Deleted member 219079
D
Deleted member 219079
Previous post;
Back then I knew I couldn't be able to define what is justice. Well now as I don't really care anymore whether I say correct things I'll take part in this ever lasting question.
What I mean by "I don't really care anymore whether I say correct things" ? Because who can define what is correct and what is not? Who can really define anything. How could we know which is real, which is not. What if I'm non existent here, so as you?
So why should I wait for knowing the right answer to "what is justice" if there'll never be one?
Other confusing thing is the matter of perspective; guy B trashed guy A's lawn because guy A had trashed guy B's newspaper in the past (neighbors). Hassle between these two had continued longer than they could even remember, so there's no knowing of which one started it all. Now in the current event, A thinks B did wrong, trashing the whole lawn is more filthy than trashing just a newspaper right? B thinks A did wrong because he had the rights to do it; trashing news paper to make it unreadable is reckless! So in the perspective of A, B is the quilty one and vice versa. It's a matter of perspective.
Can we rank acts into points in which order the worse act is sorted? No, we cannot. This means an act of injustice is abstractly defined. I mean conceptually. Taken the existence of perspectives into account also, saying an act of injustice is faulty also, we should only talk about it as an "act".
People have their own ethics. There are no global ethical rules all 7 billion humen on earth could agree to.
But we must agree that not everyone's ideal set of rules are perfect for the environment; what'd happen if a teen junkie would be chosen as the us president and defined new rules everyone to follow? At least it'd most likely have worse effect on Americans than the current law.
Could there still be somehow ideal set of rules for people to follow? Global form of law, which'd take environment and healthcare into account? I bet not that many people'd like to agree to these ethics; something ideal would sort out money, the biggest scammer ever, maybe sort out factories as they damage the environment, but that would stop human as a ever evolving race which might not be ideal after all as we couldn't be able to perform healthcare efficiently. I don't know what it would sort out and add in, but I bet money wouldn't stay there, at least as it is as of now.
Since it wouldn't treat America as 9999999999999999x better and more important country as other countries on earth, not that many Americans would like to agree to it. Maybe not even anyone else beside poor and mistreated countries?
I think ideal global law would order me to get the **** out of my computer, so I'd join the forces who are against it, I'm a dumb European who's got used to the fact that I get lots of everything.
...
Maybe I make #3 after I've actually finished a couple of courses in philosophy.
What'ye think was this text worse than latter one about YouTube?
I know you hivers like to argument about things so please do so but I won't respond to all the mean ones xd
Guys, I'm bored. Are you too? Good, then discuss with me about:
Disliking others' comments on YouTube
It bothers me that sometimes I'm going through some fights on YT, the comment is hidden because of getting too many dislikes. Now I'm sure there's a good reason for that, but people tend to press that thumb down button only because they don't think the same way as the commentator does. I think this is really really wrong. You're disliking for other to have different opinions than you.
Why I think there's a good reason for YT to hide too heavily disliked comments? Because simply one can write anything, literally anything to YouTube comments. It's actually protecting him for going through sanctions, since not that many people can see the comment, and get pissed by that, or capture the comment and use it against him somehow.
Let me bring a real life scenario here.
One could comment on Xbox video:
"xbox sucks. ps 3 ftw"
Now caused by this, since he posted this on an xbox video, he will probably get hate. There's three ways people (against the comment) would react. First says something fanboy-like against him. Second says something constructive against him. Third just ignores his comment.
(I'm on PC side btw, it's the right one ^^ )
Are you the third person? It's the best way. Why not the second, trying to talk some sense into him? Just watch the fanboy video I linked, it tells you that fanboy can't accept your opinion. I can find a connection between this and anti-theism.
I'm against anti-theism, we should just let people make their decisions and let them follow them.
Your friend goes to college and you don't? Let him go, it's his decision.
You see a woman as a construction worker? Don't diss her for that, it's her decision.
A black man is white woman's husband? Let them be together, it was their decision.
You could ask "what about the bad decisions?" The bad decisions might be cause by sickness, bad environment etc. Or then it was just "miscalculation" by that one.
