Page 31 of 36 FirstFirst ...
21
29
30
31
32
33
... LastLast
  1. #601
    Go for it - Boyfriend? not Husband? right. That means she's still for grabs.

    GG

  2. #602
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    I see no reason to be inconsistent and grant your exceptions. The future is caused by the sum of the present and all past events. Your lack of intervention is causing future suffering every bit as much as whatever action the person took to initiate the suffering.
    Once again you remove the agency of those choices and the differing motivational factors, the future is not the same as 'people'. Complete strict measured equality on unequal people, is ironically, inequality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Your subjective experience. I have no idea why some experiences are felt as positive and others negative. But they are the entire basis of preference and preference is necessary for morality to make any sense at all.
    Subjective experience varies very widely. I'm sure a large degree of people prefer not to be in pain, yet you find some that enjoy it. But we can't allow the intentional infliction of harm on a broad scale due to a minority's preference. Despite that we accommodate for the weaker will, if possible. Because not being a raging tyrannical asshat is a thing (yay morality)!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    They exist due to the lack of will of the stronger force.
    Right, because nobody has absolute power. So weaker wills have weight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    I am angry because _______. Crisis averted. "Murder is immoral," doesn't even tell me you're mad.
    If you ask questions rather than just dismiss statements as worthless; you can actually find out why they consider it immoral. A lot of people in this very thread have articulated why quite effectively. That statement alone is useless, but only marginally less useful than I'm angry because X (which still requires an orientation device). You've chosen people who have poor articulation skills as your example, no framework you could give these individuals would help them. Well you could educate them...
    Last edited by RapBreon; 2014-05-10 at 02:19 PM.

  3. #603
    The Patient ladylin's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Barrowwind View Post
    Go for it - Boyfriend? not Husband? right. That means she's still for grabs.

    GG
    A boyfriend of 13 years. In some places that's a common law marriage.

  4. #604
    Quote Originally Posted by ladylin View Post
    I understand what he's/she's saying. I understand what you are saying. Here's a question. Can you logically explain love?
    Yes, it is a chemical reaction in the brain to ensure maximal survival rate of your offspring.

    Everybody knows this, I do, you do, everyone does! We often pretend that we don't though since that tingly feeling is a lot nicer when not remembering what it really is...in house drugs.

  5. #605
    When I was younger I always dated older women, maybe not that much older but if you are into it you are into it. Just be honest with her, make sure you both want the same things out of whatever kind of relationship you are looking for, and if you do go nuts. Really I don't think you should ever seek validation from other people concerning intimate issues, at the end of the day nobody can tell you about the kind of person or relationship that is right for you. You have to figure that out all on your own. And the best way to do that is by experiencing stuff. So even if it doesn't work out as long as you learn more about yourself and what makes you happy in a relationship, you come out ahead.

  6. #606
    The Patient ladylin's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Is there something about love that makes it fundamentally different from all other emotions?
    Love is that one thing, people can do amazing things in the name of love, or do incredibly terrible things in the name of love. When you ask them why they honestly say " I don't know." That is what feelings/emotions are. I work with humans, and their emotions, it's not as black and white as you think it is but I'm not going to go down this road. Like I said I perfectly understand what both of them are saying. Both are right to an extent.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by madmanx View Post
    Yes, it is a chemical reaction in the brain to ensure maximal survival rate of your offspring.

    Everybody knows this, I do, you do, everyone does! We often pretend that we don't though since that tingly feeling is a lot nicer when not remembering what it really is...in house drugs.
    But you can't explain WHY those chemicals occur at the times that they do. Like Nixx you try to paint things as black and white, but they just aren't. If there were logical reasons behind our every emotion or thought, then psychology wouldn't be needed.

  7. #607
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Decisions create future events. One decision caused suffering. Now your decision is causing suffering. What is the rational justification for ignoring the continued suffering your action causes when you maintain you have an obligation to strangers to act in a way that prevents harm to them? The decision that started the suffering isn't exactly a worthwhile distinction with such a rule.
    This is what I mean by blind blanket judgments (an idea we've been moving passed for years now; at least in the justice system). One situation is not the same as another. The end result may be the same, but the decisions do not have to be. Your version of morality condemns accidents as much as maliciousness to the exact same place. I believe the place they should go is different, because as I said, unequal beings treated with measured equality is inequality.

