Now that the dust has settled, was he right?

Now that the dust has settled, was he right?

Literally who

>muh universifiability
>if everyone killed people then everyone would be dead and this is objectively bad because I said so
>therefore all this other shit that I'm just making up is also objectively true

he was full of himself. I give him an A for effort, though, because he's one of the final formal attempts of Western thought to use reason to avoid falling into total amorality

Yes, look at the bravest generation

Space racist
Seriously, this guy was ahead of his time with categorizing the races

define amorality, and explain why you think it's bad

>comic sans font

Hehe ebin comic sans hating meme bandwangoning

Fuck off
>>>r/Cred Forums

I'm not referring to certain behaviors or societal symptoms (muh degeneracy). I mean the general philosophy ideas of total skepticism, rejection of the idea of a moral basis that can be arrived at through the Socratic method or empirical observation.

I don't even disagree with the idea. as far as I can tell, morality certainly seems to be subjective and all the arguments I've seen for some kind of objective morality (like Kant) have been unconvincing. I just appreciate the effort because the whole postmodern/absurdity thing is a bit depressing and not terribly interesting to discuss

I didn't mean to imply anything, just wondering what it was you meant. I'm a mathematician, with limited free time, so I am aware of philosophy, but I am not so familiar with it yet.

Most things I've read of Kant were... Unconvincing, to put it lightly.

Does anyone else feel like they are "missing out" and a constant longing for war?

I know it's stupid but I can't help it

You have an evil soul, user.

?

you just want to fight? go join the Kurds in Syria. guaranteed to see action and last I checked they were still recruiting internationally.

Google "lions of rojava"

There used to be the argument that war helps promote advances technology, but I feel like we're past that point, or we're in a bit of a war-tech rut. We need to hurry up and move off the Earth so we can start seriously developing space technology for interplanetary warfare.

>all these cucks who have never read a single book by Kant unironically critiquing him because the categorical imperative made them feel bad cause it hurt their poor little millennial feelings :(

That's right, poor baby can do NOTHING bad, just like mommy and daddy said! Universality of ethics doesn't exist because uhm because well uh well you know... I mean, well cause it's okay when I do things that are unethical!!! It's not my fault! Kant is just so dogmatic! Clearly he has the problem, not me!

It's because you've been raised in a sterile post-industrial society where your parents shielded you from any kind of bad feelings or emotions. You are developmentally stunted.

>"I'm totally a wiz kid math genius!"
>"I have limited free time"

No you're not. You're nobody and you know nothing. Also you're on Cred Forums.

Literally cancer.

Amorality is the behaviors I believe are not good, and they're bad because that's what I believe.

EEEEEEEE
mmanuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable-

>No you're not. You're nobody and you know nothing. Also you're on Cred Forums.

Only on Cred Forums because I'm in my uni's comp lab waiting to take a physics test. I also do have limited free time, as you implied I did not.

Heidegger Heidegger was a boozy begger who could drink you under the table

David Hume could outconsume
Schopenhauer and Hegel

I think I'm smart enough not to give in to some silly urge and perish in a shitty desert with my roach friends

>It's because you've been raised in a sterile post-industrial society where your parents shielded you from any kind of bad feelings or emotions. You are developmentally stunted.

You are probably right.
I saw the Watership Down VHS like a million times though

LOL, you are fucking pathetic

>this whole post

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as sloshed as Schlegel!

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist...

Excellent rebuttal

Socrates himself
was
permanently
piiiiiiiiisssssssssed

Cool man. Baby's first troll attempt?

John Stuart Mill
Of his own free will
On a half pint of Shandy
Was particularly ill

Plato, they say
Could stick it away
Halfacrateawhiskey
Everyday

people like this right here are why ive lost all fire for arguing

its just an endless rabbit hole of define define context context but all the while they know exactly what constitutes as moral etc

it just turns into semantics with so many people

>Universality of ethics doesn't exist because uhm because well uh well you know...

I have read Kant's writing on the categorical imperative, angry angry user.

the burden of proof of the existence of universality lies upon you who claims it does exist, my friend, not upon me.

Aristotle Aristotle was a bugger for a bottle
Hobbes was fond of his dram

And Rene Descartes
was a drunken fart,
"I drink therefore I am!"

read his followup. he wasn't arguing he was just curious

I'm not trying to rebuttal, I could care less what this thread is about


But that whole post was cringy

Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed
A lovely little thinker
But a bugger when he's pissed!

AY!

>evil

Well spooked, my property

>attempting to talk about shit you can define

You need to be able to define something or else your entire discussion is moot.

It's is natural for the less intelligent to lash out aggressively at their betters when confronted with something they do not understand and never well

Oh, also
>"I could care less"

Fucking lol

Kys yourself my man

Oh man you made it worse

Greeks had it wrong, for nothing in history hasn't improved until rivers of blood were spilled.

Think about it: society fucking collapsed the day we stopped fucking killing one another for a couple years every several decades.

what the fuck was this guy's name again? I always see people meming him but I never actually got around to reading any of his shit

Yeah, just look how well that constant warfare is working for the development of middle-eastern cultures.

Max Stirner

>>all these cucks

I've read it. are you going to argue, or just say 'everyone that disagrees with me is stupid'?

one may imagine a sweetspot between Warhammer 40K and the Lotus Eaters. the MENA region is a bit on the 40k side

It's because they're shitflinging monkeys, have you seen a declaration of war with an all-out full scale invasion somewhere recently?

They don't want to settle it, they're just playing parts. An actual war would mean the whole middle east looking like Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If you said that shit to my face you would bother be collecting each other's teeth from up off the pavement

Feels good to be a black belt :)

then you get shot
welcome to America

>captcha contains pao de queijo
fug I need some hue hue food.

>People like this exist

I'm a state champ colkege wrestler and I'm pretty good at MMA.

Your "black belt" doesn't mean shit when your arms are broken because you don't know how to grapple.

>this is the average continental

>it's a philosopher tries to comment on something he knows absolutely nothing about episode again

And you do?

Where did i make that claim?

Not really, the outcome of the war will result in a direct o indirect form. Who knows how bad o well it would have gone if hitler won, or if there was not a war, ever.

I know that I don't know, unlike Kant.