Morality and Ethics for the Information Age

doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:44 PM):
 naggers
Eldrad says (10:45 PM):
 sanders would you pay 3000 dollars for a pound of weed
Barre says (10:45 PM):
 sndrs llps og
 and of course he would
 he is a dumb druggie
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:48 PM):
 ye mang i pay whatever it takes to get the dro
Eldrad says (10:48 PM):
 sanders, how much would you pay for one pound of weed
Barre says (10:48 PM):
 he just told you
Eldrad says (10:48 PM):
 no he really didnt
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:48 PM):
 420 dollars
 smoke weed erry day
Eldrad says (10:48 PM):
 I'm bein' serious.
 What's the going rate.
Barre says (10:48 PM):
 but he said
Eldrad says (10:49 PM):
 Where you live.
Barre says (10:49 PM):
 that he'll pay whatever they ask
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:49 PM):
 different weed has different prices
 shitty weed
 also known as mids
Eldrad says (10:49 PM):
 white widow
 we're discussing white widow
 this kid is asking for 3000 for a pound of it
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 hmm
Barre says (10:50 PM):
 mant
 are you a druggie as well?
Eldrad says (10:50 PM):
 no
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 yeah that sounds about right
Barre says (10:50 PM):
 we need to make mantdrg
Eldrad says (10:50 PM):
 wow, really?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 yes
Eldrad says (10:50 PM):
 the fuck
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 that's high grade weed
Eldrad says (10:50 PM):
 stupid druggies
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 which people buy by the gram
Eldrad says (10:50 PM):
 who'd spend that much money on that
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:50 PM):
 around here stuff like that sells for $20 a gram
Barre says (10:50 PM):
 druggies
Barre says (10:51 PM):
 duh
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:51 PM):
 dude
 you don't need a fucking pound of weed
 unless you're trying to sell it
Eldrad says (10:51 PM):
 >twenty dollars for a gram
 ALL OF THIS
 WASTED TAX MONEY
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:51 PM):
 1 gram is good for a few days
Barre says (10:51 PM):
 ye mant
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:51 PM):
 depending on how often you like to get high
Barre says (10:51 PM):
 legalize and tax it
 420 save ecenomoy and smoke weed
Eldrad says (10:51 PM):
 this kid says he has, like, 75000 dollars worth of it
 27 or so pounds
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:51 PM):
 well he's probably full of shit
Eldrad says (10:51 PM):
 nobody needs that much weed
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:52 PM):
 but
 $3000 a pound sounds legit
Eldrad says (10:52 PM):
 fuckin stupi
 d
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:52 PM):
 dude its not
Eldrad says (10:52 PM):
 like hell it isnt
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:52 PM):
 your average druggie
Eldrad says (10:52 PM):
 is pathetic
 and filthy
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:52 PM):
 is not going to be like "hum today i want to buy a pound of weed"
Eldrad says (10:52 PM):
 looking for his next fix
 wasting money on the stupidest shit
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:52 PM):
 nobody buys anything more than a quarter ounce
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:53 PM):
 unless they are trying to re-sell it for profit
 and if you're talking about white widow
 most people will buy 1 gram at a time
 have you ever smoked weed
Eldrad says (10:53 PM):
 wait then
 if he has 27 pounds
Eldrad says (10:54 PM):
 and people buy per gram
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:54 PM):
 he's selling it by the poudn
Eldrad says (10:54 PM):
 ...doesn't that mean he's sinking his own buisness?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:54 PM):
 or at least that's what he's claiming
Eldrad says (10:54 PM):
 hes throwing an immense amount of supply into the market
 but he wants prices to stay the same
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:54 PM):
 He is basically claiming that he buys almost directly from the growers
Eldrad says (10:54 PM):
 no, hes growing it himself
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:54 PM):
 oh
 i dont understand how you mean
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:55 PM):
 how is he sinking his own business
Eldrad says (10:55 PM):
 he has a tremendous supply
 but he expects prices to stay the same
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:55 PM):
 no no no
 $20 a gram
 is $9000 a pound
Eldrad says (10:55 PM):
 if he sells his supply, ignoring the fact that he'll get more, he'll lower the price of it because there's so much in circulation
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:55 PM):
 he is selling for $3000 a pound
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:56 PM):
 it doesnt really work that way the prices aren't going to react to changes in supply that quickly
 the weed market is not very elastic at all
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:58 PM):
 besides with that large of a product
 his stuff is not going to stay local
Barre says (10:58 PM):
 druggie pls go
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (10:58 PM):
 ralfdrg
Barre says (10:58 PM):
 noralph
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:00 PM):
 manticus have you ever smoked weed
 i want to know
Barre says (11:00 PM):
 yes
 during the mw3 free weekend
Barre says (11:01 PM):
 he smoked weed while doing 360 quickscopes
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:02 PM):
 cool
 sadsand
Barre says (11:02 PM):
 why are you sad?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:02 PM):
 too much drgs
Barre says (11:02 PM):
 Aren't you happy that you get more druggie friends?