    Imagine holding a person on that bus who suffers from extreme social phobia, simply being on that bus is a living nightmare. You are willing to condemn that individual to the same fate as the person who assaulted the girl, because they did not act. You may not think empathy is a good reasoning tool, but when it comes to people, it's another analyzing tool, you can never have enough tools.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    The only point is that virtue ethics are unnecessary.
    I don't see it working on a large scale. Or where dissenting ideas of pleasurable and non-pleasurable are involved. You still have indoctrinate individuals into what is and isn't pleasurable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    They do not have weight where the government has both will and ability. They only have weight outside of that sphere.
    Weaker wills have influenced more powerful ones for a pretty long time now. Ability or no.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Their explanations would be just as effective or ineffective without the inclusion of moral language. Moral language only flouts reason. "X is evil." "Oh, well I don't want people to think I'm evil. I'd best disagree with x too." I doubt anyone has that exact thought, but it's approximately what occurs, whether or not they're aware of it.
    Only flouts reason? It's used in great effect with reason to justify certain principles all the time. The only issue I really see you taking is with that particular statement. The rest is just pack mentality and indoctrination, that would occur morality or no.
    Last edited by RapBreon; 2014-05-10 at 02:42 PM.

  8. #608
    The Patient ladylin's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    But love serves a purpose within our biology. When it correctly serves its function or a similar function in a constructive manner, it can be said to be logical. When it's applied to situations that are harmful and not constructive, it can be said to be irrational.
    That is true to a point. But there are emotions that run so much deeper than this horrible basis you are trying to apply. Logic and reason can be applied to certain situations, but not every situation. If we did, we would stopping the very thing that makes us what we are. Who we are.

    I'm done here. I have things to do today. Have a good day Nixx. I do enjoy talking with you. Sometimes you say some profound things, other times, ya make me facepalm :P

  9. #609
    To wake up this morning and find this thread...

    Kinda made my day.

    On a serious note, I think people have mentioned pretty well what the real problem is here aka a boyfriend and 2 kids. Some people didn't really read your whole post and say go for it. Id advise you not to listen. In life we have to make mistakes and from mistakes we become who we are but this one is easy to be smart and take the right decision.

    You are 21...you need to realize that no one can really tell you what to do...but you really need to sit down alone and think this through and look at your options properly. Every action has a result,you have to filter those results and figure out which road you want to take...Having sex with her can cause multiple consequences, do you want to be part of that drama? If she's being this way with you, how many more guys is she like this with? Do you really just want to have sex to say you had sex?

    The possibilities to the questions you need to be rational about is endless...and lets not forget that sometimes you need to do what you need to..and not what you want to. If your issue is you cannot get women and this is the only one thats given you attention like you want and that's why you're attached, then you need to think about that as well...thats not healthy and is also not a proper reason to love someone. Attachment is fine if you have control over it and have boundaries for yourself and others. There's a healthy way to go about attachment but yours is not a good one.

    It could be that you are scared that you wont have the opportunity again , don't settle , who knows what your life will bring you..dear god you're only 21. These events are something that further down the road you will have to share with someone, now with a certain acceptance some people are fine with their actions and share them honestly, but you will have to know that it will make people question if you understand what love is or if you just jump the gun on a person who show's you attention.

    In my personal opinion..don't do it, but the decision is entirely up to you and what your willing to live with.

  10. #610
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    I'm not willing to condemn anyone. I don't maintain that there's any sort of obligation to help strangers. You, however, absolutely should be, given that you said there is.
    I'm going to say it again despite me sounding like a broken record. Differing levels of culpability. The obligation to help is less than the obligation to not stab someone. The primary difference is one isn't legally enforced because it's a minefield. So instead it is socially enforced via community backlash (the article).

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    I'm willing to recognize the difference between accident and intent, but they intentionally did not help her. In the earlier hypothetical, you intentionally did not feed those children. That was no accident.
    If you're willing to recognise accident, consequentialism collapses under its own premise. It requires a supporting structure for it to make sense. You deny virtue ethics, but you propose some kind of 'reason' instead. But there are many types of reason. What is logical to you, may not be logical to others.

    I did mention ignorance as a defence and leaps of logic earlier. This is why circumstances are important.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    The stronger group imposes its will on the weaker group where necessary.
    Necessary is up for definition. But I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Influence is ability. Influencing is both ability and will.
    Influence can come in more ways than directly and intentionally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Justify a principle with just emotion in a way that isn't completely garbage.
    I did say in tandem. Emotion alone is like reason alone, limited in scope. If nothing else emotion breeds motivation and at its height, it breeds passion. At its lowest, it's pretty destructive. They serve different purposes, but have the potential to compliment each other or destroy each other. Most great scientific progress didn't come from a people who ignored emotions, their passion drove them to continue their quest for X.

