Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
When one values one human life over another you begin to have mistakes in reasoning.
What nonsense, and how surprising coming from someone who is willing to wipe out half the planet to increase productivity (as far as i could understand that was your motivation).
It shows that society has had an effect on how you think, telling you that killing defenseless animals is morally "wrong".
Is it something to be ashamed of?
If there is anything or anyone in this cold universe you can ally with, it's mankind and it's well-being. And if you don't, then you are a parasite to society.
Besides, you are a product of society just like that vacant-stare woman greeting people at walmart.
Human life is meaningless. Wasn't expecting this thread from someone who is usually so logical and calculating.
So human life is meaningless, and here you are patronizing me for wanting to kill those 2 yobs? You're confused, young man.
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
I'm not patronizing you for wishing to kill the "yobs". I could care less whether these hypothetical beings live or die. I was simply stating that it shows society's influence on you and your thoughts in the sense that believing that killing the puppy was wrong.
So as far as i understand, to you the only perspective which seems reasonable is one of total inert apathy to everything. Why?
I happen to root for our civilization. Why not?
Those 2 people from OP i consider harmful to said civilization, albeit on small scale.
It's clear in my first post here that I don't care about the killing, but the reasoning behind it and the societal consequences. And yes, I am aware that I as a being am a product of society, but I don't think like mainstream society does, in terms of right and wrong.
And that somehow makes your perspective more reasonable?
Note that not only is your informational make-up due to society, but your biological one as well.
I don't empathize with people, and I don't care about my relationships with other people. Whether or not I was alone in the vastness of the universe, I accept my life for what it is, which is to say, nothing.
All is relative. Your life may be nothing to the rocks, gasses and vacuum we float in, but not to your relatives or (potentially) your society. And of course, your mother and father and your society is part of the universe, so it's not so indifferent after all.
Also, I have stated in other threads that a utopia is one with no human life. When I stated my views in the Politique discussion, it was my ideal vision of a utopia WITH people.
Even the term utopia is relative.
But i wonder why you consider a barren wasteland a perfect state. Are humans antithetical to perfection (whatever that is) in your eyes?
Talk about antisocial.
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
Because it doesn't matter, in the end. The universe is an immense and unknowable vacuum, and when all of us die, not one thing in it will shed a tear.
1. I wouldn't be so quick to jump to these kinds of conclusions in this day and age.
2. So the fact that we will all die eventually means we shouldn't make our experience as pleasureful as possible? THIS is why i ally with vague ideals of our civilization and also why i feel protecting that puppy is a good idea.
No, just unaffected by morality or bias.
Hah, there are far more subtle things which shape your ego, let alone actual upbringing by society.
There is always a bias, whatever your views are. I could argue that your stubborn impartiality is a result of a bias which was developed in you through some bitter experiences or lack of connection to any one thing. Much like a rock. Although i wouldn't call rocks biased, since they have no ability to analyze their surroundings.
All of which have no effect on the universe as a whole. Human thought is of no consequence.
Sure they do, your mom and dad are a part of "the whole" universe. What effect do you have in mind, exactly? If we could make starts explode, is that enough of an effect? How about stopping expansion of galaxies?
Perfection is relative- therefore it does not exist. Upon further thought I realize that utopia is unachieveable. Utopia is a human construct, and embodies perfection. But without the human mind, perfection cannot exist. However, a world would no human life would have no problems, because problems are, again, a mental construct.
I imagine the whole quest for utopia is fueled by one thing only, and that is longing for happiness. Universal happiness of all people. Wiping them all out sort of defeats the purpose.
Originally Posted by hydrotoxin
I don't care about human life- do what you will. That's the point I'm trying to make. I'll steer YOUR thread back on topic now and end this argument by politely withdrawing. I don't wish to banter back and forth about my views on the value (or lack thereof) of human life and humanity's effects on the universe. I would walk over and stomp the shit out of the puppy with the thugs, and afterwards murder them all with my bare hands, tearing off their skin and fashioning various objects and clothing from it. If life, as you say, is meant to take pleasure in, then so be it. Violence is my pleasure. If there is a minimal chance of me being caught, as you also stated, then I would knock the teenagers unconscious, take their ID's, find out where they live, and force them to watch as I slit the throats of their families, making them drink their blood and partake in the consumption of their flesh, then insert fish hooks into every square inch of the thugs' skin and tear their skin off, bathing them in pure alcohol if they are still conscious and alive, and at the peak of their agony, I would burn them all alive. Thread back on rails.
You go girl
So we have different means for generating pleasure... Yours being rather unhealthy as far as mankind is concerned. Pity.
Last edited by Odlov; Nov 1, 2009 at 12:00 AM.