Barre says (11:03 PM):
 now you have joc, herc and mant
 druggie bros 4lyfe
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:03 PM):
 cool
 bros
 4 lyfe
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:04 PM):
 also i still think whoever you're talking to is full of shit
 because
 you referred to him as "kid"
 and
 he would not be telling you any of this shit if it were true
Eldrad says (11:04 PM):
 >me
 >a druggy
Eldrad says (11:05 PM):
 Dude, WHAT
Barre says (11:05 PM):
 ye mant
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:05 PM):
 because he could get a fuckload of jail time
Barre says (11:05 PM):
 u druggie now
Eldrad says (11:05 PM):
 I hate drugs to the point that I find CAFFINE immoral
 you piece of shit i'll fucking end you
Barre says (11:05 PM):
 poor mant
 he hasn't gotten his fix yet
 so hostile
 ;_;
Eldrad says (11:05 PM):
 1v1 right now
 1v1
 1v1
 1v1
 1v1
 1v1
Barre says (11:06 PM):
 druggie pls go
Eldrad says (11:06 PM):
 no i've never smoked weed because i dont hate myself
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:06 PM):
 i used to be like you
Eldrad says (11:06 PM):
 I still have morality and self-respect
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:06 PM):
 then i took a bong rip
Eldrad says (11:06 PM):
 a joint to the knee
 xD
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:06 PM):
 and it was awesome
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:07 PM):
 >smoking weed is immoral
 justify this claim
 pls
Eldrad says (11:07 PM):
 What is the ultimate good in the universe.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:07 PM):
 that's highly debatable
Eldrad says (11:07 PM):
 No, it isn't.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:08 PM):
 what are you going to say
 is the ultimate good in the universe
Eldrad says (11:08 PM):
 Morality is arbitrary, and meaningless
 There is no wrong answer.
 So, I'll ask again. What is the ultimate good in the universe?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:08 PM):
 i don't have an answer to that question
 because whatever I respond with, I wont be able to justify
 because I havent thought on the issue
Eldrad says (11:08 PM):
 I won't scrutinize you.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:09 PM):
 well socrates thought the ultimate good in the universe was happiness
 if I remember my PHIL 1000 class correctly
Eldrad says (11:09 PM):
 No, you're thinking of Hedon.
 He founded the school of Hedonism, which believes Pleasure and Happiness are the ultimate good.
Eldrad says (11:10 PM):
 For hedonists, as long as you're happy, you're well... be that high on your next fix, or after sex after countless times.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:10 PM):
 okay well
 continue
 obviously you have some way of connecting this train of thought to the morality of using drugs
Eldrad says (11:10 PM):
 I am a stoic. I believe the ultimate good in the universe is thinking.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:10 PM):
 okay
Eldrad says (11:11 PM):
 Anything that interferes with thinking is therefore immoral. You follow?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:11 PM):
 yes
 if
Eldrad says (11:11 PM):
 If you are drunk, thinking is more challenging, and you cannot do it in the classical sense. Even your motor skills fade, and so does your judgment.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:11 PM):
 you define a moral act as something which provides or furthers the ultimate good
Eldrad says (11:11 PM):
 Therefore, drunkness is immoral.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:12 PM):
 and an immoral act is something which hinders the ultimate good or prevents it
 okay
 now that we've got some boundaries
Eldrad says (11:13 PM):
 Well, you kinda have a moral scale. On the left, evil, the right, good.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:13 PM):
 but can you make a connection between smoking weed and hindering of thinking?
 what about testimony from users of marijuana that say that it actually opens your mind?
Eldrad says (11:14 PM):
 It changes how you think. Therefore, it is immoral.
