topgfsfurart3dcgdislitrpp2preq

/dis/ - Discussion

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

 No.5231

I'm okay with nerophilia. I'm okay with the notion that out there, somewhere a kid has sex woth adults and isn't traumatized. Animals? Fuck them. Literally. If you want to.

I'm not ok with torture or rape. I think objective morality is clear as day, though not really "Right" and "Wrong."

Except... well i can be very hateful. Maybe I would torture certain people that i know deserve it. But it would still be evil. I think. It couldn't give anyone enough pleasure to outweigh their pain, even accounting ratio differences, like me feeling a little better is worth that guy feeling a thousamd times worse.

Maybe that rambling made no sense.

My only point for this thread is the notion of an ethical Right and Wrong.

 No.5233

"Ethics and aesthetics are one".

Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

 No.5235

It's a fine dream, but you must consider that the defining characteristic of rape is lack of consent (ideally, clear presence of non-consent, but that's a big fish to fry). By all means cultivate an interspecies or age-transcending sexual relationship, but how will you ensure that both parties are on the same page consent-wise? Humans are quite bad at reading signals from other animals, and children are quite bad at making important decisions that can have lasting consequences.
It would be a good start to modify the cultural stigmas surrounding sex and rape. I admit that, having never been on the giving or receiving end of rape, I'm not an authority on the subject, but from what I can tell, rape victims are conditioned to think they've been permanently ruined as people, and outsiders seem to view rape as a capital crime worse than genocide. Being forcibly put through intercourse is harsh, yes, but hypothetically, if rape were viewed as a shameful but relatively minor offense, and the victims were treated with sympathy but reassured that it was nothing they couldn't get over (or need fear in advance), I suspect the actual experience would be less emotionally scarring for them. If it goes well, then we could broach the subject of allowing relationships with parties that can't give admissible legal consent, e.g. children and non-humans.
Tl;dr: I see your rambling and raise you my rambling xP

 No.5240

The thing about needing consent is it only applies to not hurting someone. What if you choose to be evil and don't care or, on a grittier note, are still a good person who's not indifferent but actively seeks out revenge, such as to rape a rapist or torture a torturer?

 No.5241

And I agree 100% with your notions, for the record.

People think rape is worse than genocide. That needs to change. Rape victims aren't broken and need to understand that. Many well meaning people have essentially assured them that they are.

And being on the same page for content, yes. Adults make bad decisipns too but children are essentially rpogrammed towards naivety, ergo it's wrong even if that specific kid probably won't be traumatized.

 No.5292

Morality almost by definition is subjective. while pain and pleasure are just for the moment and do not matter in the long term besides the fact that they are things that change people's minds.

What really matters in ethics seems to be how you change other people regardless if this is pain or pleasure. society should consider things wrong that change other people into something that will make them cause harm.

like if some drunk husband is battering his kids I may not care about those kids, however, I do care about the fact that most likely when they will grow they may kill me.

it looks like this is how society operates in general because nobody really cares about crimes itself, what matters is to create the illusion that crime does not pay.

If you were robbed by someone nobody really cares about you however what everyone does care is that this thief who robbed you will change your mind (or the mind of those who care about you) in a way that you will start doing same. so this Is why I have to protect you against robbers and pretend that I am trying to catch the criminal just to prevent you from becoming criminal yourself.
In situations when you actually can't harm me I will not care about what happens to you at all. just like we do not care what people do to each other behind our state borders.

 No.6961

So the person in the attached picture is manipulating an entire department of hard-working men and women by forcing management to let her have at least two hours lunch break in order to breastfeed back at home and also to not do overtime shifts as everybody else for the same reason.
Whenever politely confronted on her bullshit, she simply victimizes herself and send emails with mommy memes.

This has been happening since said person has returned from a 2 years+ payed maternity leave.

