@kino @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @Ricotta @TheMadPirate it is so over for women

@ferrarilegends @TheMadPirate @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @kino @Ricotta
Well given that a bunch of them might be infertile from the "vaccines", yes.

@kino @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @Ricotta In the “Utopia” sketch I made in my mind, I think it would the opposite. A men world would be an hyper-militaristic, high-tech, laissez faire capitalism competitive society with exponential technological progress.

@TheMadPirate @xianc78 @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @kino @Ricotta
"Ethics"
A field of philosophy focused on racionaliyion your feefees...

@LukeAlmighty @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @kino @Ricotta These people don’t know shit about Ethics, or they wouldn’t be criticizing Aristotle to begin with. They are ideological activists who use their “philosophy” as a conduct for their activism.

@LukeAlmighty @TheMadPirate @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @kino @Ricotta Don't cut yourself on that edge. Don't buy modern ethics either. Its bullshit deformation of this discipline of Philosophy.

@maxmustermann @TheMadPirate @xianc78 @ChristiJunior@neckbeard.xyz @kino @Ricotta
All I'm saying is that ot is hard to take field of ethics seriously when:
1st, there are people just pointing at a book, saying I cannot be possibly a moral being if I do not believe in events and beings from that book
2nd, there are people just arguing what feels right to them
3rd, there are people able to reason away that mutalating childers is ethical.

And I have not seen a good rationalization for any of above. So there might be the mythical ethics, that makes sense, but this is what I see instead.

@LukeAlmighty @TheMadPirate @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @kino @Ricotta
1) Euphoric! Atheists (in the biblical sense) have no claim to morals, because they don't have a absolute source. Socrates used that Argument against Pagans who said Morals come from the Gods.

<But there is generally preferable bebavior!

You really should read David Hume. He brought Western Phiolosophy to a standstill by disproving the Peripatetic Axiom. With this disproven there is no causality according to empircal standards. Only Event A followed by Event B which are not necessarily connected. There is no Teology; The Universe could be as well meaningless.

2: See above:
How do you think emotional ethics came intto being to begin with? There a video of a bald dude with goatee who says: "If you are insane there are no rules".

If there is no absolute truth about right and wrong, right and wrong degenerates into relative truth which leads to a Situation Iljin has observed and criticized in a extra spicy way in his works against Tolstoi: First feels based morality is not so much about morality but about the emotional hedonism of its practioners. This enables evil, because the passivity of such morals is totally OK with not defending yourself and second evil is infectious. Read the thread again; You can see this very good in Trannies.

3: Once again; If you are insane, there are no rules. If absolute truth is done away with, you can rationalize anything. Does it mean you get to throw away the discipline of ethics and morality itself? Not even Nacho went so far as he proposed the creaton of the over man instead of doing away with absolute truth totally.

tl;dr
Read David Hume. Atheism dead philosophically and demographically anyway, LOL!

@LukeAlmighty @ChristiJunior @Ricotta @TheMadPirate @kino @xianc78
I forgot to mention: As long the Wect doesn't refute David Hume, it can't do metaphysics. This is why the latest trend in Wectern philosophy is psychologism. What feels good and can explained psychological is correct. I hope you like washing your penis.

@LukeAlmighty @maxmustermann @TheMadPirate @xianc78 @ChristiJunior @kino @Ricotta Well, you can separate people's moral systems pretty much into 1. believers and 2./3. believers. So from a a functional point of view it is quite easy to figure out where you stand.

>And I have not seen a good rationalization for any of above.
There is exactly one moral system which is fully rationalized and internally coherent "morality is just your feelings". All other attempts to build a moral system up from nothing have failed and people have *tried*.

So either you take a leap of faith that the traditionally developed moral systems are good despite their apparent irrationality (themselves requiring a leap of faith) or you go sliding down the slope of rationality.

@servant_of_the_anime_avatars @LukeAlmighty @ChristiJunior @Ricotta @TheMadPirate @kino @xianc78 You forgot the best part: All arguments for Transcental objects, and morality is one, are at one point circular. Not a problem for me but a gigantic problem for Nominalists.

https://invidious.silkky.cloud/watch?v=Es5dvfLOYec

@maxmustermann @servant_of_the_anime_avatars @ChristiJunior @LukeAlmighty @Ricotta @kino @xianc78 Personally, I side with Karl Popper on his opinion about all schools of philosophy.

@maxmustermann @LukeAlmighty @ChristiJunior @Ricotta @kino @xianc78

Continental Philosophy = Charlatanry and Sophistry

Analytical Philosophy = Based and Redpilled

@TheMadPirate @ChristiJunior @LukeAlmighty @Ricotta @kino @xianc78 Traditional Philosophy = Superior to everything. Actually the stuff red pills are made of.