 I phrased that poorly.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:14 PM):
 yes
 non sequitor; it does not follow
Eldrad says (11:14 PM):
 It... LITERALLY changes how you think, unlike an idea.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:15 PM):
 hrm
 I don't see how that makes it immoral
 because
 just because something has changed
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:16 PM):
 does not mean it is worse than it was before
 by the way
 I took a class on arguments
 so
 that's why I'm going at this in such a systematic fasion
 *fashion
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:17 PM):
 i'm used to philosophical discussions where every statement is justified in some way
Kori says (11:17 PM):
 changing is not necessarily taking away or impairing
 it's just different
Eldrad says (11:18 PM):
 If marijuana is a miracle drug that enhances so well, then, why don't more people use it, or why is it illegal?
Kori says (11:18 PM):
 dunno
 it's never been shown to actually cause harm
 it has plenty of medicinal purposes
Eldrad says (11:18 PM):
 But it has long-term memory damage.
Kori says (11:18 PM):
 sources pls
Kori says (11:19 PM):
 if this is the monkey brain cell killing thing that's bullshit
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:19 PM):
 i can testify that it affects memory
Kori says (11:19 PM):
 okay
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:19 PM):
 from personal experience
Eldrad says (11:19 PM):
 At it's best, Marijuana is like... horseblinders. They focus you.
Kori says (11:19 PM):
 What's it like?
Kori says (11:20 PM):
 Like small gaps in your memory, or things that are different from what happened?
Eldrad says (11:20 PM):
 That is a fundamental change in thinking. It's an entire scope change that can drastically change judgment.
 Therefore, it is immoral.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:20 PM):
 I stopped smoking for about 3 or 4 months
 recently started smoking again and lately I will frequently forget where i put things that I had in my hand not 5 minutes ago
Kori says (11:21 PM):
 and this is new?
 because i do that normally sometimes
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:21 PM):
 I.E. i'll put a guitar pick down, go do something else, come back and be like "WHERE THE FUCK DID I PUT THAT"
 well it's happening a lot more often than it used
Kori says (11:21 PM):
 ah
 how often do you smoke?
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:21 PM):
 so manticus
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:22 PM):
 can I paraphrase your argument thusly:
 you are essentially saying that marijuana clouds your thinking, not allowing your thoughts to reach their full potential?
Eldrad says (11:22 PM):
 No.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:22 PM):
 i'll get about four or five days out of the wee
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:23 PM):
 *high
Eldrad says (11:23 PM):
 Marijuana is immoral on the basis that it A) Interferes with judgment B) Alters the processes of the mind and brain C) Has long term effects that interfere with the mind
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:24 PM):
 okay
Eldrad says (11:24 PM):
 Or, that is, smoking marijuana. Nothing immoral about a plant existing.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:24 PM):
 that's a pretty solid philosophical position
Kori says (11:24 PM):
 it is
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:24 PM):
 its not an argument that I subscribe to, though
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:25 PM):
 because I disagree with your foundation of the ultimate good
 and the basis of morality
Eldrad says (11:25 PM):
 No matter how much I don't want it to be, morality really does mean nothing.
 It's so arbitrary and wavers with culture.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:26 PM):
 personal morality is important
 such that it's important that you can believe that you yourself are a moral person
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:27 PM):
 and if you take that to a global scale, with each person trying to act in a moral way
 it seems like it would create an overall moral society
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:28 PM):
 the only issue with that is each person has a different view on morality
 sorry, i'm just thinking out loud at this point
Kori says (11:28 PM):
 Well, here in what I suppose we'd call 1st world countries, there are certain things that everybody can agree is immoral
Kori says (11:29 PM):
 Or nearly everybody
 On a global scale, that morality is more of a between cultures thing
Eldrad says (11:29 PM):
 I think everyone can agree that everyone is immoral.
Kori says (11:29 PM):
 only you can make the entire world to be immoral, mant
 only you
 ehue
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:30 PM):
 I disagree
 with you manticus
Eldrad says (11:30 PM):
 I have only met two people that I could ever objectively call moral and good people
 One of them fucked my girlfriend.
 So that whittles the list down to one.
Kori says (11:30 PM):
 >objectively call moral and good
Kori says (11:31 PM):
 the objectively doesn't really belong there
Eldrad says (11:31 PM):
 Morality is subjective, moral analysis is not.