Details:
Complete Name: Eliza Misu;
DOB: 03/28/1991;
Nationality: Romanian (I think, anon friend confirmed)
Complete telephone number with attached country code: +40 763 877 299
Email: elenamisu@ymail.com; eliza.misu@pirelli.com;
Address: Horia street, nr. 2, postal code: 200472, city of Craiova, country Romania

 No.6964

>>6961
Faggot, that's not what this thread is for.

 No.7225

>>6961
That fucking sucks but why the hell'd you post this here?

 No.7226

>>6961
Holly crap stop you ass, is this some joke or are you just that stupid. Part of me thinks like this is some “ test” by an ass who thinks we would do this or some shot but hey, it’s probably some attention seeking ass who either had all of the other posts or this is a story to copy to get attention. So please just leave now. ass

Ps. Are the deals even the same or is he pulling them out of his ass .

 No.7269

I maintain that morals are subjective. Any action could be "good" or "evil" depending on the circumstances.

That being said, the causing of pain or taking of life is generally considered "evil." In general, I think it is better to avoid it. However, sometimes it is necessary to harm another. Self-preservation, for example.

Revenge is not always necessary, but it is gratifying. I firmly believe in taking revenge against those who have wronged me. This frame of mind isn't for everybody, but it works for me. When it comes to revenge, I think it is important to have no sympathy for your victim. If you feel sorry for them, then you have no business taking revenge. Revenge is the place for viciousness, not mercy.

I gave up trying to be the "good guy." That isn't to say that I'm "evil," but rather that I don't feel the need to impose moral standards on myself that go against my natural behavior. There's no sense in apologizing for something if I'm just going to do it again.

 No.7271

I already liked you 666 and that paragraph just won you an invite. https://discord.gg/xHsrue

 No.7287

I could be okay or not okay with anything, depending on the circumstances. Rape, murder, genocide, whatever. I think perhaps that the thing I disapprove of most consistently is dishonesty. Especially intellectual dishonesty.

Because I tend to dislike intellectual dishonesty, I don't harbor the pretension that my disapproval is a product of some sort of Platonic moral law carved into the fabric of the universe. No, I know full well that disapproval and all other moral feelings are just that, feelings, no more enlightened or truthful than anger or sadness or sexual urges. There is no more objectivity to an action's wrongness than there is to a person's sexiness. It's all just preference.

 No.7372

The subjective nature of ethics, the issues of determinism and the difficulty to be had in disentangling ethics from aesthetics in the face of rampant deconstructionism do not provide a free pass to act immorally.

One of several reasons is that though ethical systems maybe subjective or flawed, we still have them. Almost all people have ethical standards whether they realize it or not. We cannot 100% decide our own ethics. To a degree, we are stuck with what we’ve got and can be held accountable to ourselves.

Internal inconsistency between individual ethic and acts represents objective immorality because acts are events with agencies and both events and agencies are objective, regardless of how we may perceive them.

 No.7377

>>5231

Sounds like you are struggling with the idea that these things (murder torture rape etc) are wrong, but that if someone is "guilty" of being a "bad" person then it becomes ok to do these things to them as some sort of "punishment". While I feel where you are coming from, that is a slippery slope my friend.

 No.7378

>>7377
Not simply a punishment but an attempt to heal the victims of a holocaust they've wilfully enabled.

All the same, I see it as a slippery slope. But if there's pain this world anyway, better to direct...

 No.7386

>>7378

We've all willfully enabled holocausts of various forms. If you eat at a fast food restaurant, hunt, or pay taxes at all, you are equivalently guilty of disregarding and harming other living things/people as a serial killer would be. People think they can hide behind bureaucracy and layers of abstraction and pretend that they aren't actually killing things. We are all killers, every single one of us, and better to own it then deny it. Trying to single out the *bad* people just means you'll be making another arbitrary metric of life and death. Do what you will, but be honest about what it is, at least with yourself.

 No.7387

>>7386
Yes Ik. By my standards,
If out of 100
9 are the worst shit heads
80 are assholes
10 are alright guysngals
And 1 is a good- not amazing let alone perfect- person. Maybe that is just my standard, but I still think it's a damn good standard.

