Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
what the fuck, Jew is literally calling the right pedophiles for praising Barron, I am merely saying they are not
Blocked for being a semantic idiot with no opinions and whose role in this chat seems to be picking at those who do. I respect Jews unhinged ass takes more than whatever this is
Blocked for being a semantic idiot with no opinions and whose role in this chat seems to be picking at those who do. I respect Jews unhinged ass takes more than whatever this is
[automerge]1759909334[/automerge]
to be fair, outside of politcal context materialism is a philosophical idea about there not being anything that is immaterial, and is very close tied to physicalism. you are using the term in a political context, hence the confusion on RyoQ's part i guess
Last edited:
Personally I understand thinking 18 and 19 is not a teenager, but the argument I heard was that they end in teen, eighteen, nineteen, and that's convincing
[automerge]1759912531[/automerge]
I don't know that Logiko does this himself but the Bible says:
John 3:19-21
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
[automerge]1759912531[/automerge]
I don't know that Logiko does this himself but the Bible says:
John 3:19-21
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Last edited:
Germany, Italy, and Japan lost WW2. Not those who funded them, as much of Hitler's war regime was funded by American Business interests (see Bush's granddaddy selling war supplies to them if you want a place to start, then move up to J. P. Morgan and the Business Plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot )
The true evil moved to the USA and Isfake, and they've never stopped spreading their terrorism.
The true evil moved to the USA and Isfake, and they've never stopped spreading their terrorism.
Indeed, I jumped a step here. Materialism has a philosophy is simply the fact of believing that our conscience, our ideas are the result of physical and therefore material interactions of the universe. That there is not some magic ideas that can appear out of nothingness.
Physicalism is a bit of a radical vision of that that can also take free-will into account and historical materialism is the political side.
Germany, France, UK, Italy. The four horsemen of genocidal complicity.
Of course it can, we do not exactly understand the full process just yet, but consciousness is a simply result of electrical, biological, and material conditions.
We are a biological and social machine. We - or our consciousness and brain - do not escape the material reality of our world.
This is morality. It aims at defining the good and bad in actions based on subjective and universal vision, but it's flawed.
Ethics, while coming from an idealist, take contextual informations into account and not a biased universality. It's more robust.
And since ethics usually push us to understand the world of structure, consequences and context, it's a sub form of political materialism.
Physicalism is a bit of a radical vision of that that can also take free-will into account and historical materialism is the political side.
Germany, Italy, and Japan lost WW2. Not those who funded them, as much of Hitler's war regime was funded by American Business interests (see Bush's granddaddy selling war supplies to them if you want a place to start, then move up to J. P. Morgan and the Business Plot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot )
The true evil moved to the USA and Isfake, and they've never stopped spreading their terrorism.
The true evil moved to the USA and Isfake, and they've never stopped spreading their terrorism.
Of course it can, we do not exactly understand the full process just yet, but consciousness is a simply result of electrical, biological, and material conditions.
We are a biological and social machine. We - or our consciousness and brain - do not escape the material reality of our world.
This is morality. It aims at defining the good and bad in actions based on subjective and universal vision, but it's flawed.
Ethics, while coming from an idealist, take contextual informations into account and not a biased universality. It's more robust.
And since ethics usually push us to understand the world of structure, consequences and context, it's a sub form of political materialism.
no that is only one aspect of consciousness, human consciousness in terms of being able to engage in self reflection is impossible for materialism
things like memory, sensory awareness etc. sure
The word ethics should really just be deleted from existence. Everything you listed (consequences, context, the structure of the world AKA how things should be) are factors of what makes a decision morally right or wrong
things like memory, sensory awareness etc. sure
The word ethics should really just be deleted from existence. Everything you listed (consequences, context, the structure of the world AKA how things should be) are factors of what makes a decision morally right or wrong
So a mentally ill sociopath killing his wife and 2 children and then killing himself is not evil/wrong, but just a "perspective"?
What about the torturing and abuse cartells in South Korea? What is their perspective?
What about a capable person saving someone's life after a heart attack? Isn't that "good" as per definition?
[automerge]1759926848[/automerge]
What AL is saying here I think, he is subjectively practicing "Null Philosophy" and he thinks it's the absolute perspective.
Last edited:
Self reflection is part of a biological, sensory, electrical and social process just as any other thought process. It's just a material reality.
I understand that it's a bit underwhelming at first, but for me, it opens up a world of wonders of biological and social possibilities.
You just made Spinoza tremble in his grave.
Without ethics, we come back to a world of senseless behaviors. In such world, you will strip the context out of the justice system.
A world without ethics is a world of tyran, dictators and fascist.
Wrong. If you strip out the context of a situation, you talk about morality, no ethics anymore.
As such, if you stop being ethical, you stop looking at the material and contextual reality of the situation and you impose your vision of the world in an universal matter, no matter the context.
I understand that it's a bit underwhelming at first, but for me, it opens up a world of wonders of biological and social possibilities.
You just made Spinoza tremble in his grave.
Without ethics, we come back to a world of senseless behaviors. In such world, you will strip the context out of the justice system.
A world without ethics is a world of tyran, dictators and fascist.
