• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

What makes someone a bad person?

mister pip
samir_office_space.jpg

you are a bad man
 
L2R said:
i came in here to post this. it's true, the ONLY thing to make one "bad" is the opinion and judgement of others.
Click to expand...

So Hitler was only bad cause other people said he was? I guess thats true in social darwinism sense.
 
actually, you guys are right, i take that back.

i think there is an objective version of good and bad. say for instance, keeping a promise to a dead person. they aren't harmed by the promise being broken (because they no longer exist and can't be harmed), but society is generally preferable for all if such promises are kept. if it is in everyone's interest, to go against it would be a bad for society, whether people know about it or not.
 
L2R said:
actually, you guys are right, i take that back.

i think there is an objective version of good and bad. say for instance, keeping a promise to a dead person. they aren't harmed by the promise being broken (because they no longer exist and can't be harmed), but society is generally preferable for all if such promises are kept. if it is in everyone's interest, to go against it would be a bad for society, whether people know about it or not.
Click to expand...


Well, killing a bunch of people to take down the world population would be good for society and it's best interest as well. And what if I had promised the dead guy I was going to murder his ex wife because she stole a can of lima beans from him in in the divorce litigation? Or I was a a fundamental extremist and I promised I would murder my promise's daughter and her family because she had children in an interracial marriage? I suggest you revise your statement there bucko
 
not quite.

what i said does not imply what you took from it.

it is NOT right to kidnap an innocent person in order to divide up their organs to save ten other's lives, let alone your even more extreme examples. it is NOT in anyone's best interest to allow such things to be considered, even if they are (arguably) better off in other ways.
 
L2R said:
not quite.

what i said does not imply what you took from it.

it is NOT right to kidnap an innocent person in order to divide up their organs to save ten other's lives, let alone your even more extreme examples. it is NOT in anyone's best interest to allow such things to be considered, even if they are (arguably) better off in other ways.
Click to expand...
I purposefully took it out of context because your statement wasn't worded very carefully.
And on what grounds do you have an objective measure for this?

Morality and ethics are no more objective than the tooth fairy.
 
want me to recite the entire ethics course i did starting with "can you harm the dead?". sorry i don't have the time nor my resources with me here in china. the answer isn't as simple as
Morality and ethics are no more objective than the tooth fairy.
Click to expand...
I used to think this too, but harm and interest goes beyond what we are conscious of. Therefore so does morality and ethics. Sorry, i can't recall any examples right now, my brain is currently switched to ancient history and political theory modes.
 
People are flesh and blood and tooth and bone. There is not anything good or bad about a person.

Actions and behaviors are good or bad and that depends on the culture and social structure of the people.

The product of my person will be determined bad or good by some people. My person is just a skin sack full of meat.
 
L2R said:
want me to recite the entire ethics course i did starting with "can you harm the dead?". sorry i don't have the time nor my resources with me here in china. the answer isn't as simple as

I used to think this too, but harm and interest goes beyond what we are conscious of. Therefore so does morality and ethics. Sorry, i can't recall any examples right now, my brain is currently switched to ancient history and political theory modes.
Click to expand...

If I killed every human (assuming no sentient aliens exist) "Morality" would not exist. You still have yet to provide any objective basis for your fallacious conjecture. The only constants in our universe are change and destruction which despite whatever little happy sunny day delusion you have is inescapable. Everything tends towards destruction. The creation part of the cycle is but one infantismal point in the circle after which destruction takes over. As soon as a universe blips into existence and starts expanding it has already passed the point of creation and is already cascading towards destruction.
 
hiphophippy said:
If I killed every human (assuming no sentient aliens exist) "Morality" would not exist. You still have yet to provide any objective basis for your fallacious conjecture. The only constants in our universe are change and destruction which despite whatever little happy sunny day delusion you have is inescapable. Everything tends towards destruction. The creation part of the cycle is but one infantismal point in the circle after which destruction takes over. As soon as a universe blips into existence and starts expanding it has already passed the point of creation and is already cascading towards destruction.
Click to expand...

you have to have something to destroy, it isnt so "infantismal".

cant go bashing nothing, something must come first.
 
panic in paradise said:
you have to have something to destroy, it isnt so "infantismal".

cant go bashing nothing, something must come first.
Click to expand...
It is, especially on the celestial scale. eve the time a sun burns is pathetic on a cosmic scale. What I'm writing right now is pathetically Irrelevant. Anything anyone does really is.

The second the first drip of concrete hits the ground as the start of a foundation it is already advancing in time towards it's destruction.
 
hiphophippy said:
If I killed every human (assuming no sentient aliens exist) "Morality" would not exist. You still have yet to provide any objective basis for your fallacious conjecture. The only constants in our universe are change and destruction which despite whatever little happy sunny day delusion you have is inescapable. Everything tends towards destruction. The creation part of the cycle is but one infantismal point in the circle after which destruction takes over. As soon as a universe blips into existence and starts expanding it has already passed the point of creation and is already cascading towards destruction.
Click to expand...

if there were no people, there'd be no one to act immorally. this does not mean that there is no objective morality when there are people.
 
L2R said:
if there were no people, there'd be no one to act immorally. this does not mean that there is no objective morality when there are people.
Click to expand...
You can continue to skirt around it as much as you want, you still have produced nothing even remotely related to your pathetic attempt at establishing objective(= altruistic) morality.
 
real men wear skirts.

anyway, i've not skirted anything, just poked holes in your version of "logic". besides, i already fucking told you i don't have my resources with me. on top of that, i really don't give a rats what you think you think.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top