 No.7444

There is no moral right and wrong. The only truths are that which can be proven with science, physics and mathematics

By all conventional standards of evil, human society itself is the most evil entity that has ever existed in the known universe

How many people have been killed, kidnapped, tortured, raped, beaten, imprisoned by governments and militaries of the world throughout history and today?

Take an institution like that Catholic Church. How many innocent people, "heretics" and pagans were brutally tortured to death in the inquisition? And still the Catholic Church is considered a "holy" institution, that many law abiding adults follow

Compare this to the insignificant "crimes" of individuals considered evil in society, such as killers and rapists

If you steal someone's money at gunpoint it's called robbery. When the government takes someone's money at gunpoint, it's called taxation

If you have a dispute with your neighbour and shoot him, you are an "evil murderer". If a government has a dispute with another government, they can send thousands of men to kill thousands of strangers, and that is called "war", and the killers are considered "heroes"

There is no such thing as punishment, there is only revenge. Punishment implies there is moral authority possessed by the punisher, when in reality there is no moral authority, only superior physical power

 No.7445

>>7444
I aligj very closely with this, though governments bring willfully selfish and delusional doesn't make other misdeeds any less awful.

Rape is still evil, clr example, even if it's not "wrong" to the question asked, for it's a wilfully selfish decision that actively and willfully harms another with selfish, not only self-serving, intentions.

 No.7449

>>7445
Why is that bad

We live in a society where a license is required to put up fliers or have a lemonade stand on your front lawn, and yet this same societybelieves that anyone with functioning genitalia has a right to become a "parent", to have a baby and TAKE IT HOME AND CLOSE THE DOOR BEHIND THEM. No supervision. No psych test. No background check.

Even though this brutal system leads to countless rapes, beatings and murders of children every year (most violence toward children is from someone in the home), human society chooses to do nothing about it. They KNOW countless more children will be raped and murdered under this system, but they keep it in place, because the right of a "parent" to own and control a human being for psychological catharsis is too important to them to give up.

So who are these innocent people getting raped?

You either choose to function as a member of this evil society and therefore deserve any violence that one of society's victims takes out on you, or you're against this society and therefore recognise there is no moral expectation on an abused child to "suck it up" and forgive what society did to them, and thy deserve to try to hurt you, even if YOU dont deserve to die

Nobody deserves to get raped or killed, but everybody deserves to rape or kill if they feel the need to.

 No.7450

>>7445

To put what I said more clearly:

Why does any individual have an obligation to not rape? Why does any individual have a moral obligation to have compassion, empathy or fondness for others?

Especially if this person has been raped and treated without compassion, empathy or fondness their whole life because of society's institutions, and society just shrugged and kept on rolling?

How can you call something evil when no good has ever existed in humanity to compare it to?

 No.7465

>>7450
But good does exist. Overwhelmed clearlt but willfully compassionate decisions are made.

As for obligations, I said nothing of one being obligated to be a good person.

 No.7469

>>7449
Society isn't evil. People just don't think about this stuff or have distorted view.
Blatant propaganda, passive-aggressively imposed patriotism, lack of interest, and ignorance are the reasons. You are overly simplifying this issue. It's not the faceless society, which commits atrocities, but it's always a specific human being. He pulled the trigger, he gave the order, he raped, he made a decission to buy competitors and fire the workers. It's always down to one or few persons. Blaming society means turning a blind eye to the real villains.

On a macro scale of course there is no good and evil. But on the micro scale yes-there is. And a line between them is pretty obvious.

Most of us don't have any impact on society, but we have impact on ourselves. So one can excuse his evil with this society bullshit, or he can strive to be better. Not for forgiveness, I don't believe good deeds erase bad ones. But just because it's the right thing to do.

>>Why does any individual have a moral obligation to have compassion, empathy or fondness for others?