Wrong. If you strip out the context of a situation, you talk about morality, no ethics anymore.
As such, if you stop being ethical, you stop looking at the material and contextual reality of the situation and you impose your vision of the world in an universal matter, no matter the context.
So a mentally ill sociopath killing his wife and 2 children and then killing himself is not evil/wrong, but just a "perspective"?
What about the torturing and abuse cartells in South Korea? What is their perspective?
What about a capable person saving someone's life after a heart attack? Isn't that "good" as per definition?
[automerge]1759926848[/automerge]
What AL is saying here I think, he is subjectively practicing "Null Philosophy" and he thinks it's the absolute perspective.
In nature there might not be good or bad, but in one's perspective, there is.
It doesn't mean you have to join a drug cartel
is self-reflection just a sensory or electrical process? I thought self reflection reflects upon biological or sensory happenings in the body, how can self reflection be mere matter if it observes matter
[automerge]1759928171[/automerge]
I am not sure how you would define ethics. You can't have ethics without morals tho
[automerge]1759928171[/automerge]
I am not sure how you would define ethics. You can't have ethics without morals tho
I'm not a brain specialist, I can't help you with that question. The important thing is, it's a result of a material chain reaction.
Self reflection is not just a reaction, it's a biological consequence of a material process (electrical, neuronal most likely, I'm not an expert).
If you can think, it's because your brain is doing all the process behind the conscious curtain. Your self reflection is but a sub process in the machine, and all this machine is influenced by interior and exterior material and structural conditions of existence.
You could look at ethics as an update of morality. It's morality but upgraded to take into account the contextual reality of the world and thus... create a world that is more fair and just.
Self reflection is not just a reaction, it's a biological consequence of a material process (electrical, neuronal most likely, I'm not an expert).
If you can think, it's because your brain is doing all the process behind the conscious curtain. Your self reflection is but a sub process in the machine, and all this machine is influenced by interior and exterior material and structural conditions of existence.
You could look at ethics as an update of morality. It's morality but upgraded to take into account the contextual reality of the world and thus... create a world that is more fair and just.
Last edited:
But our cosmic value is certainly a positive.
Everything from the big bang until the creation of life is a +1, the -1 is just unseen. There is no 0, because it would imply absolute Nihility and that would imply a nonexistent consciousness. But we ourself are disproving that fact.
So I think in subjectivity it is okay to say "I am neither good nor evil", that is a perspective with values and not anything absolute.
Where it gets weird is to say "there is no math, no accumulation, no equation", because it's everywhere. It's in the fundamentals of our brain.
So yes there is good and bad and everything is subjective, but also everything can be mathed out and defined. Else we would become Nihility.
In order to define good and bad per karmatic scale and cosmic values:
Good = positive on karmatic scale
Bad = negative on karmatic scale
How a karmatic scale applies to each religion is each their own. The current circumstances in the world are proving that scalism is existent. So whether it's karmatic, cosmic or hyper-rational. Is again each to their own.
Not accepting this is often a sign of confusion, which imho is not a bad thing. Confusion is a result of wrong sequencing and scaling, aswell as many other things, which is another topic to discuss at another time.
I hope i made sense. My examples were extreme, but I just try to figure out my homie AL atp.
Creating this hyper philosophical quotes is always a big step imho. Religiously following them is another one.
Everything from the big bang until the creation of life is a +1, the -1 is just unseen. There is no 0, because it would imply absolute Nihility and that would imply a nonexistent consciousness. But we ourself are disproving that fact.
So I think in subjectivity it is okay to say "I am neither good nor evil", that is a perspective with values and not anything absolute.
Where it gets weird is to say "there is no math, no accumulation, no equation", because it's everywhere. It's in the fundamentals of our brain.
So yes there is good and bad and everything is subjective, but also everything can be mathed out and defined. Else we would become Nihility.
In order to define good and bad per karmatic scale and cosmic values:
Good = positive on karmatic scale
Bad = negative on karmatic scale
How a karmatic scale applies to each religion is each their own. The current circumstances in the world are proving that scalism is existent. So whether it's karmatic, cosmic or hyper-rational. Is again each to their own.
Not accepting this is often a sign of confusion, which imho is not a bad thing. Confusion is a result of wrong sequencing and scaling, aswell as many other things, which is another topic to discuss at another time.
I hope i made sense. My examples were extreme, but I just try to figure out my homie AL atp.
Creating this hyper philosophical quotes is always a big step imho. Religiously following them is another one.
Of course it can. That's why consciousness is such a wonder.
No, It is simply a complex and beautiful natural process. The brain is a biological machine that models itself as an object of observation.
When you observe what you feel, what you think, what you believe in, your brain is projecting an image of its own activity. It's a form of self-interpretation of reality. The brain creates representations, patterns, symbols, imagination etc. but it's all happening inside.
No, It is simply a complex and beautiful natural process. The brain is a biological machine that models itself as an object of observation.
When you observe what you feel, what you think, what you believe in, your brain is projecting an image of its own activity. It's a form of self-interpretation of reality. The brain creates representations, patterns, symbols, imagination etc. but it's all happening inside.