How do you justify 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
For, if there is no "good" and "bad," there can't an understanding that false is "bad" and true is "good."
Why is the truth of redpill more desirable than falsehood? What makes truth "good?"
Other urls found in this thread:
pastebin.com
en.wikipedia.org
m.youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
>Where do you get your morals
i think about things objectively and come up with my own point of view. i also change my point of view from time to time, but ultimately i've realized there are some things i care about, and some i don't
>How do you justify 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
i don't really. i see people have different interests and different backgrounds. if our interests are in conflict i may back down, or i may stick to "us" over "them", depending on the situation.
>if there is no "good" and "bad"
there is good, and there is bad. people who are bad know that they are.
>Why is the truth of redpill more desirable than falsehood
>What makes truth "good?"
the truth is always better because you get a better understanding of things, and can act on that.
Words like good and bad suddenly make sense if you always qualify them with a for whom in your mind
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
From crime statistics.
From the God-Emperor of Mankind.
Required Reading
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
The only source of objective morality: religion.
>morals
>current year
It's a race to the bottom mawfuckas
> Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
From Bible.
> How do you justify 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
IDK, who are "you"? You are probably some education-worshiping science cultist. And you will blindly argue about how ignorant Christians are, while Christians in fact have created everything, what science claims for itself. Just to hand it out further to kikes, mudslimes, heretics, pagans and all kinds of degenerates.
> What makes truth "good?"
Because truth is what exists, what was and what will be.
You cant build on lies. You cant have worth without being a part of truth.
There is nothing in worshiping lie.
And everyone should start by stop lying to themselves.
Sup Forums
Truth doesn't have to be good or bad.
It just has to be true.
This.
Good girl in OP's pic. She knows the rules.
> morals
Traditional western Cristian-(((Judeo))) culture
I'm right because I've never been wrong.
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
Myself.
The golden rule.
I get my morals from the teaching of Jesus Christ and the Bible. There is definitive good and evil in the world. Therefore there is definitive truth. The truth is that white civilization has done more for the world than any other civilization in the history of mankind. I believe the truth is that once we turn our attention back to God, and cleanse our society of the parasites, heathens and savage degenerates he will bless us once again.
The "redpill" that we preach is not anything crazy or far out there. Most of the time it is simply traditional conservative values. The degenerates cry out against it but the wicked always recoil from truth.
What makes truth good? Truth is good because without it we are all living lies. Lies separate us from God and in turn he witholds his blessings from us. Dedicate your lives to the truth. Dedicate your lives to preserving justice and law. Dedicate yourselves to promoting healthy lifestyles and culture. Only then, when we are right, can we hope to correct the woes of society and bring grace back to our race.
I tend to base my concept of Good and Evil off of how it works in D&D. Good behavior is at the benefit of others. Evil behavior detriments others and usually benefits one's self. Neutral behavior purely benefits one's self without causing detriment to others. Actions that are a detriment to others and one's self are simply stupid.
Then there's Lawful-Chaotic. Lawful people tend to prefer organized structures that enforce and protect a specific way of life. Chaotic people would rather let people be responsible for themselves instead of needing others to dictate their lives. Neutrality in this category tends to accept the need for some societal structure, but not to the point of forcing people to either fit in or be punished
> Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
I have no friends and my parents worked most of the time.
So I would guess Sup Forums and Sup Forums in general.
> 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
Sup Forums is always right
...
I don't justify right or wrong. I just think everyone is wrong and if they still have a sense of ego to discriminate themselves as "right" then I classify them to be extremely wrong.
t. fedora
Morality is relative, user. Always has been
rational self-interest
I can see why Allah likes this position
Did you know that Rand's philosophy is simply a modernized version of Aristotle? I can cite him if she triggers you too much.
Belief in the Almighty God, who has laid down Good and Evil in unambiguous terms.
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
From a pre-Aryan moon goddess who chose me to receive her message.
>Did you know that Rand's philosophy is simply a rewrite of Aristotle?
FTFY
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
This man inspired me.
I choose:
>The science of morality may refer to various forms of ethical naturalism grounding morality in rational, empirical consideration of the natural world.
Just like any other animal on the planet, we get our morals from our evolution as a social species.
