For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Haha. I'm not into that sort of stuff. Pretty conventional guy here. It just seemed like a good joke to make.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:17 pmIt's never too late: direct me to your favorite site, and I'll go post it there.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:15 pmYou should have saved that as a great comment for a photograph on a BDSM website.
No one has argued against "might makes right" as the ultimate definition of justice. It is a man made construct. It requires a change of mind from the usual discursive mindset to understand why. But who thinks in a new way?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:09 pm*I'll beat that (or any) ass if it deserves it. I ain't waitin' on God. And if He has a problem with it: He can take it up with me now cuz there doesn't seem to be a later.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:25 pm Don't you go beating up on donkeys, henry quirk. Animal abuse => ticket to Valhalla cancelled.
*This, it seems to me, is as it should be. We have this clear-cut sense of when we're wronged. We ought act on it now rather than leave it to other, supposedly wiser, men to deliberate on. And The Creator, I think, wants no part of scale-balancin', not directly. Justice -- to go gunnin' for the man who stole your water -- is for today, as you can and will.
-----
Nick,
What was the question?I didn't think anyone could answer my question on objective justice.
*
No, I didn't. You need wenches to wench.The only thing you left out is the cute wench whose behind you could play with.
*
Nope. Justice is redress. Might can help in redress (an obese agoraphobic will have a harder time gettin' the water-thief than a trim, outdoorsy type) but, no, might, in itself, is not the measure of right.Justice is defined as "might makes right."
*
Philosophy, for the most part, is nit-pickin' and self-castration. Philosophy is reducin' a painting, with its embedded meaning, to meaningless dabs of color on canvas.Philosophy has served its purpose.
Sensible folks ought to avoid philosophizin'.
Although I agree with you about living and handling life now, rather than assigning value and balancing to an afterlife, your ass-whippin' philosophy could destroy the world real fast.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:17 pm So: when thy neighbor offends, beat his ass today, cuz there may be no tomorrow.
Then your allegation amounts to this:Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:34 pmNo, I very much don't, and I won't.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:16 pmBut you have toHarry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:07 pm
I really don't want to revisit our lengthy debate on the grounding of morality
Nope. Because the simple definition of the word, even if right, doesn't tell us anything about whether or not the concept has been "violated" by one or another action.Uh, the meaning of the word "just".Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:16 pm So what is your claim that "God is unjust" grounded in?
No real answer, then.Dude,...unrelated, ad hom blah, invoking emotive termsHarry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:07 pm Some demonstration is required that you have reason to know what particular sins, the sinful nature and defiance and rejection of relationship with the Supreme Being deserve, and that it is all insufficient warrant for God to allow a person to choose eternal condemnation.
So, your having descended into shamelessness, let's briefly recap, and then I'll leave it at that, because you really are shameless:
Well said. That unwillingness (especially on a philosophy forum) reveals that the presumption is of and for the ego rather than truth.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:34 pmAnd that's because you're motivated not to by your presumption that the Bible is true - a presumption which you are unwilling to challenge or have challenged.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:16 pmI don't see that's true at all.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:07 pm I emphasise the bottom line though: you affirm a conception of justice based in the Bible that is the polar opposite of what the word actually means.
It is a fascinating demonstration, is it not, of how people can create gods in their own demented image? And then they shamelessly defend that creation despite all to the contrary because it represents and serves their identity to a degree they cannot be without.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 5:04 pmSo, your having descended into shamelessness, let's briefly recap, and then I'll leave it at that, because you really are shameless:
According to Immanuel Can, the Bible is free to use words - in particular, "just" and "loving" - in their exact opposite sense, and this is perfectly reasonable, because it's the Bible that defines words. In particular, according to Immanuel Can, God is "loving" and "just" but just happens anyway to f*** people over for eternity. According to Immanuel Can, this Biblical doublespeak is nothing to worry about, because it comes from God, and who could doubt Big Brother? Now, everybody, it's time for the two-minute hate. Ooo, that Goldstein!
Even so, one might trust one's own subjective judgement over God's subjective judgement. To be honest, I think God has sometimes let his temper get the better of him.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:16 pm some human beings DO agree with God's conception of justice, but because no amount of human agreement makes a thing objective or true. It just makes it popular.
What difference does it make as long as one is on the side which wins. Might makes right. Perhaps force wins as Simone Weil describes in the beginning of her essay on the Iliad. But understanding force requires contemplation but it gets in the way of argument so why bother. Just let force use you.Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:49 pmAlthough I agree with you about living and handling life now, rather than assigning value and balancing to an afterlife, your ass-whippin' philosophy could destroy the world real fast.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:17 pm So: when thy neighbor offends, beat his ass today, cuz there may be no tomorrow.
"Opposite" only means "opposite to what Harry likes." It doesn't mean any more than that, at present.Harry Baird wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 5:04 pm According to Immanuel Can, the Bible is free to use words - in particular, "just" and "loving" - in their exact opposite sense...
Depends on how it's implemented. Self-defense, defense of other, seekin' redress for injury, these are personal. They involve few. The world ain't involved. Now, when we step away from self-defense, defense of other, seekin' redress, we've left justice behind. We've become offenders. Then the world is involved.Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:49 pmAlthough I agree with you about living and handling life now, rather than assigning value and balancing to an afterlife, your ass-whippin' philosophy could destroy the world real fast.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:17 pm So: when thy neighbor offends, beat his ass today, cuz there may be no tomorrow.
As usual: you've lost me, Nick.
One might trust one's subjective feelings over the Supreme Being who created and grounds the very concept of "justice," and who gave you the power to feel things in the first place?Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 5:12 pmEven so, one might trust one's own subjective judgement over God's subjective judgement.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:16 pm some human beings DO agree with God's conception of justice, but because no amount of human agreement makes a thing objective or true. It just makes it popular.
Well, imagine you've got a whole lot of half-witted people and misunderstandings. How does the ass-whippin' scenario play out?henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 5:26 pmDepends on how it's implemented. Self-defense, defense of other, seekin' redress for injury, these are personal. They involve few. The world ain't involved. Now, when we step away from self-defense, defense of other, seekin' redress, we've left justice behind. We've become offenders. Then the world is involved.Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 4:49 pmAlthough I agree with you about living and handling life now, rather than assigning value and balancing to an afterlife, your ass-whippin' philosophy could destroy the world real fast.henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 3:17 pm So: when thy neighbor offends, beat his ass today, cuz there may be no tomorrow.
I just don't trust him, IC, what can I say?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Oct 01, 2022 5:28 pm
One might trust one's subjective feelings over the Supreme Being who created and grounds the very concept of "justice," and who gave you the power to feel things in the first place?