Travelling will never be a problem.
Saving you so much money.
You can instantly go anywhere you want.
Can be used defensively by either instantly escaping or putting 'distance' between you and potential danger.
So is it agreed that for day-to-day practical use, the Space Gem is superior to the others?
Other urls found in this thread:
You fucking kidding me?
>Time gem
>Know tomorrow's lottery numbers, never have to work again
>Freeze the time of anyone you want, effectively making them statues. Never have to deal with any threat ever again
Come on, man
I'd go with the mind gem to be honest.
Most mundane, everyday things you'd want to do can be done by just mind-controlling someone into doing them for you.
Need to get somewhere fast? Just turn someone into your personal driver and make sure everyone on the road gives you enough room to speed like a maniac.
Need money? Either make some rich asshole give you lots of money, or just make people give you the shit you want to buy for free.
Someone's being an asshole? Either make them be nice to you or make them go literally fuck themselves.
etc.
Yeah but that's all, like, wrong. I'll go with the Time or Space.
Morality is a spook.
Why the FUCK wouldn't you want reality?
It's arguably the most superior of gems.
I mind control them into sex slaves, inceptioning them into submission, they truly believe it's their own will. Does society deem it wrong if I do it t enough people where it is the actual social paragdime? Like the harams of warlords, or the dungeons of old. The morality of the situation is based on these society it exists withing.y universe powered gem puts me above the plebian mind contracts of your mind. Because reality literally skips all these rules. In short, reality gem bitches. #getonmylevel
Honestly, with Reality I'd be too afraid to use it because I'd inevitably fuck something up and forget how to put it back the way it was.
>altering people's perceptions of reality is wrong.
>these gems which actually alter reality itself are fine though.
That's retarded man, you're retarded.
Don't be a dick. If you use the space gem to travel somewhere or use the time gem to freeze time so you're not late or something you're not affecting anyone else's life.
The person likely didn't choose or volunteer for you to change the structure of their mind. You created a new person just to suit you, but you got rid of the previous one. You're overwriting someone else's will and imposing your own and THAT'S wrong you fedoralord.
Please explain why that's wrong, instead of just asserting that it is.
I have to explain why mind controlling someone who probably did not choose to be mind controlled is wrong? I dunno, it's like fucking murder or slavery. They're not choosing to be under your control, they don't get a say. They no longer have free will. Maybe you should explain why it's okay.
>I have to explain why mind controlling someone who probably did not choose to be mind controlled is wrong?
You can read my question, good.
>I dunno, it's like fucking murder or slavery.
No. You're not killing anyone. You're not hurting anyone. You can literally make them happy to help you out with whatever you're doing. If you're a mind controller, you can make everyone happy just by thinking it.
>They're not choosing to be under your control, they don't get a say.
I don't get a say in a lot of things. Does that make all those things wrong by definition?
>They no longer have free will.
You don't have free will right now.
But let's put that aside and assume you do. Now I feel like having an icecream cone and I give you the urge to buy me an icecream cone. You give me what I want and you feel happy and fullfilled doing so. We both win and happily go about the rest of our day. How is that wrong?
>Maybe you should explain why it's okay.
You're the one making absolute moral judgements here. You can't just say something is wrong just because you don't like it and leave it at that as if that's an actual argument.
>You can literally make them happy to help you out with whatever you're doing. If you're a mind controller, you can make everyone happy just by thinking it.
But that's not real happiness. That's fake, because you're forcing them to be happy when otherwise they might be sad or just content or whatever. They don't get to NOT be happy, because when they stray then you will be there to force them to be what YOU want them to be.
>I don't get a say in a lot of things. Does that make all those things wrong by definition?
You don't have a say in things like who your neighbor marries, or what the mayor of the next town over eats for dinner. You don't have a say in those because they are none of your business and won't really impact your life. We DO have a say in who WE marry, and what WE eat for dinner. If someone else is deciding that for us without our consent then that is wrong.
>Now I feel like having an icecream cone and I give you the urge to buy me an icecream cone. You give me what I want and you feel happy and fullfilled doing so. We both win and happily go about the rest of our day. How is that wrong?
I feel happy and fulfilled why? I don't care if you have an ice cream cone, you're a stranger to me. If you MADE me feel happy then like I said, it's fake.
And I DO have free will. For example, I'm willing myself out of this terrible discussion.
>But that's not real happiness.
Says who? Who defines what's real or not? The chemicals in your brain?