Kori says (11:31 PM):
 By our standards, they had good morals
 And lived by good morals
Kori says (11:32 PM):
 A moral analysis and saying that somebody has good morals are different, I'd say
Kori says (11:33 PM):
 If a moral analysis is always objective, that is
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:34 PM):
 meh
 i wish that we were having this conversation a year ago
 when I was still taking an ethics class
Kori says (11:35 PM):
 well, i know i learned stuff today
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:35 PM):
 cause i cant remember shit from that class
Kori says (11:35 PM):
 and that makes me feel good about myself
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:35 PM):
 oh wait
 I have my ethics textbook right here
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:36 PM):
 okay so
 let's take a look at this particular philosophy
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:37 PM):
 Emmanuel Kant's categorical imperative
 "Act only from moral rules that you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws."
Kori says (11:38 PM):
 Well, anybody can will their morals to be universal, but it won't fit into every culture
Eldrad says (11:38 PM):
 There is no such thing as a universal morality
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:38 PM):
 that's not what its saying
 Here's an example provided from the textbook
Eldrad says (11:39 PM):
 I wish I had a morality textbook. All I have is...
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:39 PM):
 Kant poses the problem of an individual in a difficult situation who must decide if he will make a promise with the intention of later breaking it. The translation of this moral rule could be "A person may make a false promise when that is the only way to escape a difficult situation."
Eldrad says (11:39 PM):
 Neitzches (oh god) Genealogy, and Plato's Republic
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:40 PM):
 To evaluate this moral rule, we universalize it. What would happen if everybody in extreme circumstances made false promises? If that were the case, nobody would believe promises, and it would be impossible for our individual in distress to make a promise that anyone believed. The moral rule self-destructs when we try to make it a universal law. Therefore, it is wrong for a person in distress to make a promise with the intention of breaking it.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:42 PM):
 Kant is saying that simply willing that our moral rule become a universal law produces a logical contradiction.
Kori says (11:42 PM):
 I see
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:43 PM):
 I'm having trouble relating this to drug use, though
Kori says (11:44 PM):
 I'm having trouble thinking up something that could make this okay in a 'situational, use your own judgment' kind of way
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:44 PM):
 but then again, there's nothing that says one has to subscribe to this particular formulation of morality, anyway
Kori says (11:44 PM):
 no, of course not
Kori says (11:45 PM):
 I still adhere to the idea that this is okay in circumstances where you've thought of the consequences of keeping or breaking the promise
 And can use your own judgment properly
Eldrad says (11:45 PM):
 Breaking a promise is never morally acceptable because that devalues your word
Kori says (11:46 PM):
 But then how can I see any promise as true when I have to trust other people's judgment
Eldrad says (11:46 PM):
 If you lie, and are caught in the lie, it becomes harder to tell the truth
Kori says (11:46 PM):
 On something that's subjective
Eldrad says (11:46 PM):
 Because you have lied in the past.
Kori says (11:46 PM):
 That's true
 Telling the truth is much harder than lying
 But you save yourself a lot of trouble farther on
Kori says (11:47 PM):
 this, i speak from experience
Barre says (11:47 PM):
 what the hell are you talking about?
Kori says (11:48 PM):
 we're discussing morality
Barre says (11:48 PM):
 telling the truth doesn't become any harder
Kori says (11:48 PM):
 What
Kori says (11:49 PM):
 Yes it does
Eldrad says (11:49 PM):
 >telling the truth doesnt become harder
 how in the heck can you figure
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:50 PM):
 okay here's a nugget to chew
 this goes back to
 Eldrad Gulcasa says (2:25 AM)
It's so arbitrary and wavers with culture.
Kori says (11:51 PM):
 err
 more like situational?
 in terms of telling the truth and whether it becomes harder
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:52 PM):
 You are riding in a car driven by a close friend. He hits a pedestrian. You know he was going at least 25 miles per hour in an area of the city where the maximum allowed speed is 20 miles per hour. There are no witnesses other than you. His lawyer says that if you testify under oath that he was driving only 20 miles per hour, you will save him from serious consequences.
 What right has your friend to expect you to protect him?

Kori says (11:52 PM):
 He really doesn't have a right
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:52 PM):
 1. My friend has a definite right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower speed.
 2. He has some right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower speed.
 3. He has no right as a friend to expect me to testify to the lower speed.
Kori says (11:53 PM):
 as equals, he doesn't have a right to expect things from me
 but mutual respect etc etc
Eldrad says (11:53 PM):
 Wait, so he hits the pedestrian and keeps going?
Kori says (11:54 PM):
 I assume since he's in court he didn't just drive away
 I don't think I'd have friends that hit people and drive away
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:54 PM):
 About 90 percent of Norwegians would not testify to the lower speed and do not believe that the person's friend has a definite right to expect help. In contrast, only about 10 percent of Yugoslavians feel the same way. About three-quarters of Americans and Canadians agree witht he dominant Norwegian view, but Mexicans are fairly evenly divided.
 This is all taken verbatim from my textbook
Kori says (11:55 PM):
 norway is in scandinavia
 scandinavia is cool
Eldrad says (11:55 PM):
 He has some right to expect it, but he doesn't have the rigorous system of morality I does. I would never lie.
Kori says (11:56 PM):
 unless he's done something like this for me in the past
 I don't think I could lie for him
 because I would never expect him to do the same for me
Eldrad says (11:57 PM):
 whats that quote for meditations
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:57 PM):
 huh
Kori says (11:57 PM):
 quote for meditations?
Eldrad says (11:57 PM):
 from meditations
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:57 PM):
 i dunno
Kori says (11:58 PM):
 if that's a book, I've never read it
Eldrad says (11:58 PM):
 When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: The people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly.
Kori says (11:58 PM):
 but then don't i become like them
Eldrad says (11:58 PM):
 I would never expect anyone to be as good as me.
Kori says (11:59 PM):
 Well, I mean, like I said, if I'd done something like this for him before, I'd expect him to do it for me, and vice versa
 though I probably wouldn't be the first to do it for him
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (11:59 PM):
 okay here comes another scenario
 gonna take a second to type up
Eldrad says (11:59 PM):
 no fuck that
 instead consider this
 A cucumber is bitter. Throw it away. There are briars in the road. Turn aside from them. This is enough. Do not add, "And why were such things made in the world?"
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:00 AM):
 that's interesting
Kori says (12:00 AM):
 that's deep
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:00 AM):
 where is that from
Eldrad says (12:00 AM):
 the philosopher king's works
Kori says (12:00 AM):
 actually deep
Eldrad says (12:01 AM):
 Meditations by Marcus Aurelius
 its what made me decide to be a stoic
Kori says (12:01 AM):
 i'll have to read this
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:01 AM):
 well I disagree with it
 because I believe in the importance of knowledge
 so I would attempt to seek out the answer to that question posed at the end
Eldrad says (12:02 AM):
 I believe in the importance of knowledge, too, but Aurelius speaks not of ignorance but of simplicity.
 You don't need to know that briars hurt to touch because they have thorns.
 All you need to know is briars hurt to touch.
Kori says (12:02 AM):
 but curiosity is what drives us
 without curiosity
Kori says (12:03 AM):
 we are nothing
 nothing
 we're empty shells frozen at a certain point in time, repeating the same godawful things over and over again
Barre says (12:03 AM):
 neat
Eldrad says (12:03 AM):
 Do you really want to keep burning your hand over and over and over until you finally understand why stoves are hot?
Kori says (12:03 AM):
 i know the stove is hot
Eldrad says (12:04 AM):
 Then why keep touching it?
Kori says (12:04 AM):
 now i want to understand why the stove is hot
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:04 AM):
 understanding why the stove is hot does not require you to touch it
Kori says (12:04 AM):
 I don't need to touch it
Barre says (12:04 AM):
 mantpun
Eldrad says (12:04 AM):
 The briars are symbolic of evil, of course. You can't truly understand why evil is evil.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:04 AM):
 It seems a bit ignorant to me
Kori says (12:04 AM):
 but we can try
Kori says (12:05 AM):
 and we can form opinions
 and gather knowledge
Eldrad says (12:05 AM):
 You're trying to seek out knowledge beyond you, so to speak.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:05 AM):
 The knowledge that briars hurt to touch because they have thorns is more useful than the knowledge that briars hurt to touch
 because when you experience something new with thorns, you already know that it hurts to touch
Disambi says (12:05 AM):
 Just because we don't know now, doesn't mean it's impossible to know.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:05 AM):
 without having to touch it again
Eldrad says (12:05 AM):
 Aurelius encourages humbleness, humility, simplicity. You don't need to know why something is wrong to know it is wrong, and you don't need to know why to not do wrong.
Disambi says (12:05 AM):
 It's only impossible if you stop trying to.