That's an interesting question. Although it's false. There is no obligation. You don't have to be emphatic-you should be emphatic. Apart from obvious ones, there are also pragmatic reasons for that:
-you will be able to understand people better
-it's a virtue, so you can feel the moral highground
-people will like you more
-it will be easier to manipulating them
-your life will be more exciting because of all this feelings you will experience

Of course you have every right to be a misanthrope and live alone in a middle of forest. As long as you don't kill, rape and shit. If you do, you should be hunt down.
Law we have may not be perfect, but it is preventing more evil, than it induce. And that is good enough reason to keep it. Also you have mention, that victims want retaliation. Law is a form of vengeance. If I was that neighboure you shot, I wouldn't care if you were assfucked in childhood, I would want you to suffer for what you did. Because evil and pain you have endured don't give you the right to hurt others. They give you the right to revenge. And sometimes you can't even have your revenge. Sad revelation-that's life.

 No.7472

>>7469
>>he made a decision to buy competitors and fire the workers. It's always down to one or few persons. Blaming society means turning a blind eye to the real villains.

you are demonstrably wrong because you do not even address the main reason why that person does all his crimes. This is because society demands them to do that.

A businessman has to fire workers and pollute the environment because if he will try to act nice he will go bankrupt and another businessman who will do that evil will win.

society is punishing good people and rewarding evil this is why society is evil.

Even if we assume that all society is made of people who have totally good intentions society as whole will be still rewarding evil because businessman who manages to cut costs more by paying his workers less and pushing them more will be rewarded by bigger profits.


To fight evil you must not chase villains but take away incentives who turn people into vilains.

 No.7474

>>7472

Society demands for him to ruthlessly chasing the profit in perpetual dehumanised race against competition? Or maybe those are rules of the capitalistic market, eh?
Society has nothing to do with this. This rules were imposed by strongest elite that gains wealth with this system and have any interest in maintaining status quo. They own media, found politicians, support scientists to keep people in the dark, in this illusion of apathy and powerlessness.

Paraphrasing your words:
To fight evil you must not blame the society, but fight villains who create those incentives.

Do you understand my point? It's always people. Even in lynching mob there is someone controling it or unleashing it to gain something. Society doesn't desire things. People do. It's always down to that in the end.

 No.7475

>>7474
>>Do you understand my point? It's always people. Even in lynching mob, there is someone controlling it or unleashing it to gain something. Society doesn't desire things. People do. It's always down to that in the end.

yes and your point is still wrong because we can take any democratic state as an example
people are totally in control to elect anyone they desire and yet they elect evil people who supposedly do stuff which nobody wants to happen.
In case of that lynching mob, if you claim that mob is being controlled by someone this implies that entire society is nothing more than the tool in the hands of that villain. so it deserves no respect and can be harmed without any regrets.

Finally, society does desire things because it is susceptible to the same laws of evolution like individual people, so if we have one capitalist society and one humane socialist society they will both compete and capitalist society will destroy socialist society over time.
society is susceptible to the same random mutation as individual people Various groups with very different moral beliefs will emerge all time. Some of them will go extinct tome will spread and assimilate other groups.

>>These rules were imposed by the strongest elite that gains wealth with this system and has any interest in maintaining status quo. They own media, found politicians, support scientists to keep people in the dark, in this illusion of apathy and powerlessness.

You overestimate the power of elites. Elites have very little power.
and mots of the time elites are on the good side fighting against society which is generally horrible.
for example, hardly anyone knows that task of the Inquisition was not to hunt witches but to save them from being murdered
all those horrible laws and rules in the Koran and bible are made not to kill innocent people but to prevent them from being killed by the bloodthirsty mob which does not care whom they kill.
If something bad happens, the mob will not care if that person is guilty or not they just grab anyone and lynch it

 No.7476

>>7475
Democracy is far from being perfect reflection of what people want. Voters are manipulated and fooled all the time by media and millionth dollars election campaigns. And very often they have to chose between two evils, like in the last US election for example. That's a fact.
It's not the real control. It's another illusion to keep people in check.

People used by someone else with lies, or just because they are naive deserve second chance. We all make mistakes. Where you see a depersonalized society I see a group of people with unique faces, voices and dreams. I don't believe in collective responsibility. Also blaming society is very convienient. Puts you above them.