Edit: Discuss about "what is justice" if you want...
Disliking others' comments on YouTube
It bothers me that sometimes I'm going through some fights on YT, the comment is hidden because of getting too many dislikes. Now I'm sure there's a good reason for that, but people tend to press that thumb down button only because they don't think the same way as the commentator does. I think this is really really wrong. You're disliking for other to have different opinions than you.
Why I think there's a good reason for YT to hide too heavily disliked comments? Because simply one can write anything, literally anything to YouTube comments. It's actually protecting him for going through sanctions, since not that many people can see the comment, and get pissed by that, or capture the comment and use it against him somehow.
Let me bring a real life scenario here.
One could comment on Xbox video:
"xbox sucks. ps 3 ftw"
Now caused by this, since he posted this on an xbox video, he will probably get hate. There's three ways people (against the comment) would react. First says something fanboy-like against him. Second says something constructive against him. Third just ignores his comment.
(I'm on PC side btw, it's the right one ^^ )
Are you the third person? It's the best way. Why not the second, trying to talk some sense into him? Just watch the fanboy video I linked, it tells you that fanboy can't accept your opinion. I can find a connection between this and anti-theism.
I'm against anti-theism, we should just let people make their decisions and let them follow them.
Your friend goes to college and you don't? Let him go, it's his decision.
You see a woman as a construction worker? Don't diss her for that, it's her decision.
A black man is white woman's husband? Let them be together, it was their decision.
You could ask "what about the bad decisions?" The bad decisions might be cause by sickness, bad environment etc. Or then it was just "miscalculation" by that one.
Edit: Discuss about "what is justice" if you want...
Back then I knew I couldn't be able to define what is justice. Well now as I don't really care anymore whether I say correct things I'll take part in this ever lasting question.
What I mean by "I don't really care anymore whether I say correct things" ? Because who can define what is correct and what is not? Who can really define anything. How could we know which is real, which is not. What if I'm non existent here, so as you?
So why should I wait for knowing the right answer to "what is justice" if there'll never be one?
Other confusing thing is the matter of perspective; guy B trashed guy A's lawn because guy A had trashed guy B's newspaper in the past (neighbors). Hassle between these two had continued longer than they could even remember, so there's no knowing of which one started it all. Now in the current event, A thinks B did wrong, trashing the whole lawn is more filthy than trashing just a newspaper right? B thinks A did wrong because he had the rights to do it; trashing news paper to make it unreadable is reckless! So in the perspective of A, B is the quilty one and vice versa. It's a matter of perspective.
Can we rank acts into points in which order the worse act is sorted? No, we cannot. This means an act of injustice is abstractly defined. I mean conceptually. Taken the existence of perspectives into account also, saying an act of injustice is faulty also, we should only talk about it as an "act".
People have their own ethics. There are no global ethical rules all 7 billion humen on earth could agree to.
But we must agree that not everyone's ideal set of rules are perfect for the environment; what'd happen if a teen junkie would be chosen as the us president and defined new rules everyone to follow? At least it'd most likely have worse effect on Americans than the current law.
Could there still be somehow ideal set of rules for people to follow? Global form of law, which'd take environment and healthcare into account? I bet not that many people'd like to agree to these ethics; something ideal would sort out money, the biggest scammer ever, maybe sort out factories as they damage the environment, but that would stop human as a ever evolving race which might not be ideal after all as we couldn't be able to perform healthcare efficiently. I don't know what it would sort out and add in, but I bet money wouldn't stay there, at least as it is as of now.
Since it wouldn't treat America as 9999999999999999x better and more important country as other countries on earth, not that many Americans would like to agree to it. Maybe not even anyone else beside poor and mistreated countries?
I think ideal global law would order me to get the **** out of my computer, so I'd join the forces who are against it, I'm a dumb European who's got used to the fact that I get lots of everything.
...
Maybe I make #3 after I've actually finished a couple of courses in philosophy.
What'ye think was this text worse than latter one about YouTube?
I know you hivers like to argument about things so please do so but I won't respond to all the mean ones xd
)
