This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Liberal or Conservative in WoW?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
You did ask both of us HSR to unequivocally state that the holocaust isn't absolutely wrong.
No I did not ask you. I
told
you:
"Rights are not given by anybody. If they are
you just justified the slaughter of millions of Jews.
You just justified the enslaving of Africans. You just justified the atrocities of the Soviet Union."
I'm asking victory, not you. Look who I'm reply to when I ask the question over and over.
(I believe Victory also has several times, but since you seem to be upset at my pointing that out I'll just qualify it there)
No he hasn't, he's categorically denied it for the past 4 pages. Can't you read?
What I've been saying (and haven't seen any real evidence to the contrary) is that right and wrong aren't measureable.
No one ever said they were.
You can't do 10lbs of wrong to someone, or give someone a gallon of right. Right and wrong are points of view.
That doesn't follow. Not being able to measure something does not automatically make it subjective.
@victoryoordeath if you don't want to use logic, then why are you even here?
Post by
374287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
So are you saying rights don't really exist at all, or that they exist regardless of whether they are enjoyed? Or something else entirely?
How did we jump from objective morality back to rights all of a sudden?
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Huh? You want to point out a logical flaw in my statement? Go ahead, don't post blank posts.
I did point out the flaw 6-7 times now.
Post by
374287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Why avoid questions? It's easy enough to answer.
So
are you saying
rights don't really exist at all, or that they exist regardless of whether they are enjoyed? Or something else entirely?
I haven't mentioned rights in at least 4 pages, so I'm not "saying" anything about them.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I did point out the flaw 6-7 times now.And I answered everytime and you or me still didn't get it.
No, you didn't answer. You keep blabbing about he thinks and I think and she thinks and you think. I did not ask about such things. Thus you didn't answer my question.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
374287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Kibbles
There are no moral absolutes in theory. But some, such as Soviet Union or North Korea, come close.
Post by
374287
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I don't believe there are any moral absolutes, and since I've neither seen nor heard any evidence to the contrary I'll take that as a given. And since my beliefs and thoughts are all that can be had with no proof, or all anyone can have, getting upset when someone rejects a premise asking for an absolute answer that we've all pretty much concluded doesn't exist seems pointless. You've said this answer justifies slavery and the holocaust and all things you judge to be immoral throughout our history, and I'd say that yes those things were justified by those that committed the acts you find to be immoral (in your defense most, though by no means all, would agree with you).
I said
you
justified them.
You
. So you have
no
right to condemn their action.
That's how they committed them. They weren't twirling their mustaches and rubbing their hands together gloating about how evil they were, they truly didn't view their behavior as being wrong (or at least not as wrong as doing the opposite). There are countless examples of things that were widely considered offensive several hundred years ago that are taken for granted today, and I'm sure in several hundred years society will look back on some of our dislikes and be confused.
Saying "they didn't think they were doing something wrong" is not a proof against absolute morals...
Rights are ideas (yes, I'm going back to rights) that only exist in the mind, and can be fought for or supported by argument or force like any other. The strongest ideas (either by feeling or force) do win out, and the ones on the short end of the stick do have their "rights" violated. It's happening all over the world today, and always has (sadly, probably always will). Again, if you disagree with any of this, please bring a solid argument against it besides semantics and wordplay. They may work in a high school debate, but they're not very convincing to third parties or to me.
My argument with victoryoordeath is still ignoring and now you're joining in, is that you're being hypocrites. You justify their actions as amoral, then you go and say
you think
they were wrong.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
You justify their actions as amoralI do not justify their actions as amoral, I've been saying that there's nothing to stop those people from thinking that their actions were justified (nothing absolute to determine that people always think that some things are bad and some things good).
then you go and say you think they were wrong.Yeah, I do think they were wrong.
Absolute has nothing to do with what people think, so your post made absolutely no sense.
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
It's not my fault if you can't read your own posts.
Some vocabulary words you need to look up:
Amoral
Absolute
Not
Justify
Post by
229791
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.