Philosophy Now Forum

Advocate wrote: ↑Wed Apr 14, 2021 1:00 am ...a tyrant can be righteous be legitimating themselves.

How can a "tyrant" legitimize himself? What's the procedure for that?

Advocate wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 9:57 pm There must be an established baseline below which no person is allowed to fall, but if society is worth it's own existence it will help everyone be their best.

Where's your definition of "real Socialism"? Are we skipping over that again?

The evidence of history. Heh. :D That's a liiiiitle broad. Can you give some specific evidence? Fact there was once a time when there were no universals of tyrrany. Ummm... :? Okay, there's not really an easy way to say this, but that's not quite what a "universal" means. You're using the world in ...

If we start by believing that this world is merely a random product of time plus chance, and that it has no inherent purpose, no objective moral facts in it, and no ultimate telos or goal, then the answer is going to be "legitimation looks like a fiction," and plausibly, like Nietzsche said, merely...

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:54 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:45 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:35 pm ...the evidence I have presented.

Show me some "evidence" and I'll deal with it. Until then, I feel no particular need to address mere posture-striking or empty rhetoric.

The evidence of history.

Heh. That's a liiiiitle broad. Can you give some specific evidence?

Sculptor wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 7:35 pm ...the evidence I have presented.

Show me some "evidence" and I'll deal with it. Until then, I feel no particular need to address mere posture-striking or empty rhetoric.

Is the reason we don't see any legitimation because legitimation is not possible? Or is it because we pre-emptively decided that no grounds of legitimation will ever be acknowledged. Hard to say. What would legitimation look like if it were in front of us? Well, based on what suppositions? If we st...

Except that there are really no universal principles. Then there would also be no legitimation. There would only be competing power-groups, with none of them any objectively "better" or "more legitimate" than any other. Rubbish. No, it's true. I rarely say this, but Advocate seems to see what's at ...

Except that there are really no universal principles. Then there would also be no legitimation. There would only be competing power-groups, with none of them any objectively "better" or "more legitimate" than any other. Which is exactly what we see in the real world. That depends. Is the reason we ...

Legitimation has to be on some universal principle, not on personal preference. Except that there are really no universal principles. Then there would also be no legitimation. There would only be competing power-groups, with none of them any objectively "better" or "more legitimate" than any other.

Advocate wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:34 pm ...just don't call it socialism.

Describe how your Socialism is different from other Socialisms, such that your Socialism will not do what other Socialisms have, in every case, done.

Or realize you're actually talking about the same "Socialism."

Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 2:04 pm Socialism has caused the death of zero people.

In a sense, that's right. "Socialism" is just a belief...and it's not until it mixes with people that other people start to die.

So we can say that Socialism is unobjectionable, so long as no human believes in it.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:55 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 1:43 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 7:27 am

No, the idea of two realities is absurd.

If so, then the very idea of reality as being a "simulation" is itself absurd.

All stories are absurd,

Well, I've decided this conversation is, anyway. I'm out.

The data ..''Then there is no "simulation" either'' ...infers... No, it "implies." The word "simulation" implies at least two "realities." One is the simulation. The other is whatever it "simulates." No, the idea of two realities is absurd. If so, then the very idea of reality as being a "simulatio...

That's funny, because people like Henry would call all of them 'commie' countries :lol: He might. But I think only in (justifiably) pejorative reference to their concessions to socialized medicine or education. And in fairness to Henry, he's right that both have been highly problematic. The former ...