Home› Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

stalinism was not inherently wrong - here's why

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
in Politics & Debate
Too many supposed "moral relativists" say that there are no moral absolutes, and then claim that an action is inherently wrong in any context!

If there are no moral absolutes, then anything goes. These dumbarses need to get out of philosophy, pronto.

Even murder is not inherently wrong! Or racism! Saying they contravene humanity is irrelevant. Please prove why moral absolutes should be based on humanity. A "moral relativist" who says this is a total fool, since he is saying that moral absolutes do not exist AND exist at the same time!!! :lol::lol::lol::lol:
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ... and this came from where???? :confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Logical reasoning.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kiddranc wrote: »
    Logical reasoning.

    But you pull this out of thin air? In what context are you raising a discussion?

    "Too many supposed "moral relativists" say that there are no moral absolutes, and then claim that an action is inherently wrong in any context!"

    What prompted your statement?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Because too many moral relativists in the world say that, and it makes a mockery of philosophy!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What are you, a sixth former who's studying philiosophy for the first time?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kiddranc wrote: »
    Because too many moral relativists in the world say that, and it makes a mockery of philosophy!

    Ok, then give us some links to some web sites so we can see who you are refering to? Who are these 'moral relativists'?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And why are there "too many" and how does that link to this place?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Cold War is over, USSR lost.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teagan wrote: »
    ... and this came from where???? :confused:
    Teagan wrote:
    But you pull this out of thin air? In what context are you raising a discussion?
    Teagan wrote:
    What prompted your statement?
    ^ Does it matter? :confused:

    Aren't most threads posted "out of thin air"... or are they all necessarily related to current affairs?

    Why don't you either agree, or disagree, or refute, or debate the points he/she was making? Or you can not post in the thread too.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sanitize wrote: »
    ^ Does it matter? :confused:

    Aren't most threads posted "out of thin air"... or are they all necessarily related to current affairs?

    It seems to me he is giving his answer to a question that hasn't been posed so I don't know exactly what he wants to debate.
    sanitize wrote: »
    Why don't you either agree, or disagree, or refute, or debate the points he/she was making? Or you can not post in the thread too.

    Who the fuck do you think you are? When did YOU become a moderator? Don't come on this board and cause shit ...
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    Anyone slightly suspicious this could be a former friend of ours?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teagan wrote:
    Who the fuck do you think you are? When did YOU become a moderator? Don't come on this board and cause shit ...
    ^ Wow. It sounds like you want a cyber fight. I didn't say anything unreasonable.

    No point in taking this thread off at a tangent even more. I said what I had to say.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    Anyone slightly suspicious this could be a former friend of ours?
    It's almost certainly a former member deciding to pop in to see us at Christmas. And like most guests that pop in at this time of year, just as unwelcome.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    Anyone slightly suspicious this could be a former friend of ours?
    You're a bit late I thought that a few days ago :p:D
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not very familiar with the older members so can I ask who you're all refering to?
  • Options
    Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    sanitize wrote: »
    I'm not very familiar with the older members so can I ask who you're all refering to?
    Nobody worth spending two words about.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sanitize wrote: »
    I'm not very familiar with the older members so can I ask who you're all refering to?
    We've had a few... People who come on the boards and just try to start trouble.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kiddranc wrote: »
    Too many supposed "moral relativists" say that there are no moral absolutes, and then claim that an action is inherently wrong in any context!

    If there are no moral absolutes, then anything goes. These dumbarses need to get out of philosophy, pronto.

    Even murder is not inherently wrong! Or racism! Saying they contravene humanity is irrelevant. Please prove why moral absolutes should be based on humanity. A "moral relativist" who says this is a total fool, since he is saying that moral absolutes do not exist AND exist at the same time!!! :lol::lol::lol::lol:
    Which philosophers are you talking about?

    And what do you mean about moral absolutes?

    I don't believe in moral absolutes in the context of 'good' and 'evil'. It's far more complicated than that. 'Right' and 'wrong' are human concepts after all.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sanitize wrote: »
    ^ Wow. It sounds like you want a cyber fight. I didn't say anything unreasonable.

    No point in taking this thread off at a tangent even more. I said what I had to say.

    sanitize and I have PM'd .. we're cool. :)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teagan wrote: »
    sanitize and I have PM'd .. we're cool. :)
    ^ Yep, just a slight misunderstanding which has been sorted.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    JsT wrote: »
    Anyone slightly suspicious this could be a former friend of ours?



    I thought Steely was long gone....

    for anyone who doesn't know, back in the dark days of the site there was a member called Steelgate who advocated the rape of women amongst other things. Do a search for him, charming fellow.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    for anyone who doesn't know, back in the dark days of the site there was a member called Steelgate who advocated the rape of women amongst other things. Do a search for him, charming fellow.
    Wow. I'm astonished, and that doesn't happen often. The arguments had by the current inhabitants of P&D are very timid in comparison. The moderators come out of that badly too.
  • Options
    Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Wow. I'm astonished, and that doesn't happen often. The arguments had by the current inhabitants of P&D are very timid in comparison. The moderators come out of that badly too.
    According to the userbase, there's no member with that name, so he was obviously deleted as well as banned... Which would mean no posts are left to see.
    So, what did you see? :confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Indrid Cold wrote: »
    According to the userbase, there's no member with that name, so he was obviously deleted as well as banned... Which would mean no posts are left to see. So, what did you see? :confused:
    I'm pissed right now, so I can't remember all that I saw. The only name that rings a bell atm is Stee1gate.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Namaste wrote: »
    Which philosophers are you talking about?

    And what do you mean about moral absolutes?

    Erm, actions that are wrong in any context, be it societal, personal or historical. What else would I mean?!
    I don't believe in moral absolutes in the context of 'good' and 'evil'. It's far more complicated than that. 'Right' and 'wrong' are human concepts after all.

    Yet people here say that racism is inherently wrong and STILL claim that morality is completely relative!!! :lol:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kiddranc wrote: »
    Erm, actions that are wrong in any context, be it societal, personal or historical. What else would I mean?!


    Yet people here say that racism is inherently wrong and STILL claim that morality is completely relative!!! :lol:

    Actually, the claim was that right and wrong are human concepts, and if humans can create concepts like right and wrong then they are also capable of knowing that racism is inherently wrong. Most of us don't need to view morals in absolutist terms in order to make moral decisions.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    kiddranc wrote: »
    Erm, actions that are wrong in any context, be it societal, personal or historical. What else would I mean?!


    Yet people here say that racism is inherently wrong and STILL claim that morality is completely relative!!! :lol:

    Did you even understand what I wrote?

    spanner.jpg
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Nothing is inherenly wrong, fuck off with your stupid circular pointless argument.

    Stalin did alot right. So did Hitler. But both had thier flaws. Mao the same.

    Grasp simple concepts, restructure your argument in some manner that MAKES SENSE, and isn't pointless, and then...

    Don't come back.

    WTF was this about... besides pointing out something obvious that "right and wrong" and relative concepts. Dear god, I think anyone over 12 realises that.

    That and all thank Dearest Comrade Stalin for the glorious triumph of the Soviet People.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    cheeta wrote: »
    Actually, the claim was that right and wrong are human concepts, and if humans can create concepts like right and wrong then they are also capable of knowing that racism is inherently wrong. Most of us don't need to view morals in absolutist terms in order to make moral decisions.

    Well duh, of course not. So what?
This discussion has been closed.