    As for attempting to justify a principle with just emotion, I want to try anyway; I'm curious to see your rebuttal. Back to the example of the individual with severe social phobia, I can empathise with their plight. Thus, I don't agree with blanket universal judgements. I suppose I'm employing an emotion as a reasoning tool still. Hmmm. But in the same way, why would you even bother responding if you weren't invested somehow? Your reason certainly doesn't beg you to respond. Maybe you are emotionally attached to some kind of value that makes responding worthwhile for you. I'm legitimately curious about this.
    Last edited by RapBreon; 2014-05-10 at 03:23 PM.

  11. #611
    I am Murloc! Grym's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in UK where there is chicken
    Posts
    5,207
    Are they your kids?
    If not, her kids are not your problem and of your concern.

    Do you know or care about her BF?
    If not, then whatever happens to him again is not your problem.

    Do you plan to have a long term relationship with her? Or just a 1 night thing?
    If just a 1 night thing, then her family's issues are not your problems.

    Do you care about if her kids and BF hates you?
    If not, whatever happen to them again, is not your problem.

    Should you bang her?
    If all the above answers you give is "not your problem", then, go for it. Yeah you may cause issue within their family, but, do you really care about what they feel and think of you? I know I won't, therefore whatever happen to them I am not interested about. They can hate me and curse me all they want, but I am not going to lose sleep over it. The only thing that directly affect you here is, do you wanna do her or not, that is the only thing in this situation that involve you that you care about.

  12. #612
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Grym View Post
    Should you bang her?
    If all the above answers you give is "not your problem", then, go for it. Yeah you may cause issue within their family, but, do you really care about what they feel and think of you? I know I won't, therefore whatever happen to them I am not interested about. They can hate me and curse me all they want, but I am not going to lose sleep over it. The only thing that directly affect you here is, do you wanna do her or not, that is the only thing in this situation that involve you that you care about.
    The OP could do that if they wanted to be entirely selfish of course but if he applies that mindset then honestly she'd be better off not getting involved with him in any way shape or form. Selfish people aren't exactly the best kind to get into a relationship with after all.

  13. #613
    I am Murloc! Grym's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in UK where there is chicken
    Posts
    5,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Bervose View Post
    The OP could do that if they wanted to be entirely selfish of course but if he applies that mindset then honestly she'd be better off not getting involved with him in any way shape or form. Selfish people aren't exactly the best kind to get into a relationship with after all.
    Don't think he wants to be in a relationship with her (I did ask that in 1 of the question).

    "should you bang her" and "should you get into a relationship with her" are VERY different questions.

    One needs you do be considerate for the other person, one doesn't.

  14. #614
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    I can't tell you how I function. With one exception at the age of 19, I do not really experience positive feelings, yet I must on some level that I'm not consciously aware of because I do not act purely to avoid suffering. Fitting such low rewards though, I form goals only very weakly and they are often very temporary. I post mostly because it's something to do and requires less effort than other things to do. Killing time is necessary to prevent the day from dragging out forever, though there are times where I literally just stare at a wall for 30 minutes or so. I pretty much rely on influence from others to do anything, but I also can't stand most people or the types of relationships they try to form with me.
    Might want to talk to a doctor, sounds like psycopathy/sociopathy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    I am ACTUALLY ASKING for them to ban me and relieve me from the misery of this thread.

  15. #615
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Why are the obligations different? You said you have an obligation to act in a manner that prevents suffering to others, even strangers.
    Edit: I misread, so I've redone this entire point.

    I said you have an obligation to not cause harm to people (I'm not sure I said and can't be fucked checking to be honest, I'm pretty sure that was part of reductionism though). Your argument is that the cause is the same if you allow it to continue, so preventing and causing are no different. Logically, I do not disagree. However, people are complex and I feel this approach largely ignores the psychology of decision making. Being the primary root cause of an act is a vital part of that decision making process.

    I also do believe you have an obligation to prevent harm to people, under specific circumstances. Unlike the above which is much broader though still willing to accept circumstance (sometimes harm is necessary 'for the greater good'). Sometimes other obligations takes precedence, hence the weighting of obligations against one another.

