idea supposing that a particular human being ought to be in any way. That's your addit...
This is most peculiarly false. There is no assumption that humans are 'by default" not gay. In fact a particular human is "by default" not anything - ...
No, it's just that you're irrationally afraid of any idea which you perceive could possibly ground any "prejudice". I'm not. If there was an intellect...
Okay I understand that you personally don't see a need for having explanations. I'm saying, however, that there are explanations for some things in re...
Let me remind you Willow, that I am one of the first people to stand down on something if I am wrong. Very rarely have I seen people admit they are wr...
Well if you refuse to believe me, I think there is no point in having a conversation. If this is your premise, what point is there in me responding to...
Did I say there was? Read carefully please. I said there is a reason why the majority of people are not, and will never be gay. If you say there is no...
Then they are bisexual? I do accept they are human like everyone else. I also don't consider them "mistakes", nor have I ever used that word, which im...
Where did I deny they were? I just said that a discussion about whether they are right-wing or left-wing doesn't belong here, and I suggested the othe...
Nonsense - facilitated by your misunderstanding of Aristotelian philosophy. You think there is no nature of man. But I DO need a nature of man to expl...
The nature of an individual is their unique nature yes. The nature of man in general, is the natural tendency. But I do not consider homosexuals, etc....
What makes you think that I care if they are "right-wing" or "left-wing"? As far as I'm aware, and as far as I made clear all through out the thread, ...
I didn't know we were talking about "the Right" in this thread man... I think you made a mistake, you should move the conversation to the other thread...
I know that. It's only fair that she does. I've learned after my first girlfriend (who was the one who cheated on me) the same strategies you suggest,...
As far as the article says "Villagers in northern India beat a Muslim man to death and injured four others who were accused of smuggling cows to be sl...
No, because they are not specifically aimed at closed marriage men. Prostitution should go on exactly as it does. So should other dating websites. It'...
It depends what the consequences of breaking that promise are. Hiding your mounting debts from your spouse is a serious problem yes. But if you told h...
@"Benkei" - See? These are everywhere. Please read the thread completely next time instead of addressing some imaginary straw-man of yours. So your st...
And I repeatedly state that people who want to live in open marriages, or other non-monogamous ways should be allowed to live so. Proof that you haven...
All this post is a red-herring and straw-manning BC. You know it. Adultery is not a requirement for a failed marriage. Hence it does not follow that p...
No, your statement is an error of inversion, supposing that higher numbers create the nature of a being, instead of realising that the nature of the b...
All through history it worked. Adultery was, in most societies, illegal under most conditions, for most of history. You cannot justify it not working ...
Yes. But this does not change the fact that the Renaissance and Enlightenment period had more geniuses than the Dark Ages or nowadays. Why? Because so...
This does not change the fact that it was done behind closed doors, and was, in words, repudiated. A society which repudiates such things in words, bu...
Well probably it should start with something preventing them from causing future suffering in the same way. This may be declining them the right to ma...
Yes indeed - you are correct, and I misread. My apologies. Nevertheless, if you re-read what my theory says: You will be perhaps shocked to discover t...
Poverty, lack of access to intellectual resources, lack of cultural values, high levels of oppression, military conflict. Just like I attribute the la...
Or maybe it's time for you to re-think why you want to oblige everyone to live like you. Or maybe it's time for you to re-think why, despite having no...
This is false. Show me proof. And keep in mind, do not include bisexuals. They are a separate category :) And even if it was true. 10% is a deviation,...
I never said that there is something wrong with being a deviation. (or that a deviation should try to be normal) I even said that I am a deviation in ...
Very well - but I've argued, and you haven't responded to the argument, that the bourgeoisie doing this behind closed scenes was better than the revol...
I don't see where you can possibly disagree with me. Not all people want closed marriages. Some do want them. If they want them, and then their partne...
Fair enough - I would disagree though with Heidegger, Orwell, Eliot. They aren't anywhere near Spinoza (for Heidegger), Shakespeare (for Eliot) or Cer...
Chinua Achebe and William Yeats :p Right BC. Unfortunately I am not disagreeing with anything you said there. My point is that some people, those who ...
It is my intuition, but let's attempt to test it. Name me 10 geniuses from 1900 onwards. I will name you 10 geniuses from 1550-1650 1. Newton (1642-17...
Comments