Most people in general want the same things. Peace, comfort life, wealth. Resources are limited though, so conflicts are hard to avoid. But I wouldn't call those desires of society. Rather universal basic human needs. Smaller groups inside the society are a different story. But we aren't talking about them.
And yes, societies will differ with means to get those needs, but again, that was not the point. We can call it evolution, despite I don't think it's the most suitable term, as evolution means upgrading, and changes in societies are often for the worse. But ok. Societies evolve. Human needs don't. War never changes.
As an example let's look at Nazi's Germany. Society was fooled by propaganda and scared by hit squads of ruling party. It's "desires" were in fact desires of Hitler'n'friends. You think holocaust and mass executions of civilians was, what German citizens wanted? Check the footages of Germans forced to visit concentration camps right after the war. They were promised better live and revenge for WW I humiliation. Kept in the dark till the end.

Elites that owns media, found election campaigns, hire countless lobbyst, abuse workers rights, evade taxes, use speculations to destabilize competition, lie, have no regards for people's health, etc, are the poor, powerless good guys? I'm sorry, what?
I get why you dislike many of moral standards, political correctness, and many general rules, but still you are pretty biased towards society.

Yes, I know this shit about Inquisition. I bet many of them even believed they were saving heretics from eternal torment in hell by torturing and burning them alive. It doesn't changes the fact that this was an unforgivable evil.

Mob will lynch, carried by emotions like fear and anger, without rational thinking. It's still less evil, than crime commited with premeditation. With cold blood.

 No.7484

>>7476
>>Mob will lynch, carried by emotions like fear and anger, without rational thinking. It's still less evil, than crime commited with premeditation. With cold blood.

Reasons do not matter, result matters. In this situation, clever elites can redirect all that mob into something less harmful.
lest say there a drought in the village and mob gets bloodthirsty for a scapegoat they will rip apart anyone who gets in proximity just to release their anger. Let it be a witch, some random traveler, some guy with an unusual pimple on his face.
Elites can take control over that anger they can assemble all that mob and kill it in some war or they can redirect it into something like murdering some cow as a sacrifice.

>>You think holocaust and mass executions of civilians was, what German citizens wanted?

yes, this is what German citizens wanted.

>>Elites that owns media, found election campaigns, hire countless lobbyst, abuse workers rights, evade taxes, use speculations to destabilize competition, lie, have no regards for people's health, etc, are the poor, powerless good guys? I'm sorry, what?

the enemy of elites is not a poor good guy, the opponent of elites is society itself in form of faceless mindless mob.
this is what elites are trying to control.

>>Most people, in general, want the same things. Peace, comfort life, wealth. Resources are limited though, so conflicts are hard to avoid. But I wouldn't call those desires of society. Rather universal basic human needs. Smaller groups inside the society are a different story. But we aren't talking about them.

I think you have a bad idea about society.
I do not claim that we should treat it as an enemy which has to be destroyed, but more like a necessary evil.

When we have people with different interests we need to manage it somehow to prevent those people from just murdering each other in one day.

This is why we create some rules on how we interact and those rules turn into the separate being by itself. now we do not interact with each other anymore we interact with those abstract rules.
just like if we have some dispute we go to the court and try to interact with the law in the attempt to get what we want.

My problem with society is not political correctness but the fact that society has a different goal than mine. While I can negotiate things with people I can't negotiate with society.

Speaking in more specifics terms, current society decided to take the route of delusions where instead of fixing problems it attempts to conceal them. For example, instead of curing disabled people, it is trying to make everyone believe that disability itself is fine and there is no need to do anything about that.
This is related to political correctness where instead of developing a medical way to change your skin color or your sex society is trying to force everyone into the delusion that black is white and man is woman

 No.7490

>>7484
1. What if was clever elites, who manipulated people to create the angry mob?
And to be honest what the hell are you talking about? Do you know anything about politics? You don't argue with my standpoint, but with my examples. Is that strawman, or what?