We have an innate need for altruism, because that's just how we are. We work together, and build societies to protect one another, and ensure the survival of our genes.
Words like "good" and "bad" are just sounds we make with our mouths to describe things we consider beneficial or not beneficial to our well-being as humans.
"Truth" is that which conforms with reality. "Truth" is "good" because it's beneficial to survival to believe as many "true" things and as few "false" things as possible.
Does that answer your question?
I don't see the difference.
I don't see a similarity.
>is
>ought
>is-ought
N E C E S S A R Y
C O N N E X I O N S
...
Finally, somebody points out Harris' bullshit. Just search for the word "Obvious" in the book and count the occurrences. Dude's trying to pass his own moral principles as "obvious" facts.
...
how often do you drink
bit of Kant
bit of Aurellius
Lot of Catholic family values
small mixing of cuck culture from college days
Well, that's a random-ass question.
I'll have a glass of wine or a beer when I eat about once a week, maybe.
I only go out to get "drunk" once every couple months, if even that.
I've been working a lot lately, and I haven't had the time to go out and drink with friends.
...
Chaotic Neutral master race. I do what I want and I do it irresponsibly
Pick qualities important to you that make you get goosebumps (not erections) and then build a morality around those qualities.
For me they stand out as honor, loyalty, honesty, self-sacrifice and peace until it is no longer possible and then fight like you're trying to exterminate the enemy, whatever it may be.
Clint Eastwood has some great films about what a man should do from Unforgiven (Deserve's got nothing to do with it) to Gran Torino (Multiculturalism and self sacrifice) to Letters from Iwo Jima
m.youtube.com
Maybe I am brainwashed, but I am doing my best to be the best man I can possibly be while trying to find the best nation I can possibly become a part of and work together as a people.
Be a good man Sup Forums, not a bad one.
Why does not believing obvious liberal bullshit make you feel enlightened? It's like feeling smug about knowing Santa isn't real. Well, you know everything now. Might as well subscribe to right wing conspiracies with all the free time you have
...
"Red pill" is the same pat-on-back, you're so smart tactic they use in those "50% of college students get this wrong" Facebook posts.
That would be Chaotic-Stupid. You are still fully responsible for your actions, even if you don't feel you need to answer to anybody else. Irresponsibility is often evil, but usually stupid as it comes back to bite you in the ass. To play a Chaotic-Neutral character intelligently, you need to understand that you still have responsibility, even if it's mostly only responsibility to yourself. If you are going to burn bridges, they better not be bridges you will need to cross later. You have a responsibility to make sure that your actions don't end up fucking you over in the future.
Now if you are intentionally playing a low-intelligence character, that's a different story :^)
fucking spot on. just because you know that one thing is bullshit, doesn't mean you're immune to being deceived. even some of the smartest people in the world still have enough inexperience in other fields to be fooled into believing things that would be obvious bullshit to most novices in that same field. that weakness will always exist in people as long as we are capable of specialization.
Because if we don't tell others Santa is fake then the New World Order wins and almost all of the non-jews (and some jews) in the world will suffer.
>right wing conspiracies
Oh. I fucked up by replying to this. Nice one shill, you get a shekel now.
No it isn't. Stop posting wrong stuff.
There is no test for being "redpilled" IRL it's just a buzzword that means you "question what you are told" just like in the Matrix vs being "bluepilled" which means you just "trust what you are told"
The only conspiracies I don't bother looking into are the irrelevent ones. The ones surrounding the Holohoax, JFK's assassination(killed for multiple NWO/jew/anti-american reasons), 9-11, US assassinating it's own citizens, CIA aided media manipulation, and The Obama/Clinton administration supporting/using ISIS are all at least partially correct.
Also modern women are mostly abusing the system while modern men are mostly stopping caring about society and the beginning of the end of a massive global financial crisis is soon to hit in the next decade due to all this useless paper monopoly money running EVERYTHING
Assume all memes are fake, but research the promising ones. Part if this one is fake, but not all of it.
>Sup Forums is always right
After you question what you have been told and dig through a billion shitposts of anonymous freespeech discussion, everyone comes to the exact same conclusion.