>If someone else is deciding that for us without our consent then that is wrong.
There are a lot of things that impact your life which you have no control over, like the laws your government writes or the decisions your employer makes. Not to mention all the things that are left to "random" chance. Are all of those things wrong by default as well?
>I feel happy and fulfilled why?
Mind control. Do pay attention, please.
>I don't care if you have an ice cream cone
Yes you do. Mind control. It's kind of what we;'re talking about here, broheim.
>If you MADE me feel happy then like I said, it's fake.
The feeling is as real as it gets. The fact that it was induced by me doesn't change that. If someone makes you happy by, I don't know, telling a funny joke or something, would you also get mad at them?
>And I DO have free will.
No you don't. You just like to think you do.
>You don't have free will right now.
We can't tell either way, user, that's the fundamental nature of subjective experience.
If I mind-control you, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference either.
I'm not taking control over your body against your will or replacing your mind with my own. I'm just making you want to do the things I want you to do. Unless I tell you about it, there would be no reason for you to assume you didn't make that choice on your own.
Here's why.
No one man should have that kind of power. The potential for abuse is just too high. I mean, you said it yourself, you don't believe in free will. No matter your intentions, what's to say that you might not become consumed with what the power of the Mind Gem makes you capable of and cause you to do great harm with it?
>I'm just making you want to do the things I want you to do. Unless I tell you about it, there would be no reason for you to assume you didn't make that choice on your own.
Because I did not consent to those actions beforehand. Whether or not free will exists; there IS a direct and irrevocable change in agency here.
>No one man should have that kind of power.
That's just another baseless assertion.
>The potential for abuse is just too high.
The potential for abuse exists with literally any kind of power, even perfectly mundane powers. I can abuse my physical strength to do horrible things, does that mean nobody should be allowed to possess physical strength?
If anything, mind-control is an incredibly benign power, because it can accomplish just about anything you might want to accomplish without harming anyone in the process. Assuming your mind-control power was strong enough, you could literally become king of the world and make sure nobody had to suffer anymore.
So anything that happens without your consent is automatically wrong? We've been over this already.
It would be more accurate to say that the potential of being mind-controlled is uncomfortable or even frightening to you than to bluntly state it's wrong because you say it is. But don't worry, if I had mind-control powers I could easily free you of those notions and make you ready and willing to be mind-controlled.
>So anything that happens without your consent is automatically wrong?
Yes, bluntly. There's a lot of wrong in the world already.
You're a dangerous person and you deserve to die.
Just saying.
Please come back when you turn 17 and grow out of your anarchist phase.
>people who don't understand that the other 5 infinity gems have limitations on their own
>people not understanding that the power gem is that only one with literally infinite power on its own and that it's the catalyst which gives the other 5 infinite power over their respective domains
>you deserve to die because of something you post on the internet
Calm down Ahmed, nobody mentioned Muhammad.
I'll take "getting mad at things nobody said" for 500, Alex!
>That's just another baseless assertion.
Not if you read history. Unless you assume you're a perfect person, unless you're arrogant enough to think of yourself as incorruptible, that kind of power is incredibly dangerous to have. Of course the potential for abuse there with any power, but on the scale you're suggesting, the potential for corruption is higher than most.
You could make yourself into God. That's not the kind of power any man deserves.
>having principles means you're a child
>That's not the kind of power any man deserves.
Based on what? Your opinion?
This isn't over who deserves what, anyway. Nobody deserves to win the lottery, but that doesn't make lotteries evil.
No. Being an anarchist means you're a child.
>Based on what? Your opinion?
Like I said, it's power on the level that corruption is incredibly likely, if not guaranteed. I'm asking you; what makes you so absolutely sure that you could use the gem without using it to do harm?
And, as a side point, say that someone else had the gem and they offered you the choice of becoming their slave with the promise that you'd happy with it or walking away. Which choice would you take, sincerely user?
>I'm asking you; what makes you so absolutely sure that you could use the gem without using it to do harm?
I can't. I also can't be absolutely sure I won't hit anyone driving to work tomorrow. Does that mean cars are evil? Mind control is easier to fix than killing a pedestrian.
Condemning the harmful use of something is perfectly acceptable, but condemning something just because it has the potential for harmful use is ridiculous. If I kill someone with a spoon for no good reason, that's wrong. But there's nothing wrong with spoons themselves despite the fact that I could use them to maim and kill people. If someone uses mind-control to give people psychic nightmares and torture them, that's pretty evil. But that doesn't mean that mind-control is by definition wrong.
