Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 7/17/2002 1:15:37 PM EST
Two things. First, I was having this moral debate with this girl the other day, and she's a moral relativist. So the debate got to the point where I said, the problem with moral relativism is that it's self contradictory. The view that moral relativism is wrong and stupid is just as valid as any other view in this system. This contradicts the premise of the system. If you can derive wrong from right, you have a logical contradiction. So then she said, not if there's no difference between right and wrong. So I said, what? How does that work? So she said, right, wrong, same thing. My question to all you people is, how do you have a moral debate with a person who don't differentiate between right and wrong? Second point. Hypothetical scenerio, if someone were to run for office, on the platform that gun owners are being unfairly targeted and that the prices of the guns and gun accessories are too high. So they want the government to intervene to bring the prices down so as to make firearm ownership more affordable for the poor and middle class. Would you vote for this person? Why/Why not?
Link Posted: 7/17/2002 1:22:08 PM EST
Originally Posted By jz02: My question to all you people is, how do you have a moral debate with a person who don't differentiate between right and wrong?
View Quote
Ask her to differentiate between right or wrong for you, give you an example. Also, check this link out, it might be helpful: [url]http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/welcome.htm[/url]
Second point. Hypothetical scenerio, if someone were to run for office, on the platform that gun owners are being unfairly targeted and that the prices of the guns and gun accessories are too high. So they want the government to intervene to bring the prices down so as to make firearm ownership more affordable for the poor and middle class. Would you vote for this person? Why/Why not?
View Quote
I would like to know about that person's stance on other issues too. Also, unfairly targeted by whom, the people who sell guns/parts, or just in general? I don't want government intervention. I want the government to back off, to stop intervening in firearms issues as much as they do today. If you mean intervention as in repelling some of the laws Clinton brought about - sure, please go ahead! But other than that, no.
Link Posted: 7/17/2002 1:22:20 PM EST
Originally Posted By jz02: Two things. First, I was having this moral debate with this girl the other day, and she's a moral relativist. So the debate got to the point where I said, the problem with moral relativism is that it's self contradictory. The view that moral relativism is wrong and stupid is just as valid as any other view in this system. This contradicts the premise of the system. If you can derive wrong from right, you have a logical contradiction. So then she said, not if there's no difference between right and wrong. So I said, what? How does that work? So she said, right, wrong, same thing. My question to all you people is, how do you have a moral debate with a person who don't differentiate between right and wrong?
View Quote
I think you can't. Ask the poor girl to look in a dictionary: moral adj. 1. Of or concerned with the judgement principles of [b]right[/b] and [b]wrong[/b] in relation to human action and character.
Second point. Hypothetical scenerio, if someone were to run for office, on the platform that gun owners are being unfairly targeted and that the prices of the guns and gun accessories are too high. So they want the government to intervene to bring the prices down so as to make firearm ownership more affordable for the poor and middle class. Would you vote for this person? Why/Why not?
View Quote
If they're talking about price caps which might drive manufacturers out of business and/or reduce the quality of available weapons, I would be wary. If, however, they were talking about eliminating the high taxes on firearms (including NFA items), I would be all for it!
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 3:46:54 AM EST
Haul off and bust her one right in the chops. Then ask her if she thought that was wrong.
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:00:42 AM EST
I'd tell he you need to do a moral experiement. Sleep with her then her sister right afterward. Hey, it's not wrong to her! Mike
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:02:45 AM EST
She's a [img]http://www.seresmitologicos.net/troll2.gif[/img] Scott
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:10:49 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:18:16 AM EST
How can she have morals to debate if she does not believe in right and wrong? Scott
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:24:56 AM EST
First item: Tell her in accordance with her views you could now, forcefully, have your way with her. Then tell her you will not do that because your moral code tells you it’s wrong to impose your will (rape) on others. Second item: High gun prices are due to over regulation of the industry, reduced availability due to law, and litigation. I WOULD NOT vote for any candidate that would encourage the government to “step in” in any way shape or form. “stepping in” is what got us to our current state in the first place. The only thing government can do is step out and repeal firearm laws and regulation. When a fire arm is treated the same as a circular saw, a tool that is dangerous when handled improperly, prices will find level out to exactly what the market dictates. Your heart is in the right place but check your premises. Good luck to you or whomever is running.
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 6:31:13 AM EST
Quit arguing with her and just bend her over and slam it to her.