Whoever disagrees with this should probably own a gun because nationalists do have a strong argument for genociding leeches that refuse to contribute or get deported.
he's not wrong though. there are plenty of right-wing conspiracies, just as there are left-wing. there are plenty of things that you look at critically and can see the bullshit through, but there are also things that you tend to accept with much less scrutiny. it's good to try to avoid this as much as possible, but there always will be some things that you believe that are bullshit.
I think he's referring to the use of "red-pilled" as some kind of statement that you're immune to bullshit. but yeah, your description of it is pretty spot-on.
this is a very sound mentality to have.
I hate the way you write.
>For, if there is no "good" and "bad," there can't an understanding that false is "bad" and true is "good."
You sound pretentious, AND you forgot your verb. So, that isn't even a complete sentence.
Kill yourself.
>Liberals claim to be peaceful
>Liberals claim to be compassionate
>Liberals claim to be against war
>Liberals claim to support Islam
And yet the person they support is a psychopathic killer
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
I see things the same way as OP, except I do not seek a justification
ii believe that what I believe is right, because I choose to
overall I do have arguments as to why I chose my values in the first place so it's not like i randomly decided X and now X is right, but when things are stripped of everything and it comes down to the simplest terms I do not need an excuse to consider what I believe to be right
Jesus Christ.
>Spiderman being Lawful Good
I wouldn't exactly consider him lawful. he's a vigilante. if anything he'd be closer to neutral good.
>where do you get your morals
From God.
>how do you justify 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
Who are we?
Who are they?
>what makes truth "good?"
I would think the contrast of lying being a violation to natural order would make it self explanatory enough. Really, what a stupid question. Why would you choose falsehood over truth? For what reason? How can you have order from accepting falsity?
>From God
in what way does God give these morals to you and what general logic do they follow you?
>lying being a violation to natural order
the act of deception is part of our natural order. I'd argue that if it wasn't, we wouldn't do it in the first place. often times simple "white lies" can save one from unneeded conflicts with others. If the truth would cause another person unnecessary pain, while a lie would cause them no detriment, is it not morally justified to lie?
The major "right wing truths" on this site are more true than not.
Holocaust, JFK, 9-11, media manipulation and ISIS.
Tinfoil hats, reptilians, flat earth etc etc don't really matter that much even if they are true. All the major relevent conspiracy truths are available online to learn about, the barrier is just humanity's attention span or ability to care of the ability to feel.
Trusting "god" is a shortcut
I went down that path objectively until I learned about the jews, the abrahamic religions, the perception based nature of reality and the ways in which the devil (synagogue of satan 666) use christianity to manipulate sinners into thinking they are doing gods work.
LIE IS THE DEVIL THAT TRICKS YOU WITH "TRUTH"
Both are 2 sides to the same jewish matrix coin
From Ioseb Djugashvili.
God made man, but Stalin made men equal.
I am still "searching" for god I should add, but I cannot "trust" in god because that is exactly what (((gods chosen people))) want.
>trust me goyim
An amalgamation of my parents, media I've consumed, and my own personal opinions.
hilariously enough JFK, 9/11, and media manipulation were considered left-wing truths a few years ago. I have a feeling what is considered left vs right wing has really changed since the regressive left started becoming more numerous.
thank you for posting that pic user. i love it.
Note: this is merely my philosophy on the subject (basically my religion, I guess)
I see "God" as more of relative position in comparison to the system that being has created. That God would potentially have complete control on the creation, the laws of nature, and longevity of that system.
On another scale, I'd consider any being that gains vast control over the system utilizing the laws of nature to be a Demigod. They might potentially gain a similar level of manipulation as the God of the system, but they are still bound to the logic and rules, whereas the God can act outside of those rules or even change them.
As humans we've created several universes within simulations. The ones that can manipulate the code of those simulations would be Gods of them; the users that can only use the tools/controls/avatars given to them would only be considered Demigods, as would any sentient being within that system that achieved the same level of control.
A system where the code could be directly manipulated from a being within that system would create some interesting ambiguity between Gods and Demigods.
pic somewhat related: I swear these dorfs are fucking sentient, at least to some degree
Is anyone else here amoral?
>Believing in spooks
if you're amoral, then you are either too mentally retarded to exhibit morality or just don't interact with anybody or anything. I'd argue that beings that completely lack empathy are either inherently evil or just incapable of making decisions in the first place.