>say that someone else had the gem and they offered you the choice of becoming their slave with the promise that you'd happy with it or walking away. Which choice would you take, sincerely user?
I'd definitely be skeptical since I don't believe mind control is a thing that exists, but assuming it did actually exist and I knew I'd be happy? I'd accept it of course. People spend all their lives chasing happiness and fulfillment. Why turn it away when it's offered to you at no cost?
>I'd definitely be skeptical since I don't believe mind control is a thing that exists, but assuming it did actually exist and I knew I'd be happy? I'd accept it of course. People spend all their lives chasing happiness and fulfillment. Why turn it away when it's offered to you at no cost?
>This guy would literally agree to be one of DIO's minions
>I'd accept it of course. People spend all their lives chasing happiness and fulfillment. Why turn it away when it's offered to you at no cost?
Ohhh fuck. I get it now. You're roleplaying.
>and I knew I'd be happy
And that's the kicker. You CANNOT know whether the person is actually happy or not with certitude. Not at all. You can't peer into their subjective experience because of the very nature of what subjective experience is. You're basing your assertions on an echo; as long as YOU think everyone else is happy and can make them tell you that, you don't care.
This is solipsism, user. Pure solipsism.
>Why turn it away when it's offered to you at no cost?
Because I'd prefer to make my own mistakes and live my own life, even if it's not as happy.
And, again, you say 'no cost', but I'd say that handing my life over to the whims of someone with that degree of power is a pretty heavy cost. Especially knowing that me being content with that power would be based on a lie.
Give me truth over bliss any day.
I think a large part of the reason people hate the idea of mind control is that virtually all movies, comics and cartoons that have mind control portray it as something evil that only a villain would use.
All of those are just evil uses of a power. That doesn't mean the power is evil of itself. If you were a super powered mind controller, you could literally turn earth into a utopia and usher in a golden age for all humanity. You could be the one who unites all peoples under one flag and brings us closer to the stars. Or you could just sit on your ass all day and do nothing if that suits you better. The possibilities are endless, and you're just focusing on the negative potential because it makes you uncomfortable.
You're ignoring that that discomfort would be the first thing to go if I were your god emperor.
I don't know who that is and while I admit I'm somewhat playing devil's advocate here, I don't exactly see you bringing any objective counterarguments.
>You CANNOT know whether the person is actually happy or not with certitude.
Uh, yes I can. Mind gem, broheim.
>I think a large part of the reason people hate the idea of mind control is that virtually all movies, comics and cartoons that have mind control portray it as something evil that only a villain would use.
Umh, no, because people can actually think for themselves (heh) and see why it's wrong.
Point is, you see mind control as if it's something soothing and trance-like.
It's not.
You don't exist when you're under control.
You'd be mildly aware of your surroundings at most.
You're making the same mistake as those who want to kill themselves because "they want to sleep forever".
>Uh, yes I can. Mind gem, broheim.
How would you know that that representation of their mind is absolutely, 100% true? There is no way to prove with certitude what someone else is experiencing because one cannot by definition have their experience.
>I don't exactly see you bringing any objective counterarguments.
This isn't an argument about the objective here, though. Arguments concerning the mind are inherently concerned with the subjective in the most pure definition of the word.
>You're ignoring that that discomfort would be the first thing to go if I were your emperor.
That's the promise of all dictators, user. Hand over your freedom to me, and I shall be your salvation.
>people can actually think for themselves and see why it's wrong.
Then why are you having such problems explaining it?
>Point is, you see mind control as if it's something soothing and trance-like.
I never said that. They way I'd use it is in a more "Inception"-like way. Implant ideas into people so they think they thought of them on their own. It's a much less invasive use than bluntly imposing your will on someone, and nobody would notice anything was influencing them.
>It's not.
Ah, I see you're an expert on things that don't exist. Please give me a moment to bow to your opinions-made-facts.
>How would you know that that representation of their mind is absolutely, 100% true?
Because it's a magic comic book gem.
>one cannot by definition have their experience
I could literally look into their minds.
>This isn't an argument about the objective here, though.
Right, so all you have is your opinion. In other words, using the mind gem isn't wrong, you just don't like the idea of it.
>That's the promise of all dictators, user. Hand over your freedom to me, and I shall be your salvation.
How many dictators have had possession of the mind gem? Dictators are by definition harmful in the long run, because of the way a dictatorial power structure works. With a mind gem, that wouldn't be necessary.
