Philosophy Now Forum

alpha wrote:and it doesn't necessarily entail being ok with them, either.

If you are of age and living in a free-market democracy and you are not ok with your goals then I'd say you are unintelligent or uneducated or weak-willed or a combination of all three.

alpha wrote:neither one's goals, nor ones reaction to them, is exactly by actual choice (though i know many would disagree).

Which goals have you got that you haven't chosen?

yes, but suggesting that a person actually chooses their goals or their reaction to their goals is baseless.

See above.

some of them are unrealistic for this world in general, and some are unrealistic for my circumstances.

See above.

Arising_uk wrote:My daughter says you're wrong, she likes existing and is pleased we created her.

I think you should be thankful to us who have created others as they're are going to be paying for your pension, nursing you when you're ill and wiping your incontinent arse later on.

This isn't about your existing daughter either, you absolute moron. And I plan to not seek treatment for anything feat. Besides, you created her to wipe your own incontinent arse, not mine. Now piss off.

Dalek Prime wrote:... And I plan to not seek treatment for anything twat. ...

And how will you be doing that? No matter what method you use it'll be in part thanks to someone else's kid that you will be able to do it.

She is exactly one of those you talk about and she likes existing and thinks it was a good thing for us to do. That you ignore opinions such as her's is exactly why what you have done has never been about others and everything to do about yourself.

Arising_uk wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:... And I plan to not seek treatment for anything twat. ...

And how will you be doing that? No matter what method you use it'll be in part thanks to someone else's kid that you will be able to do it.

She is exactly one of those you talk about and she likes existing and thinks it was a good thing for us to do. That you ignore opinions such as her's is exactly why what you have done has never been about others and everything to do about yourself.

God you're absolutely stupid. Read the post before that I wrote, and stop being such a tool.

Dalek Prime wrote:God you're absolutely stupid. Read the post before that I wrote, and stop being such a tool.

I read your post wanker and showed it to one who by your lights I've done no favours. She said you are wrong I have done her a favour, you're a knob. If you argue that the existent have no say because they are not the non-existent you're an even bigger knob.

alpha wrote:and it doesn't necessarily entail being ok with them, either.

Arising_uk wrote:If you are of age and living in a free-market democracy and you are not ok with your goals then I'd say you are unintelligent or uneducated or weak-willed or a combination of all three.

well, at least now we know that the unintelligent and uneducated people on this forum far outnumber the intelligent ones.

alpha wrote:neither one's goals, nor ones reaction to them, is exactly by actual choice (though i know many would disagree).

Arising_uk wrote:Which goals have you got that you haven't chosen?

it seems you haven't read that many of my posts. i'm a determinist, so i don't believe in any true choice.

please stop peddling personal opinions or anecdotal evidence. if you have any logical, or conclusive scientific evidence, please present it, otherwise, don't.

@ arising;

let's say that your daughter, and many others, are happy to exist; what does that have to do with the ones who aren't happy about it? their opinion is at least just as valid as that of the happy go lucky bunch.

alpha wrote:@ arising;

let's say that your daughter, and many others, are happy to exist; what does that have to do with the ones who aren't happy about it? their opinion is at least just as valid as that of the happy go lucky bunch.

After a certain age they all have the option of ending their existence. Since so many appear to carry on despite their unhappiness I assume they are happy to exist unhappily rather than not exist at all.

alpha wrote:well, at least now we know that the unintelligent and uneducated people on this forum far outnumber the intelligent ones.

Are you saying this forum is full of people unhappy because they have unachievable and unrealistic goals?

it seems you haven't read that many of my posts. i'm a determinist, so i don't believe in any true choice.

There are various forms of determinism so what is this 'true' choice you think doesn't exist?

In your determinism what happens when you have equally weighted options?

please stop peddling personal opinions or anecdotal evidence. if you have any logical, or conclusive scientific evidence, please present it, otherwise, don't.

The logic is clear but you ignore it, non-existents cannot be in any form of relation how are you doing this?

The questions you raise are existential ones and I'd be impressed if their is any 'scientific' evidence concerning this subject? The thing about anecdotal evidence in this subject is that it is the evidence that we all have to refer to, i.e. existing.