    The full wording would be full legalese like; "you have an obligation to not cause harm to people with reasonable foreseeability by either acting with malicious intent or recklessly". Which we have discussed over the length of our discourse. But we're reaching the conclusion now it seems. So recaps are in order.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Or being unwilling to recognize accidents is more damaging than the accidents that occur. Since utilitarianism is probably the pinnacle of consequentialism, I'll use that as an example. People tend to think it would come to really unsettling outcomes, such as sacrificing individuals for the good of the community, yet I'm not really sure that would be the case. We know that people need to feel secure and safe to be productive and happy, yet if we were to randomly kill people on a whim for "the greater good," their sense of safety and security would be threatened, resulting in a decline in productivity and happiness. Doing it too often would certainly be detrimental. Doing it even once might be detrimental if anyone ever finds out about it. So in that sense, the principles of utilitarianism prevent it from leading to an outcome that would widely be considered ridiculous and results in something close to de facto rights.
    I'm sure people would take umbrage at 'random killings'. But people are sent to their deaths often 'for the greater good'. Spies, soldiers, etc. I agree in our current social milieu you have a fair point. I mean this is the entire notion that leads the courts to believe convicting innocents is worse than letting offenders go free.

    However, in a society where community is the emphasised value, not the self. It could devolve to that point (would it be a devolution? It might be a desired thing to be sacrificed for the good of everyone else). People do incredibly rash and dangerous things for their families and sometimes even their country. The sheer unbridled egocentricism of our society would be its saving grace against what you have described. Regardless, this notion is still supported by other forces and values.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Necessary in the same sense that matter trying to occupy the same space as other matter will necessarily result in one or both pieces of matter failing to occupy that space in the future.
    To me necessary is defined by those enacting their will.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    You find their plight more empathetic, but what about their paralyzing fear is less blameworthy than someone else's explosive anger? In either case, emotion compels action, but indirectness once again rears its ugly head to deem one action less harmful than the other. In both cases an overwhelming emotion compelled intentional actions that caused harm.
    Paralyzing fear has only the intention of inflicting itself upon the one who feels it. Explosive anger intends to share. Additionally, less blameworthy? Not particularly. If someone has crippling anger issues it runs deep, I typically wouldn't hold them as responsible. Calculated misdeeds are the issue for me.

    To be entirely honest, I find it philosophically difficult to blame anyone for anything, this is a very unpopular stance, the importance of choice placed upon the individual in society is very real, but I feel overstated. That being said, in the real world, there does need to be a line drawn for the sake of order. I draw that line at calculated deeds with forethought, damage is known. Because that seems the most reasonable place to draw it, full control of mental faculties is retained and reasoning skills aren't inhibited beyond their natural state for the individual in question. Obviously people with impaired mental skills go in a different box, but even then, putting stuff in boxes, I dunno.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    -snip-
    I'm out of line here. My apologies. Just something to think about I suppose.

    Edit: I apologise for the floodgates I have opened below. This will be a field day for the MMO-C crowd.

    On another note, you and my partner would get along famously, she likes to stare at walls as well. She also really likes Ice King >.>

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    Might want to talk to a doctor, sounds like psycopathy/sociopathy.
    There is nothing inherently wrong with being a sociopath. If the person is comfortable with it, there really isn't much of an issue. And to be honest it doesn't sound like sociopathy, just a general low mood. But hey I'm no practitioner of psychology.
    Last edited by RapBreon; 2014-05-10 at 05:37 PM.

  16. #616
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Pets are terrible for the same reasons as people: They're demanding. I considered a sloth because I think they're neat, but I think it would be hard to justify owning one.
    I have one of these: http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/c208/
    Our bond is growing strong :].

  17. #617
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueobelisk View Post
    Omg yes I got here before the lock.

    Do what you want.
    everyone is proud of you

    OT: don´t mess with someones girlfriend

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nixx View Post
    Pets are terrible for the same reasons as people: They're demanding. I considered a sloth because I think they're neat, but I think it would be hard to justify owning one.
    so you rely on influence but think people are terrible because they´re demanding... hum, i think you should talk to someone more qualified than the people of mmoc-offtopic
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  18. #618
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    Might want to talk to a doctor, sounds like psycopathy/sociopathy.
    Sounds more like depression to me, but I am not a medical professional of any type.

  19. #619
    Have you not considered a simple 3some with said milf and boyfriend?f

  20. #620
    Quote Originally Posted by Grym View Post
    Don't think he wants to be in a relationship with her (I did ask that in 1 of the question).

    "should you bang her" and "should you get into a relationship with her" are VERY different questions.

    One needs you do be considerate for the other person, one doesn't.
    Doing either makes you an asshole, no matter how you look at it. Even then though, he considers her a friend. That alone should be reason enough not to possibly fuck up her life for such selfish reasons. Frankly though, the whole discussion about right or wrong is pointless anyway, because no matter what shitty, selfish, antisocial advice people here will give him, the chance of him getting anything from her are next to zero anyway. The most dmg will probably directed at him proportional to how poorly he chooses.
    Last edited by Cosmic Janitor; 2014-05-10 at 04:49 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •