Discussion of actions #1 responce.

I compare them with each other due to them being actions. And as I’ve said I believe actions can’t be “good or bad” by moral standards.

I chose killing because it is seen as an extreme action in the our modern society compared to the actions you did in the beginning of the whole chat history.

 

“There is nothing wrong with bringing amusement to myself and others.”

Here I don’t know in what sense you mean “wrong”. “Nothing wrong” as in, it’s a behavior that can’t be questioned is the one I went for.

I then almost copied your quote but switched out your actions that resulted in bringing amusement into murder that brought amusement, because I assumed you would think murder was wrong and could not be seen as amusement. Which it seems that you don’t think it can.

 

This was purely to point out that just because an action brings fun does not mean it’s good. It was a reaction to what you said.

 

After this we leave the main question when you write this.

“No, you autmoatically go for the worst sort of comparison. As though my actions are comparable to human slaughter.” As in response to me comparing your action with the action of killing for fun.

 

Here you imply that murdering people is wrong compared to your actions. (I chose to see that you implied this by your form of wording “human slaughter”.

And now the other discussion sets of due to you having implied that murdering is wrong. Since you didn’t give any other reason for why murdering could not be compared with your actions I went for morals, the obvious reason. (Feel free to tell me the “real” reason for why you think one can’t compare them).

Now we have two questions of debate, 1 whether or not your behavior was unnecessary (which we never discussed) and whether or not I could compare your behavior with the example I give.

 

“You imply that my actions are worse.”

I never stated that your actions are worse. I imply that your actions are unnecessary.

 

Another fun quote. “<12:52:29> "Vaemethius": Generally good/bad actions are judged against the morals of whoever it is that considers whatever action it is.”

The first time the word “morals” was ever brought in.

This goes against you saying this “You when jump to morals, with no provocation from anyone”.

As you see, you brought up morals. I did not.

 

It’s now that I set out about morals.

You agree to that not everyone has the same morals and same subjective view by this quote.

“<12:54:08> "Vaemethius": Morals do have a set standard for certain regions, eras, religions. But to what degree, and the interpritation, however it' spelled, of them is left to the individual.”

This is when I begin to talk about there being no universal morals.

There are morals that most people follow but that does not make them correct.

 

<14:01:38> "Vaemethius": You then try to lead into my being wrong because murdering compared to silly behaviour is the same. But the reason it is not the same is because throughout the world the majority of the population consider taking another human life to be the absolute low of anything. But silly behaviour is tolerated, not approved of, but not something that is viewed by a major chunk of human population to be something as horrid.

 

Here you say that they are not the same because what the majority of the people consider?

History has often proven that one man has been right when the majority was wrong (this is when it comes to objective things, absolute things). This proves that the majority can be wrong.

And since the view on certain actions changes through time it’s only logical to say that there’s no correct view up on it.

Just because the majority thinks one thing does not make it true. What I think might as well be true.

One day an action will be good another day it will be good. For you an action is wrong for another is right. How can right or wrong actions even exist in a world where right and wrong changes from day to day, from moment to moment.

 

To respond to your rock. When day I see the rock. It’s good because I can sit on it. The other day the rock is bad because it is in the way of my path, but for my friend who’s next to me. It’s a good rock, he’s tired and wants to sit. At this exact moment the rock is both good and bad? Or is it just my feelings for the rock that counts, or is it just his?

No that can’t be correct. Nones subjective view can be more correct than another one. No the stone is in reality simply a stone.

 

Now we move on to your commenting my magical Island.

It’s a very unlikely scenario because killing each other would ruin a society. A society does not work with murdering all the time. That’s why you’re not allowed to kill in our society. Because it would not function. The same way you’re not allowed to steal and such. Killing is wrong in the sense that it will ruin society but whether the action is wrong in itself is not true.

Killing will be justified when it lets society survive. War is an example. When your society in threatened you kill to keep it living. When killing threatens to rip your society apart to forbid killing.

 

On my Island I removed the facts that a society wouldn’t function and altered the population to gain the majority of the world just to prove that what the majority thinks does not make it correct.

 

"It proves that morals isn't absolute and since the majorities morals always change an action can be good now but bad later." is your final statement...

<14:02:11> "Vaemethius": I never said anything against morals being absolute. You did. That morals change, I stated that, and agreed when you reiterated it. I never said that something good/bad now can be the opposite later. You did.”

 

I assume it’s here you imply that I am arguing with myself? I bring up these facts not because you mentioned them but because they prove the worthlessness of morals. I guess that was not clear.

So now to reply your question.

“How can you compare my overly exaggerated friendliness with murder?”

I thought the reason for why you acted (it bringing amusement) was a funny and silly reason.

To prove the silliness I took an “extreme” action. An action that is seen as morally wrong.

Since I believe there isn’t a difference between actions when it comes to being right or wrong I used it. And I also see killing for fun as unnecessary as your actions in the beginning.