Higher intelligence = better morals
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
From my guts.
If something sickens me to my very core, it's wrong.
I care about truth. Freedom of expression. Freedom of ideas. Freedom of speech. Objectivity. Critical thinking.
Cultural marxists are liars and shills. What they say is not true and their ideology, any ideology, is toxic.
Ideas that are worth their salt would not need to be backed up by such bullshit.
So my values come from a need to defend the truth and defend freedom.
Thank you.
Yeah, I way I see "red pill" is similar to a used car dealer buddying up with you with an appeal to intellect. "You obviously know a lot about quality cars to know that first one was a lemon. Let me show you something really sweet. I don't show this to everyone, but did you know Sandy Hook was a false flag operation crafted by Obama to steal your guns? Oh yeah, and climate change is just a marketing gimmick for reusable grocery bag manufacturers. There's an afterlife if you vote for pro-lifers."
"Honey, why's there a junk car in our yard?"
"Get back in the kitchen you blue-pilled fucking sheep!"
so you are a Swede is what i am hearing from your post, there are no ideologies here, it's all freedom and defending liberties and peoples rights, the most important thing is that whomever lives here follows those freedoms/thoughts.
My parents. And Catholicism. And Stoicism.
nature.
I just know.
Not religious, parents aren't religious, I have a complete disdain for philosophy and have never studied it, but I have a very clearly defined moral code that I always stick to that pretty much aligns with Christianity.
I guess they could be ingrained culturally but Christian culture has not really been the dominant one in our society when I grew up, so that seems unlikely.
>muh Randian Aristotelianism
Aristotle is not sacrosanct. Heidegger crushed his law of identity in Being and Time, Bertrand Russell dismissed his logics, and Hume would throw his whole corpus out. gg at philosophy.
My mother and my father, stable family structure, religion, healthy sources of knowledge, reinforced with hard work, determination and self-motivation.
...
Fuck off reletivists
I put myself in other people's position, if I don't want what I would do to them to happen to me then I won't do it. It's number 1 rule that I live by and I'm not even a Buddhist.
>have a complete disdain for philosophy
>and have never studied it
>applying Nietzsche to a bunch of little Nietzsches
Guaranteed replies, low quality replies, Nietzsche replies.
Since jews are the embodiment of evil, doing the opposite of what they do is the true way to live a fully moral life.
Did you know that Rand is a Jew and that Jews do not have morals but instead invent new systems by which they are better and the goyim must be put down?
It's literally the most worthless and harmful of all human pursuits.
It's an excuse for pseudo intellectuals to sit around overthinking simple concepts and trying to out-compete eachother in completely untestable thought experiments with no verifiable, objective solutions that only serve to inflate their own massive egos in a completely selfish pursuit that contributes less than nothing to humanity.
Considering truth refers to reality, and being able to represent things as they are allows you to react and thus survive better than others, it's no wonder truth is more desirable to a comfortable lie.
As to good and bad.
Good is what makes us happy and evil what makes us unhappy.
You might say, well that makes truth evil sometimes, but it's not the truth itself that is bad, but the thing the truth illuminates.
Though, maybe there could be an argument that knowledge of evil is evil in and of itself.
That's another discussion though.
It's like being a musician or a writer. The highiest honor is some vapid chick quoting it in a Facebook post or maybe a guy closing a PowerPoint presentation with it.
All I have is "us" versus "them" mentality. As long as everything I care about is safe, I don't give a fuck about the rest of the world.
>Where do you get your morals Sup Forums?
Tribalism
>How do you justify 'Us' being right and 'Them' being wrong?
They bother us they're wrong
I've been interested in modified divine command theory as a meta ethical system for awhile, but the problem with trying to say
> Muh Jesus
Is that he did not exactly leave an entire corpus of law to live by, and depending on your background, Jesus abrogated the need to follow the Mosaic Law, conveniently ignoring the fact that basic moral precepts like
> Don't commit murder
> Don't commit adultery
Come from the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. Some Christians try to get clever, and say that Jesus only abrogated the ceremonial and civil components of the Mosaic code, while leaving the ethical components intact, but the question immediately arises- what counts as a ceremonial law? There is no hard and fast distinction given at Mount Sinai that "These are all the ceremonial laws". From what I can tell, this was a theological innovation, possibly spearheaded by Marcion as part of his heretical teachings, yet for some reason stuck around. Various perspectives on Paul thus try to argue exactly what it means to be "under the Law" with some arguing that Paul has been totally misunderstood, and that Christians ought to be keeping the Torah, albeit Jesus' interpretation of it.