Kori says (12:05 AM):
 ^
Kori says (12:06 AM):
 Was thinking of a way to say that
 as i said earlier, curiosity drives us
Kori says (12:07 AM):
 without curiosity and a will to know who, what, when, why, how
 we're shells
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:07 AM):
 But if I don't know why I shouldn't do wrong, then why should I avoid doing wrong?
 If I have no reason to avoid doing something, why avoid doing it?
Kori says (12:07 AM):
 we've developed enough intelligence that 'this is wrong' and 'this hurts' aren't sufficient
Eldrad says (12:08 AM):
 You would, ideally, not want to do wrong because you would get pricked by a briar, understand that it hurts, and would not want to prick someone else, so to speak
Kori says (12:08 AM):
 That's different from what we were talking about
 huh
Eldrad says (12:09 AM):
 i was responding to sanders
Kori says (12:09 AM):
 That's more like empathy
 oh
 ye
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:09 AM):
 meh
 i'm not content with that philosophy
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:10 AM):
 it really does seem to be promoting ignorance to me
Eldrad says (12:10 AM):
 The context of Meditations is that Aurelius wrote them over the course of several military campaigns. He wasn't very educated, he was a simple man.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:10 AM):
 and is all about consequences of actions
Kori says (12:10 AM):
 that's why i don't like it either
Disambi says (12:10 AM):
 I'd have to agree with Sanders.
Eldrad says (12:10 AM):
 He's not promoting ignorance, he's promoting simplicity.
Kori says (12:10 AM):
 In the context of when he was and where he was
 It was great
 But at this point in time
 I understand where you're coming from, mant
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:10 AM):
 "If an action has a negative consequence, do not repeat the action" is what I'm reading from this
Eldrad says (12:10 AM):
 Because the life you live is anything but simple
Eldrad says (12:11 AM):
 You and your cities are so complicated
Disambi says (12:12 AM):
 Are you really going to suggest that society and  the general lifestyle of people hasn't changed in the time since his book?
Eldrad says (12:12 AM):
 No, it has, definitely.
 I'm saying I don't think it's for the better.
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:12 AM):
 okay well this has been fun
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:13 AM):
 i have to sleep
Disambi says (12:13 AM):
 Night.
Eldrad says (12:13 AM):
 good night
Kori says (12:13 AM):
 Night, Sanders
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:13 AM):
 i'm going to type up another scenario from my book and then depart
Kori says (12:13 AM):
 Was a good chat
 I think that we've degenerated in some ways and improved in some
Barre says (12:13 AM):
 silly sanders
 druggies never sleep
Disambi says (12:13 AM):
 I will definately agree that not every change has been better, but we've improved as well.
Kori says (12:13 AM):
 And mant, it was simpler back then and perhaps more people had the kind of simple thought that guy had
Kori says (12:14 AM):
 But even then, they had the same assholes we have today
 the same immoral people
 maybe it was just easier to hide it back then
Eldrad says (12:14 AM):
 Have you ever been to Pompeii, Kori? Or at least, seen pictures of it.
Kori says (12:14 AM):
 I've seen pictures
Disambi says (12:14 AM):
 But that didn't come without questing the world, evil, and pretty much everything.
Kori says (12:14 AM):
 Bread still in the oven, bodies preserved with how they were lying
Eldrad says (12:14 AM):
 There's still ancient latin graffiti on the walls in the streets.
Disambi says (12:15 AM):
 If there's paradise beyond the briar patch, it way be worth the cuts.
Eldrad says (12:15 AM):
 Saying so-and-so had and affair with whomever.
Disambi says (12:15 AM):
 may be*
Disambi says (12:16 AM):
 without questioning*
 Fuck I'm tired.
Kori says (12:16 AM):
 curiosity, man
 it drives us and makes us who we are
Disambi says (12:16 AM):
 Exactly.
Kori says (12:17 AM):
 without curiosity, we are nothing
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:17 AM):
 Alexis, a gifted high school student, wants to become a doctor. Because she comes from a poor family, she will need a scholarship in order to attend college. Some of her classes require students to do extra research projects in order to get an A. Her high school has a few older PCs, but there are always long lines of students waiting to use them during the school day. After school, she usually works at a part-time job to help support her family.
                  One evening Alexis visits the library of a private college a few miles from her family's apartment, and she finds plenty of unused PCs connected to the internet. She surreptitiously looks over the shoulder of another student to learn a valid login/password combination. Alexis returns to the library several times a week, and by using its PCs and printers she efficiently completes the extra research projects, graduates from high school with straight A's, and gets a full-ride scholarship to attend a prestigious university.