You've not answered my questions, which goals have you got that you have not chosen? What are these higher goals that you have?

alpha wrote:@ arising;

let's say that your daughter, and many others, are happy to exist; what does that have to do with the ones who aren't happy about it? their opinion is at least just as valid as that of the happy go lucky bunch.

Arising_uk wrote:After a certain age they all have the option of ending their existence. Since so many appear to carry on despite their unhappiness I assume they are happy to exist unhappily rather than not exist at all.

no offense, but this is a very ignorant statement;

first of all, not every adult has the option/ability to end his/her life. a quadriplegic for instance, can't even take a dump (intentionally) on his/her own, let alone do everything necessary to end their life. i can provide many more examples and scenarios, but it's not necessary.

secondly, there is such a thing as the 'self preservation' instinct. bypassing it isn't easy, and staying "alive" because of it, doesn't mean/suggest that the person prefers staying around.

thirdly, why create a mess, then expect the mess to clean itself up (if it's unhappy about it)?

Arising_uk wrote:There are various forms of determinism so what is this 'true' choice you think doesn't exist?

In your determinism what happens when you have equally weighted options?

from what i know, they generally divide determinism into two categories: hard/strict determinism, and soft determinism a.k.a compatibilism. in reality they're both the same in denying any true freewill. the only doctrine that claims true freewill is libertarianism, which has yet to provide any evidence that even suggests anything other than determinism or indeterminism is possible. (i believe indeterminism is also impossible, but even its hypothetical possibility doesn't help proponents of genuine freewill).

btw, there is no such thing as "equally weighted options". even unequally weighted "options" are not real options, they just appear to be options.

alpha wrote:please stop peddling personal opinions or anecdotal evidence. if you have any logical, or conclusive scientific evidence, please present it, otherwise, don't.

Arising_uk wrote:The logic is clear but you ignore it, non-existents cannot be in any form of relation how are you doing this?

what clear logic? that a nonexistent can't have an opinion? it doesn't need to; just like it doesn't need anything else.

Arising_uk wrote:The questions you raise are existential ones and I'd be impressed if their is any 'scientific' evidence concerning this subject? The thing about anecdotal evidence in this subject is that it is the evidence that we all have to refer to, i.e. existing.

anecdotal evidence hasn't much value for anyone other than the experiencer himself. i can assure you that my anecdotal evidence (as well as many others) is much different than yours (and those similar to yours). if there isn't any scientific evidence, what about logical?

Arising_uk wrote:You've not answered my questions, which goals have you got that you have not chosen? What are these higher goals that you have?

what my exact goals are, is irrelevant (let's say having total control of my traits and my environment). the point is, i was created without my consent, with characteristics that i'm unhappy with, in a world with which i'm unimpressed, if i was the only one, i'd just get over it, walk it off, or something, but i'm not alone.

alpha wrote: i was created without my consent, with characteristics that i'm unhappy with, in a world with which i'm unimpressed, if i was the only one, i'd just get over it, walk it off, or something, but i'm not alone.

So what do you propose?

alpha wrote:i was created without my consent, with characteristics that i'm unhappy with, in a world with which i'm unimpressed, if i was the only one, i'd just get over it, walk it off, or something, but i'm not alone.

Lacewing wrote:So what do you propose?

my main beef isn't with people, but with god (if he exists). people would help (by not contributing to the cycle) if they stopped procreating altogether. a person can't guarantee that all his/her children, grandchildren, great grandchildren (all descendants) would consent to being here, so nipping it in the bud seems like the most responsible thing to do.

sorry that this upsets some people.

alpha wrote: ...my main beef isn't with people, but with god (if he exists).

How can you have a beef with something you can't be sure exists?

alpha wrote:...people would help (by not contributing to the cycle) if they stopped procreating altogether.

Do you think that's likely to happen?

If you can't control life, are you here to simply thrash around in discontent?

alpha wrote:...my main beef isn't with people, but with god (if he exists).

Lacewing wrote:How can you have a beef with something you can't be sure exists?

i'm almost certain that a "first mover" exists. the point i was trying to make is that i object to my coming into existence.

alpha wrote:...people would help (by not contributing to the cycle) if they stopped procreating altogether.

Lacewing wrote:Do you think that's likely to happen?

are pigs likely to fly?

Lacewing wrote:If you can't control life, are you here to simply thrash around in discontent?

many of us have no idea why we were brought into existence.