That being said, I think the whole thing is a bit of a crap shoot, given that Deuteronomy specifically says that anyone who tries to do away with God's law is not to be listened to, which forms the basis of the Jew's centuries long denial of Jesus/Yeshua as the Messiah.
Personally, I find that the kikes have actually got a pretty good idea for us goys. The Noahide Laws are seven laws that were apparently given to Noah after leaving the Ark, making them encumbent upon him and all his descendants (implication being; all of mankind, though it doesn't really matter whether or not it happened or not, what matters is whether or not they are flexible and pragmatic enough from which to derive an ethical system).
The laws are as follows:
> Do not deny God
> Do not blaspheme against God
> Do not murder
> Do not steal
> Do not engage in illicit sexual relations
> Do not eat the limb of a living animal
> Establish courts for the administration of justice
Now let me rephrase them as I understand them
> Do not deny God
As the source of ethics (see, modified divine command theory) one cannot deny God and claim to live righteously. Most interestingly for me is that this precept does not necessarily require one to be a theist; it is perfectly acceptable to be an agnostic, as many have pointed out that one cannot "know" that God, as the ground of being, exists (leaving the issue of whether or not existence is a quality which may be applied to God for another time)
> Do not blaspheme against God
For me, this ties into respect for all religious cultures, as all religious cultures ultimately point toward the one, objective, ultimate reality, which is God. One cannot curse Allah without also cursing God, for Allah and God point to the same source (though the names used by the individual reveal one's conception of God). This also ties deeply into the destructive power of language, such as slander, libel, and gossip.
> Do not murder
Pretty simple, but what constitutes murder? Killing is not murder, manslaughter is not murder, and what about warfare? By framing the prohibition in this way, intent and motive come into play as considerations about how to classify a killing act. Here also questions about the death penalty may be raised, and how and when to apply it.
> Do not steal
Again, fairly straightforward, but forms the absolute bedrock upon which all commerce is founded, namely- trust. If one cannot trust their clients to pay them, business and society will ground to a halt, because failure to pay/cheating one's clients is a form of theft. Rape also falls under this category, as it is the illegal possession of carnal knowledge of another person
> Do not engage in illicit sexual relations
This one is an interesting one for me, because it is simultaneously more exacting and more lenient than most common attitudes towards sex. For most males, their urge to mate and breed is a powerful, even destructive force of love (see; eros), and must be harnessed towards productive ends. Traditionally, marriage fulfilled this role, forcing the man to equip himself with the skills to provide for and raise a family before he was allowed to get his dick wet on the regular. Traditionally, this prohibition forbids adultery, bestiality, paedophilia, and necrophilia, but does not explicitly forbid premarital sex. Given the sexual marketplace however, a virgin bride can and will attract higher status males, making it a worthwhile strategy to abstain from sex, or at the very least, do not indulge in it frivolously.
> Do not eat the limb of a living animal.
Yeah, you read that right. This has usually been interpreted to forbid cruelty towards animals, but of late has also been taken to apply to ecological justice as a whole. The natural world is at our mercy, and it is our duty to ensure that we are not torturing it's inhabitants while they are still yet alive. Animal, food, and environmental protection laws all derive from this basic respect.
> Establish courts for the administration of justice
As the only prescriptive command out of all seven laws, this is particularly interesting, for the long reaching consequences which it entails. One, that there will be a need for these courts, implying that justice, peace, and order are not the natural state of the world, but are instead cultivated through humans, as well as giving shape and purpose to our actions as humans; we are not just here for ourselves, we are to be actively working to better the world through our actions and efforts, through the rule of law.
If anyone has any questions about the Noahide Laws, I'd be happy to answer
t. Jew loving goy
Jocko Podcast
Discipline = freedom