Did Alexis do anything wrong?
Who benefited from Alexis's course of action?
 Who was hurt by Alexis's course of action?
Did Alexis have an unfair advantage over her high school classmates?
Would any of your answers change if it turns out Alexis did not win a college scholarship after all and is now working at the Burger Barn?
Are there better ways Alexis could have accomplished her objective?

  Stroll has been added to the conversation.

Kori says (12:19 AM):
 there's nothing in the rules saying that students from other schools aren't allowed to use their library, is there?
Disambi says (12:19 AM):
 Other than the stealing the username/password part, I see nothing wrong with it.
Kori says (12:19 AM):
 If she fails, no one benefits or loses
Eldrad says (12:19 AM):
 It's a "victimless crime".
Kori says (12:19 AM):
 If she succeeds, everyone benefits
Kori says (12:20 AM):
 yeah, mant
Disambi says (12:20 AM):
 Pretty much, yeah.
Kori says (12:20 AM):
 In terms of having an unfair advantage, she was disadvantaged at the start
 She could have gone to a public library, or asked a friend
 Even used encyclopedias, though it would have been much more work for her to use offline sources
Eldrad says (12:21 AM):
 Besides, I could never admonish her because... I sort of have the same habit.
Kori says (12:21 AM):
 and those offline sources could easily be outdated
 there could be new information on the subject
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:21 AM):
 Really>
 manticus I'm surprised that you don't find that to be immoral
Eldrad says (12:21 AM):
 When I take tests, I glance at other people's papers. I'm not even trying to cheat, I just... want to gauge how far people are along the test.
Kori says (12:22 AM):
 i try not to do that but i always want to see how far people are
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:22 AM):
 I thought for sure you would say she was immoral for stealing the login information of someone else
Kori says (12:22 AM):
 i always do
 ;_;
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:22 AM):
 and therefore is undeserving of the rewards
Kori says (12:22 AM):
 well, it's not like she makes it unable for the 'victim' to do anything
Eldrad says (12:22 AM):
 Well, it would be immoral if the person she took the information from was suffering because of it
Kori says (12:22 AM):
 ^
Eldrad says (12:22 AM):
 ie. he couldnt log in
 Then there would be a problem.
Eldrad says (12:23 AM):
 At the end of the day, the only group suffering is the library that's missing out on one whole customer.
Kori says (12:23 AM):
 wait
 mant
 that means that this is like piracy
 hehe
 You could compare this to piracy
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:23 AM):
 actually its funny you bring that up
Disambi says (12:23 AM):
 It said it had many open PCs.
Kori says (12:23 AM):
 oh
Kori says (12:24 AM):
 welp
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:24 AM):
 this textbook is from a class on Ethics for the Information Age
 its all about Piracy and System Security
Eldrad says (12:24 AM):
 >Ethics for the Information Age
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:24 AM):
 etc
Eldrad says (12:24 AM):
 Oh, 1995...
Kori says (12:24 AM):
 Disambi, it was a private college where I assume all the computers needed a login
 So if she was actually needing to pay for the college to use the computer
 Then this is comparable to piracy
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:24 AM):
 nah the book is pretty new
Eldrad says (12:25 AM):
 "Information Age" is such an antiquated term
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:25 AM):
 because it talks about the RIAA suing the pants off everybody
Eldrad says (12:25 AM):
 i prefer to call it
 the Globalization Era
Disambi says (12:25 AM):
 Well they didn't lose a customer, just had someone using their bandwith and ink cartidges.
Kori says (12:25 AM):
 I think that globalization is barely, barely starting
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:26 AM):
 okay
 i'm going to type up another, more complicated scenario
 THEN sleep
Eldrad says (12:26 AM):
 no
 no
 no
 i cant
 its 3:26 am
Kori says (12:26 AM):
 Well, Disambi, then pirating a game or music is not a lost sale
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:26 AM):
 too late im doing it
Disambi says (12:26 AM):
 It's not, it's copyright infridgement.
Kori says (12:26 AM):
 touche
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:26 AM):
 this scenario is about privacy
Kori says (12:28 AM):
 last one?
 maybe we can continue tomorrow
Stroll says (12:29 AM):
 i just re-read and i find this hilarious
Kori says (12:29 AM):
 strolll
 no mant-hating allowed
Stroll says (12:29 AM):
 hi
 i said hilarious
Kori says (12:29 AM):
 ye
 i'm glad that we managed to have such a great discussion
 and there was zero hating
Barre says (12:29 AM):
 Why are you guys still up?
