You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

BlueBanana

Comments

In: #MeToo  — view comment
I misclicked an option in the 2nd poll and can't unselect it, thus I can't vote. Edit: managed to unselect it but can't vote.
October 22, 2017 at 10:57
True, but neither does it turn impossible just because we add the concept of nonsensicalness in front of it. Making sense or being logical are propert...
October 22, 2017 at 06:54
This was clear.
October 21, 2017 at 18:37
Virtue by definition means being uncommonly good at something, and like skills in general virtuousness is a spectrum. Anyone is virtuous by some stand...
October 21, 2017 at 18:20
No, humans are the only thing capable of understanding the abstract concept of morality. I don't see the relevance. What, then, explains morals almost...
October 21, 2017 at 11:17
Morals can be viewed as a thing much larger than us puny humans. Taking our viewpoint of course does warp our perceptions of the matter. Without consi...
October 21, 2017 at 07:31
Or maybe it's a property of some specific triangles. As Gandhi says, argumentum ad verecundiam.
October 21, 2017 at 05:43
I heavily disagree. Most people would recognize that object, or a triangle with rounded angles, as a triangle. Furthermore, it's only our culture that...
October 20, 2017 at 10:58
I'm providing examples of people's views, not my own ones, so any of them, although I'm not sure exactly which religions base their morals on their de...
October 20, 2017 at 10:49
To give some examples: God Well-being (of anything) Well-being of any sentient beings Culture Nothing
October 20, 2017 at 05:05
The question implies you have the premise of morals being grounded in human nature.
October 18, 2017 at 19:30
As OP's, I feel your arguments rely on very specific views that aren't universal.
October 18, 2017 at 19:27
The concept of triangleness. We recognize triangles without having to count their sides or amount of angles, because they seem triangle-ish. Similarly...
October 15, 2017 at 21:17
As you wish. A triangle with an amount of sides other than three can exist, as triangles aren't defined by having three sides. Instead, there's a conc...
October 15, 2017 at 21:03
Yes. I also believe causing any enthropy is immoral. You should be more careful with rhetorical questions.
October 15, 2017 at 20:52
Not this again :-x
October 15, 2017 at 20:44
wait a sec
October 10, 2017 at 13:56
Ok, could you please fix the attitude of USA being the center of everything, and using the circumstances in it as arguments while discussing global to...
October 07, 2017 at 09:01
No. In the case neither of the parents made the decision to have the child, neither parent should have a say in whether the other parent will have any...
October 06, 2017 at 21:24
I assume this refers to the laws of USA and you're from USA?
October 05, 2017 at 21:04
Seriously? Of course the father has no reason at all to be obliged to support a person he does not know and whose existence he has no responsibility o...
October 05, 2017 at 20:49
A good question, but not quite. Damn that's a tough question. Seriously though, that's a question. I think what is the reason for the motivation is a ...
October 03, 2017 at 15:31
It's not; there's a vast difference between one having an obligation, or being obliged, and that one should do something. Obligations are always exter...
October 03, 2017 at 14:06
It doesn't follow from the mere existence of an obligation that it ought to be followed, which the sentence "one should do X" means.
October 03, 2017 at 13:54
"You should do things you want to because you want to" is circular reasoning. That's not a reason unless you answer the question "why should we do as ...
October 03, 2017 at 13:46
For the claim to be correct, the premise should be "morality is man made, and not objective, and we should follow it".
October 03, 2017 at 13:33
Why should you act according to your benefits and motivations in the first place?
October 03, 2017 at 13:16
No, it's means "I should follow the obligation to do X".
October 03, 2017 at 13:14
Uh?
September 30, 2017 at 20:19
The question and its phrasing implied more that I assumed the answer to be no than yes. A very good question. For the same reason you think it's unrea...
September 30, 2017 at 20:17
Does someone have the link to the original thread?
September 30, 2017 at 15:48
Democracy is only unviable if there's one centralized power in control of everything known to mankind. That's just not happening. We don't have one go...
September 30, 2017 at 14:50
As I have stated, I don't. I'm asking on what ground you expect a god to do that job, as you wouldn't expect anyone else, including yourself, to be ab...
September 29, 2017 at 06:02
First, that answers neither of my questions. Second, no.
September 29, 2017 at 05:25
God itself is the title I'm referring to. Did you purposefully dodge my point?
September 28, 2017 at 20:02
You seem to be mistaken about the physicist's stance on time. They also use matter to measure distances, but no physicist would claim that the distanc...
September 28, 2017 at 11:30
How can you be sure of this? Not as in what if someone else can experience future, but what if you don't experience single moments but a nanosecond of...
September 28, 2017 at 11:19
What you're writing isn't the scientific view of the time. In scientific stance, we use some event, the rate of which doesn't change, to measure time,...
September 28, 2017 at 10:51
Exactly my point. You admit you couldn't do any better, so how is it fair to ask a god to do the same thing just because of their title?
September 28, 2017 at 08:56
Must be confirmation bias.
September 27, 2017 at 10:24
Do you think you could do any better with no experience of the job?
September 27, 2017 at 09:03
Which wiki? Wikipedia? Sorry, but what does this mean?
September 27, 2017 at 08:54
A small error there: ((All statements are false) is false) is equivalent to (some statements are true). (All statements are false) is equivalent to (t...
September 26, 2017 at 20:48
Does this often happen to you? :D
September 25, 2017 at 21:16
I agree with Rich. Science, as is, does not explain the emergence of consciousness, we can't equate the brain structure of consciousness with consciou...
September 25, 2017 at 13:36
Can any odds be incalculable? I think the more unexpected an event is (which is required for it to be more difficult to calculate), the smaller are it...
September 25, 2017 at 11:36
I guess we should be asking what anything being morally respectable is based on and whether it's justified to demand us to respect the dead to find th...
September 25, 2017 at 11:17
It doesn't matter in the slightest what counts as anything legally speaking - ethically speaking, of course. I treat practical issues as irrelevant to...
September 25, 2017 at 09:12
I actually buy very much into that thought myself. I see mind as a construct that unconstructs itself into smaller pieces while asleep - a thought ver...
September 25, 2017 at 08:47
Are you saying it's not? Have my brethren no human rights? Wait what. When. Where.
September 25, 2017 at 08:15