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 2:42:45 PM EST
Well I'll address my second point first. I'm glad to see that people here didn't jump to conclusions about the candidate who wants to reduce firearm prices. It came up yesterday in a discussion I had with an anti-gunner. He wanted to put government price controls on guns to make it unprofitable to make and sell. In the hopes that it will fool pro-gunners into supporting the legislation and thereby shooting themselves in the foot. Second point, I will now address my previous first point.
Quit arguing with her and just bend her over and slam it to her.
View Quote
I wish [:D]. She's pretty hot. Anyway, her argument wasn't just there's no right or wrong, but everything is morally equivalent. So even if there was a right or wrong, everything would be just as right or just as wrong as every other thing, depending on your point of view. So I might think something is wrong, but someone else will think it's right, so you can't really say that any given thing is more right or more wrong than any other thing. Basically, you can't compare things morally. Now just to add another question. Why is it that whenever you meet a hot girl, she have to say something stupid to ruin it?
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 2:53:56 PM EST
Hey, if she is saying there's no such thing as right and wrong.... Ask her if it's wrong to interrupt her mid-sentence and stick it in her pooper. That could also change her mind.
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 3:05:06 PM EST
So where do you stand on capital punishment? Can you kill someone who kills another? Or is all killing always wrong? If you're a moral relativist, you can support capital punishment. If your an absolutist, you can't, logically. Right?
Link Posted: 7/18/2002 3:05:55 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/18/2002 3:06:50 PM EST by IMHO]
I guess that the woman was trying to be a pill due to the fact that she didn't refer to the principal contentions of moral relativism, to any writings or philosophers/anthropoligists, or to a good example of what she was trying to describe. Even one who was taking the relativist position would qualify a perception of a lack of right and wrong by describing one's own morals at a definite time and place in a defined situation, and comparing them with another's who came from a different moral tradition. I have reason to doubt that this young woman knows what she is talking about. Sounds to me like a young woman who was looking for attention.
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 12:30:46 PM EST
as I said, she's pretty hot. I don't think she needs to open her mouth to get attention.
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 1:08:00 PM EST
So, like, how big are her boobs? Sorry, I could not resist!
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 1:46:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By jz02: Two things. First, I was having this moral debate with this girl the other day, and she's a moral relativist. So the debate got to the point where I said, the problem with moral relativism is that it's self contradictory. The view that moral relativism is wrong and stupid is just as valid as any other view in this system. This contradicts the premise of the system. If you can derive wrong from right, you have a logical contradiction. So then she said, not if there's no difference between right and wrong. So I said, what? How does that work? So she said, right, wrong, same thing. My question to all you people is, how do you have a moral debate with a person who don't differentiate between right and wrong?[/b]
View Quote
Setting aside the fact that technically, moral relativism is a contradiction in terms..... The answer is: you don't. It's like debating the color of the sky with a blind person....you can't debate someone on the topic of morality when they define themselves by a lack of morality. The best you can do is show that their pithy little illusions are nothing more than trite blatherings and milksops for their own internal weakness of character. You could always challenge if she 'really' is a moral relativist. Ask her to explain how there can be a lack of any difference between the mindset and viewpoint of Dalai Lama as opposed to John Wayne Gacy. Another joy is to attack any of her political points with it....is she anti-gun? Pro-environment? Pro-animal rights? Any of the usuall liberal crap? Each one of those represents at its base a moral standpoint.....
Second point. Hypothetical scenerio, if someone were to run for office, on the platform that gun owners are being unfairly targeted and that the prices of the guns and gun accessories are too high. So they want the government to intervene to bring the prices down so as to make firearm ownership more affordable for the poor and middle class. Would you vote for this person? Why/Why not?
View Quote
Hell no. Government involvment in regulation of that level is not something I support. To me it sounds almost like a bastard stepchild of welfare for gun owners....
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 1:50:40 PM EST
Women are for f@cking...not talking to. Problem solved! Sgtar15
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 1:53:06 PM EST
Originally Posted By DOCPIG: Quit arguing with her and just bend her over and slam it to her.