2. You are delusional then. State of German society during Nazi's regime is well recorded and there were countless sociological researches. I'm sorry, you are wrong.

3. Society as a >>faceless mindless mob.
Great. you are basically proving my point from post above:
>>blaming society is very convienient. Puts you above them.
Gives you excuse for harmong random people, as they are part of that "evil" society.

4. I was thinking you are the best poster on Gurochan /Dis/. Smart, insightfull, fair. But you are just another villain looking for justification for his dark dreams. Pretending minor flaws of society are abominations asking for cleansing.

 No.7491

>>7490
Drop your insults. I take issues some things he says, but don't be surprised he has an oppositional opinion.

 No.7492

and I wouldn't say socitey's flaws are minor.

 No.7494

>>7490
What if was clever elites, who manipulated people to create the angry mob?

no, it is not elites who created an angry mob
This is pretty natural psychology, even if you take some animals you can see similar behavior if some animal will fell pain it will attack anyone in proximity. humans will behave in the exact same way if something happens they will attack someone at random in proximity.

when you are one on one with another person you can defend and another person will not dare to attack you or you can engage in some discussion and reasoning that way convincing that you are not the source of the trouble. but when you are being attacked by the mob you will be crushed.

you do not need lots of manipulation to create angry mob something happens someone starts blaming something and everyone will follow
elites need to track that time and conveniently retired it into the desired direction to discharge that anger in a controllable way.

I even expect that current migrant crisis in Europe is the preparation of the new scapegoat to discharge upcoming anger.
It is popular to blame elites for all evil. but if you look at old societies without those elites you will see that it is almost impossible to survive there without being murdered for no reason. just take Africa as an example where they still burn witches even if they have no inquisition and nobody can stop them. they just want to do it so badly.

>>You are delusional then. State of German society during Nazi's regime is well recorded and there were countless sociological researchers. I'm sorry, you are wrong.

if Germans did not want that that would not have happened and it would have no reason to happen. so I discard all those researchers whose research lacks any logic. it is nothing more than usual propaganda.

also even if the idea of Jews as a scapegoat was the partial result of the propaganda this is not changing that fact that it was what people wanted
if the reason why you want new iPhone is advertising it does not change the fact that you still want it.
If it was not jews it would haw be something else. Europe needed some way to discharge all that frustration over dying capitalism and failing economy.

By the way, China found the more funny option they proclaimed sparrows as scapegoats and quickly exterminated them all, then they proclaimed flies as a new scapegoat and fortunately they never ran out of flies so that kept people busy for quite some time. A population of idiots has certain benefits in that case because you cant pull out such trick in Europe LOL

>>Gives you an excuse for harming random people, as they are part of that "evil" society.

I do not need any excuses I can do anything without excuses if I only I want LOL
and by default, everyone is on top of everything. This is most basic logic.
I am above all society and not only above all society but above all universe. and it just can't be otherwise. there is no purpose in life than making myself feel good.

society to the great extent contradicts this objective this why it is my enemy. and it is also enemy of pretty much everyone with the rational brain because everyone should assume themselves as the center of the universe.

Being the center of the universe does not mean that you must harm other people or be very unfair it just means that you cooperate with those who cooperate with you and ignore trying to destroy those who do not cooperate or obstruct your goals.
The idea of cleansing is totally stupid and pointless. if you harm someone this is because you want to achieve something not because you proclaim yourself as performing the will of God. You are the god yourself.

On the other hand, if you do not see yourself as the center of the universe I cannot cooperate with you on equal terms because you are part of some other entity so instead of negotiating with you I have to negotiate with that entity whose part you are.

If you are Christian I can't argue with you about anything. I need to argue with your god in a way that I will change your religious dogmas to fit my needs. and you as dumb slave will just do whatever your god tells you to do.

if you see yourself as part of society I need to negotiate with that society as whole to modify its moral norms and rules into something that suits my desires.



[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
topgfsfurart3dcgdislitrpp2preq