Besides, that's just one extreme example. I wouldn't even want to be a dictator personally, it sound way too bothersome. The thread started off being about mundane, everyday things, which is mostly what I'd use the gem for.
>Ah, I see you're an expert on things that don't exist. Please give me a moment to bow to your opinions-made-facts.
I'm not an expert, I'm just a guy who hates any form of attack against freedom.
And people like you I think the world would be better without.
>people like you I think the world would be better without
I'm still not talking about Muhammad, Ahmed. Please put down your bomb belt.
Sorry, my caliph implanted in me the idea that if I kill you I get 70+ virgins to bang.
Boy am I happy.
Why is your caliph inciting violence instead of mind controlling everyone and creating a peaceful society under his rule?
Is he a supervillain?
I don't have anything left to tell you, edgelord.
>I don't get a say in a lot of things. Does that make all those things wrong by definition?
Whatever awful abusive things happened to you, you deserve every single one of them.
>Says who? Who defines what's real or not? The chemicals in your brain?
You just described the fucking "Happy Helmet", you sick tard. That's not "happiness", that's "mind rape".
>Ah, I see you're an expert on things that don't exist. Please give me a moment to bow to your opinions-made-facts.
You're arguing about things that don't exist, faggot. There is no concrete evidence to go off of unless, god forbid, you want to talk about comics on the comics and cartoon board.
Abuse of a power doesn't make the power itself wrong. We've been over this.
>You're arguing about things that don't exist, faggot.
Yes, I am. But I'm not trying to dictate how someone can or cannot use a fictional power. Just arbitrarily deciding what mind control is like in order to argue that it's wrong is pretty ridiculous exactly BECAUSE there's no concrete evidence to go off of.
>But I'm not trying to dictate how someone can or cannot use a fictional power.
No, you're just saying you'd dictate everyone else with that fictional power.
>Abuse of a power doesn't make the power itself wrong. We've been over this.
It's not about the power existing, it's about that power existing in the hands of a single human being.
>Yeah but I don't want to be mind controlled, so if someone mind controls me or anybody else that doesn't want to be mind controlled then it is wrong.
So what does Soul do again? Like I know it has its own weird realm or something inside of it, but anything else?
>No, you're just saying you'd dictate everyone else with that fictional power.
Do you read discussions or just react to individual lines of text? That's a completely different subtext,
>it's about that power existing in the hands of a single human being
So how many people should get a mind gem for it to be acceptable in your book? Can you give me an exact number, or just a ballpark figure?
I'm not sure what you're trying to express here.
Ya the > was a mistake because I had your text highlighted and forgot to delete everything.
>So how many people should get a mind gem for it to be acceptable in your book? Can you give me an exact number, or just a ballpark figure?
Zero. We're imperfect beings and that's absolute power.
So then what do you mean you don't mind the power existing if you object to anyone having it?
Never mind that it's arbitrary as fuck and already been talked about earlier in the discussion. If you don't want anyone to have the power, don't you just object to the power existing at all?
>Abuse of a power doesn't make the power itself wrong. We've been over this.
The power itself? No. Giving that power to any mortal being? Yes. Hell, not even just that: it is just immoral to use that kind of power, period, as it violates the very essence of someone's being.
Because without the other gems, you can accidentally fuck up the laws of reality.
>So how many people should get a mind gem for it to be acceptable in your book? Can you give me an exact number, or just a ballpark figure?
Why don't you answer the question instead of trying to counter it with an even stupider question you dumb redditor.
>Giving that power to any mortal being? Yes.
Based on what?
>It is just immoral to use that kind of power, period, as it violates the very essence of someone's being.
That's just another buzzword-filled, baseless assertion. Why is it immoral? What is "the very essence of someone's being" and why is it being violated? You're using words without meaning to express what I think is a very simple message.
Why not just say "things that make me uncomfortable are objectively wrong"?
I'm not sure what you're talking about. That question wasn't even in response to another question.
Yeah, you're right there, actually. I do object to that sort of power existing because there's too much risk of it falling into the wrong hands. And the wrong hands is anyone (human, at least) who would use it, anyone who is so arrogant as to think they can use that sort of power only for good.
Because unlike everything else mentioned in the thread, unlike laws or even the iron fist of dictators, this is power that by it's very nature cannot be resisted. All it takes is for you to have one bad day.
Reality is basically Mind because I can just turn this reality into one where everyone agrees with me and does what I say. Except it has the added benefit of applying to the laws of physics.
