Author Topic: Nickpb starfish for no real reason (Read 9845 times)

Ocelotus · April 18, 2015, 11:04:04 PM

this whole topic is just
i cant
lmao

Ad Bot · Advertisement

$trinick · April 18, 2015, 11:05:01 PM

Indeed, I never meant to imply that morals are not discussable or debatable in nature. I was talking about people who apply their individual morals as objective reality. Examples: "Gay marriage is wrong." "Racism is wrong." "Every human is equal."

These all need substantiation. You may believe that gay marriage is wrong, but that doesn't make it wrong. It makes it wrong to you. To make the statement that gay marriage is wrong, you need reasoning behind that statement.

That is my point.

otto-san · April 18, 2015, 11:06:35 PM

yeah i totes agree there

the idea of objective morality is completely stupid and for some reason i hear a lot of people around me commonly complain that objective morality "no longer exists" when it's never existed in the first place

a bit of a tangent but WHATEVER HAHA!!

Youtuber42 · April 19, 2015, 12:00:28 AM

So guys how did this turn to homoloveuality?

otto-san · April 19, 2015, 12:21:17 AM

it didn't? it was used as an example

Tezuni 2.0 · April 19, 2015, 12:53:34 AM

I suppose everyone could tack on "IMO" when relevant to avoid ambiguity, but I imagine that'd get rather tiresome.

Folie � Deux · April 19, 2015, 10:34:20 AM

Quote from: �::Kishgal::� on April 18, 2015, 10:55:12 PM

Wow, lucky me...

loving hella dude

shamester · April 19, 2015, 11:25:39 AM

Nick is a nice guy in general, sure he does some stuff, but don't we all?

Maxwell. · April 19, 2015, 11:27:04 AM

no I hate stuff
we should ban stuff

$trinick · April 19, 2015, 07:08:53 PM

Quote from: Tezuni 2.0 on April 19, 2015, 12:53:34 AM

I suppose everyone could tack on "IMO" when relevant to avoid ambiguity, but I imagine that'd get rather tiresome.

That doesn't solve the core issue: you're making an assertion without supporting it with any reasoning.

"Homoloveuality is wrong." is a strong, bold statement.
"In my opinion, homoloveuality is wrong." is a weak statement.

The reason the first is strong and the second is weak is because in the second one you're admitting that it's open to interpretation, whereas in the first you're making a declaration. You can't make declarations that are subject to opinion without supporting evidence, which is my point.

Anyway, if everyone tacked on "IMO" or whatever people would find themselves needing to expand on why because their statements would be weakened.

nickpb1 · April 19, 2015, 09:17:00 PM

Quote from: Ocelotus on April 18, 2015, 11:04:04 PM

this whole topic is just
i cant
lmao

Your kind isn't allowed on my drama...

Quote from: shamester on April 19, 2015, 11:25:39 AM

Nick is a nice guy in general, sure he does some stuff, but don't we all?

awh thanks! I think I'm a nice guy too

SWAT One · April 20, 2015, 12:49:29 PM

Quote from: $trinick on April 19, 2015, 07:08:53 PM

If I may dispute this, wouldn't the strength of the statement also have to do with the credibility of the person saying, more so in regards to opinion?

For example, a married straight christian priest could say, "Homoloveuality is wrong," or a man who has been involved in many homoloveual relationships could turn around and say "Homoloveuality is wrong" on the premise of experience. Again, referring to your assertion that perception is irrelevant to objectivity, the person closest to objectivity that would merit a more credible answer would be the latter.

So yes, an anonymous person on the internet would not carry much power, but the "IMO tag" on things shouldn't automatically make statements weak.

IkeTheGeneric · April 20, 2015, 01:00:23 PM

I don't understand what's wrong with treating people based on how they act. If fen goes around acting like a cunt, people are going to treat him like a cunt. If you have a problem with that, you should probably go back to burying your head in the sand.

nickpb1 · April 20, 2015, 01:05:50 PM

Quote from: IkeTheGeneric on April 20, 2015, 01:00:23 PM

I don't understand what's wrong with treating people based on how they act. If fen goes around acting like a cunt, people are going to treat him like a cunt. If you have a problem with that, you should probably go back to burying your head in the sand.

Right?
It's like several of the problem users expect people to treat them like they haven't done anything wrong. Not every interaction begins with a blank slate which is something fen seems to forget

IkeTheGeneric · April 20, 2015, 01:15:03 PM

Quote from: nickpb1 on April 20, 2015, 01:05:50 PM

Right?
It's like several of the problem users expect people to treat them like they haven't done anything wrong. Not every interaction begins with a blank slate which is something fen seems to forget

Exactly, there seems to be a problem with stuffty people with new accounts thinking that just because they bought a new account means they should be forgiven just because.

You want to be treated good? Give people a loving reason to like you instead of whining when they don't. That's not how society works.