You can whine, you clearly want to and you do. And your 'Why Daddy why?' schtick should have stopped entertaining you before puberty.
Skepick's and tillingborn's mental mastication thread.
-
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
That is an uncharitable interpretation.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
tillingborn wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 12:40 pmYou can whine, you clearly want to and you do. And your 'Why Daddy why?' schtick should have stopped entertaining you before puberty.
-
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:15 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
Performatively, it doesn't seem like you meant it.
Since you are still engaging me, when you have the choice not to.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6335
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
Whether you are a thief or not is entirely determined by my behaviour not yours...Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:44 amWhether I am a "troll" or not is entirely determined by your behaviour, not mine.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:19 am Lol, has the troll of infinite vendettas gone and got himself yet another dance partner?
That boy is such a robo-slut
If you react to me with emotion - then I am a troll (from your PoV). Presumably because my questions have exhausted your vocabulary.
If you react to me with reason - then i am not a troll (from your PoV). Presumably because you have more to say.
it's good job you aren't a policeman. You'd just tell the guy whose house got robbed that it's his own fault for objecting to the absence of his TV, and he needs to adopt a more charitable attitude.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
Starwman.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 12:57 pm Whether you are a thief or not is entirely determined by my behaviour not yours...
it's good job you aren't a policeman. You'd just tell the guy whose house got robbed that it's his own fault for objecting to the absence of his TV, and he needs to adopt a more charitable attitude.
It's not the polices' job to assert blame/fault or determine whether we are dealing with robbery or insurance fraud.
It's the police's job to take reports and gather evidence and to remain entirely unbiased on the matter.
Good thing that I am a policeman, so I know these things better than an idiot-Philosopher.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6335
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
Whether you are police or not must be determined by my behaviour not yours.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:00 pmStarwman.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 12:57 pm Whether you are a thief or not is entirely determined by my behaviour not yours...
it's good job you aren't a policeman. You'd just tell the guy whose house got robbed that it's his own fault for objecting to the absence of his TV, and he needs to adopt a more charitable attitude.
It's not the polices' job to assert blame/fault or determine whether we are dealing with robbery or insurance fraud.
It's the police's job to take reports and gather evidence and to remain entirely unbiased on the matter.
Good thing that I am a policeman, so I know these things better than an idiot-Philosopher.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
It is.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:05 pm Whether you are police or not must be determined by my behaviour not yours.
If you break any laws in my presence then I am police.
If you don't - then I am not. I am just some average guy who does policing occasionally.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6335
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
The averageness is determined by your behaviour.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:06 pmIt is.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:05 pm Whether you are police or not must be determined by my behaviour not yours.
If you break any laws in my presence then I am police.
If you don't - then I am not. I am just some average guy who does policing occasionally.
Oh, wait, no, it's determined by everyone else's behaviour.
Actually you have no causal role or input into what you are at all if you choose not to have one.
Nope, wait, that would be a choice as a cause.
Well, we've ended up with quite a strange version of behaviourism here.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
And you can totally present your argument re: morality being only fashion to the magistrate.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:21 pm The averageness is determined by your behaviour.
Oh, wait, no, it's determined by everyone else's behaviour.
Actually you have no causal role or input into what you are at all if you choose not to have one.
Nope, wait, that would be a choice as a cause.
Well, we've ended up with quite a strange version of behaviourism here.
I am sure they understand how to play the language games with you.
My job (as a policeman) is only to arrange the debate.
P.S Poor Philosophicus Retardicus. Doesn't seem to understand the linguistic trade-off between completeness and consistency.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6335
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
That one comes to us from the guy who is always begging for charity and whining about strawmen.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:22 pmAnd you can totally present your argument re: morality being only fashion to the magistrate.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:21 pm The averageness is determined by your behaviour.
Oh, wait, no, it's determined by everyone else's behaviour.
Actually you have no causal role or input into what you are at all if you choose not to have one.
Nope, wait, that would be a choice as a cause.
Well, we've ended up with quite a strange version of behaviourism here.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
And this objection comes from a guy who calls himself a moral anti-realist and compared morality to choosing pant colors.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:33 pmThat one comes to us from the guy who is always begging for charity and whining about strawmen.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:22 pmAnd you can totally present your argument re: morality being only fashion to the magistrate.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:21 pm The averageness is determined by your behaviour.
Oh, wait, no, it's determined by everyone else's behaviour.
Actually you have no causal role or input into what you are at all if you choose not to have one.
Nope, wait, that would be a choice as a cause.
Well, we've ended up with quite a strange version of behaviourism here.
I am being charitable. Apparently you believe everything you say, and your words aren't just a performance.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 6335
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
I simply noted that a claim to have derived moral ought from is, on the basis of some unquantified claim that oughts just exist in some way should apply to non moral oughts on the exact same basis, and thus should have similar consequence for knowledge derived thereby.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:37 pmAnd this objection comes from a guy who calls himself a moral anti-realist and compared morality to choosing pant colors.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:33 pmThat one comes to us from the guy who is always begging for charity and whining about strawmen.
I am being charitable. Apparently you believe everything you say, and your words aren't just a performance.
It seems I don't need any lectures on charitable interpretation, or honesty for that matter, from you.
This has become boring, I'm handing you back to tillingborn.
Re: Skepick's and tillingborn's mental masturbation thread.
It's derived the same way as all knowledge - measurement. Seeming as you insist that beliefs are non-performative, then knowledge (a form of belief) cannot have any consequences either.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:53 pm I simply noted that a claim to have derived moral ought from is, on the basis of some unquantified claim that oughts just exist in some way should apply to non moral oughts on the exact same basis, and thus should have similar consequence for knowledge derived thereby.
Morality isn't about measurements. Anybody can and does measure however they please.
It's about arriving at standards of measurement. Scientists do it by charitable consensus. How do you do it?
I can't convince an uncharitable person of my charity...FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:53 pm It seems I don't need any lectures on charitable interpretation, or honesty for that matter, from you.
Free will's a bitch!