>What is "the very essence of someone's being" and why is it being violated?
Peoples choice is being violated because they do not have free will to do what they want when being mind controlled if they don't consent to it.
>Based on what?
6,000 years of human history. The faults of Socialist regimes proving the imperfectability of humans. Common religious morality stemming from every religion not named "Islam". Take your pick.
That, and forcing someone to do something against their wishes for your own sick amusement or benefit is wrong. There is a reason the "Purple Man" is a villain.
>That's just another buzzword-filled, baseless assertion. Why is it immoral?
Just because a power exists, let's assume for the sake of argument that the Mind Gem exists, and is one of the six the fundamental forces of reality, doesn't give any mortal being, no matter genius in intellect or morally righteous, the right to fuck with it.
>Wireheading is bad
fuck off moralfag.
>Based on what?
Because it's incredible power without any discipline in earning it.
>I want to live in a Mad Max-like hellhole of endless war, rape, and torture.
Good for you, you degenerate hedonist you!
>Because unlike everything else mentioned in the thread, unlike laws or even the iron fist of dictators, this is power that by it's very nature cannot be resisted.
I have to step out of my devil's advocate persona for a moment and congratulate you on being the first to make an argument that doesn't just fall back on subjective morality or the perceived value of agency.
I'd go ahead and argue that an irresistible power used to do good things is still good, but then we'd be going in circles again because then we get to I can't absolutely promise to always be good and responsible and then I can't absolutely promise to never lose control over the wheel driving to work and kill someone but that doesn't make cars evil, etc. We've been there. Might as well call it quits on a relative high point.
I'd still choose to have the mind gem if given the choice, though.
As mentioned multiple times before, choice and consent aren't automatic qualifiers for what's right or wrong. Things can happen without your consent that aren't wrong, and things can happen with your consent that aren't right.
>6,000 years of human history.
6,000 years of human history with the mind gem?
>doesn't give any mortal being, no matter genius in intellect or morally righteous, the right to fuck with it
What do rights have to do with it? Did someone write a law against mind gems?
The only "good" way to use mind control is to make a gunman stand down, or make a corrupt politician resign. So, stopping people from doing bad things that hurt other people, and even still I think it's a bit "bleeeh". Anything else is just selfish and evil.
>As mentioned multiple times before, choice and consent aren't automatic qualifiers for what's right or wrong. Things can happen without your consent that aren't wrong, and things can happen with your consent that aren't right.
But peoples choice and free will are still being violated which are both widely considered to be part of what makes us people. If you didn't have free will you might as well just be considered a robot.
>I'm not sure what you're talking about. That question wasn't even in response to another question.
It wasn't a question but that doesn't change how retarded your response is.
One person having infinite control over any person's actions and thoughts is a disaster waiting to happen.
A democracy has checks and balances to ensure that one doesn't have complete control over the nation. Now if only one person has this power, who can stop them from just getting a bunch of people to kill themselves? Nobody, meaning it would be incredibly easy for that power to end up causing more harm then good.
>6,000 years of human history with the mind gem?
Good lord, you're a retard. Human history is replete with examples of brutal dictators, rape, slavery, and murder. And those are things that can be resisted. Based on that history, giving a Mind Gem to someone is just asking for mass genocides and endless serial rapes.
>What do rights have to do with it?
Oh, I don't know, the rights to "life" and "liberty" might have something to do with it...
>but then we'd be going in circles again because then we get to I can't absolutely promise to always be good and responsible and then I can't absolutely promise to never lose control over the wheel driving to work and kill someone but that doesn't make cars evil
Fallacious argument. You didn't choose to plow that car into someone. You DID choose to use the Mind Gem to force someone to do something against their agency and individuality. One is an accident, the other is on purpose. If you can't tell the difference, you are the very reason that such a power should never be in the hands of a single human being.
>I'd go ahead and argue that an irresistible power used to do good things is still good, but then we'd be going in circles again because then we get to I can't absolutely promise to always be good and responsible and then I can't absolutely promise to never lose control over the wheel driving to work and kill someone but that doesn't make cars evil, etc. We've been there. Might as well call it quits on a relative high point.
And that's why the morality of authoritarianism vs individualism is so complex and so passionately argued.
>Things can happen without your consent that aren't wrong, and things can happen with your consent that aren't right.
This isn't a simple question of situational consent as much as ones entire ability to freely consent.
You're seizing power over others that they did not give freely and openly.