View Quote
I'll give you two points for your thoughtful, well-reasoned response to this fella's predicament. [beer]
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 2:05:44 PM EST
Sometimes I really wonder where the mindset came from. I mean...take vegans for instance. From observation, it appears that most veggies are also enviro's. However, one way to really help the planet is to kill every cow on earth because their farts are not only foul, aren't good for the environment. But by doing so, you'll have to go against your veggy ways for a while, a paradox. Then there is these people that think nothing is right nor wrong. Hitler, misunderstood human being. Stalin, a product of his environment. Daumer, whats wrong with eating people? And all those NAMBLA folks that think screwing little boys is a good thing...or those people that like to nab little boys and girls and kill them. Its not wrong because there is no difference between wrong or right. I truly believe that brain anyrism's are caused by things stupid people say. Your brain is working so hard to figure out what was just said, something pops...
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 2:54:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/22/2002 2:55:37 PM EST by Miss_Magnum]
Originally Posted By sgtar15: Women are for f@cking...not talking to. Problem solved! Sgtar15
View Quote
So if we met at a shooting event, what should I expect? Hmmm? What this girl is trying to say is that arguing moral ABS0LUTES in some situations can be mute. This is why trying to legislate morality in society gets so hairy. If you want to debate her on a topic, establish that the subject is only relevant with regards to her [i]personal[/i] code of right and wrong versus your's. Now, was that so hard?
Link Posted: 7/22/2002 2:58:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By Halfcocked: Haul off and bust her one right in the chops. Then ask her if she thought that was wrong.
View Quote
this reminds me of a joke a friend sent me a while ago:
What to do if you happen upon a peace rally by stupid naive hemp-shirt-wearing college idiots, to teach them why force is sometimes needed: 1) Approach dumb ignorant student talking about "peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation." 2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate. 3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?" 4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence." 5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can. 6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence." 7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence. 8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time. Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to punch back.
View Quote
Link Posted: 7/24/2002 3:16:53 PM EST
Originally Posted By Miss_Magnum:
Originally Posted By sgtar15: Women are for f@cking...not talking to. Problem solved! Sgtar15
View Quote
So if we met at a shooting event, what should I expect? Hmmm? What this girl is trying to say is that arguing moral ABS0LUTES in some situations can be mute. This is why trying to legislate morality in society gets so hairy. If you want to debate her on a topic, establish that the subject is only relevant with regards to her [i]personal[/i] code of right and wrong versus your's. Now, was that so hard?
View Quote
Yes, well our debate was on moral absolutism vs moral relativism. It's possible to be an agnostic moral absolutist. There exist moral absolutes which is external to ourselves, I believe this. However, I do not profess to know them all. One of the absolutes of which I'm certain is that morals are absolute. This is self consistent. She's a moral relativist. Our debate is not over personal moral codes, but the existence of moral absolutes. And for whoever asked this, no, her breasts are not big. I'm not a breast-man. It's possible to be hot without big breasts. It's such a pity, she's so nice to look at but so hard to talk to. sgtar15, that was very sexist of you. If I'd thought what you said, I wouldn't have been debating with her in the first place. But I thought, you know, if she's as fun to talk to as she's nice to look at, we could have something here. So I was wrong. But if your statement is correct, that would defeat the purpose of meeting women socially. If that's all women are, they'd all be prostitutes and all of our interactions would take place in brothels.
Link Posted: 7/24/2002 3:36:24 PM EST
sgtar15--YOU BRUTE! YOU MASHER! Seriously, who cares about her opinion? Why would you waste time debating someone obviously so silly and intellectually immature? Are you trying to enlighten her or get into her pants? If the former, forget it. If the latter, carry on.
Link Posted: 7/25/2002 1:57:46 PM EST
Originally Posted By magnum_99: sgtar15--YOU BRUTE! YOU MASHER! Seriously, who cares about her opinion? Why would you waste time debating someone obviously so silly and intellectually immature? Are you trying to enlighten her or get into her pants? If the former, forget it. If the latter, carry on.
View Quote
Well obviously the first option has become undoable. As for the second option, I'm not trying to get into her pants. At first I thought she was 18, which is my age and I thought it'd be cool if we could talk and stuff and it'd be nice. But then I found out that she's 14, so that's out of the question. So basically there's no point in pursuing this any further. No good can possibly come out of it.
Link Posted: 7/29/2002 3:04:59 AM EST
Originally Posted By jz02: .... But then I found out that she's 14, so that's out of the question. So basically there's no point in pursuing this any further. No good can possibly come out of it.
View Quote
[Homer Simpson voice]DOH![/Homer Simpson] Never mind.
Top Top