 It's almost 4am
Stroll says (12:29 AM):
 its morning here
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:29 AM):
 In an attempt to deter speeders, the East Dakota State Police (EDSP) installs video cameras on all of its freeway overpasses. The cameras are connected to computers that can reliably detect cars traveling more than five miles per hour above the speed limit. These computers have sophisticated image recognition software that enables them to read license plate numbers and capture high-resolution pictures of vehicle drivers. If the picture of the driver matches the driver's license photo of one of the registered owners of the car, the system issues a speeding ticket to the driver, complete with photo evidence. Six months after the system is put into operation, the number of people speeding on East Dakota freeways is reduced by 90 percent.
       The FBI asks the EDSP for real-time access to the information collected by the video cameras. The EDSP complies with this request. Three months later, the FBI uses this information to arrest five members of a terrorist organization.

1. Did the East Dakota State Police do anything wrong?
2. Who benefited from the actions of the EDSP?
Stroll says (12:29 AM):
 8:30
Barre says (12:29 AM):
 not you stroll
Barre says (12:30 AM):
 I meant the amurcans
Eldrad says (12:30 AM):
 I want to note how Ralph said nothing because he could not contribute without feeling stupid
Barre says (12:30 AM):
 That hurts
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:30 AM):
 3. Who was harmed by the actions of the EDSP?
4. What other courses of action could the EDSP have taken to achieve its objectives? Examine the advantages and disadvantaged of these alternative courses of action.
Stroll says (12:30 AM):
 or maybe mant
 its 4am where he is
Kori says (12:30 AM):
 I wouldn't say it's wrong
Barre says (12:30 AM):
 it ain't
Stroll says (12:30 AM):
 wait no
Barre says (12:30 AM):
 it's 4am in america
 well
 almost
Stroll says (12:30 AM):
 no it isnt
Barre says (12:30 AM):
 3:30
Stroll says (12:30 AM):
 its like 2;30
Barre says (12:31 AM):
 according to mant
Disambi says (12:31 AM):
 It's 3:30 for the East Coast.
Barre says (12:31 AM):
 it's 3:30 where it matters
Stroll says (12:31 AM):
 00:30 -> 3:30
Kori says (12:31 AM):
 nobody but people breaking the law and disrupting order are being harmed
Eldrad says (12:31 AM):
 Don't they already do that in Britain?
Kori says (12:31 AM):
 everybody benefits except people who are breaking the law
Disambi says (12:31 AM):
 >2012
>Living in Mountain Time.
Kori says (12:31 AM):
 which you should be prepared for the consequences anyways
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:31 AM):
 But its an invasion of privacy.
Disambi says (12:31 AM):
 I think they do it some place in the U.S. already too.
 Is it?
Kori says (12:31 AM):
 The FBI, I'm sure, already has pictures of our faces
Disambi says (12:32 AM):
 How is you driving a car private?
Kori says (12:32 AM):
 If I drive on the other side of the road
Stroll says (12:32 AM):
 oh also
Kori says (12:32 AM):
 And look in through the windshield
 That's not an invasion of privacy
 If I come in and search or look through the trunk of your car
 that's an invasion of privacy
Stroll says (12:32 AM):
 disambi, above you said infridgement which i was going to make a >fridge ihope joke
 But it's infringement
 :3
Barre says (12:33 AM):
 ahh
Disambi says (12:33 AM):
 Oh, thanks. I didn't even notice.
Barre says (12:33 AM):
 time to eat
Kori says (12:33 AM):
 I don't see any other methods to be that efficient with catching law breakers and people on the run
Disambi says (12:33 AM):
 I really need to get some proper sleep.
Kori says (12:34 AM):
 perhaps if the FBI were looking for someone, they could give an estimated time and receive footage from that time?
 though it'd be less efficient
Disambi says (12:34 AM):
 Exactly, it uses no info that a law enforcement agency doesn't already know. (i.e. Plate numbers and driver's licenses.)
doughnutguy@gmail.com (E-mail address not verified) says (12:35 AM):
 Yes it does
 It uses information such as "where was X person at Y time"
Eldrad says (12:35 AM):
 Watching someone drink coffee at a cafe is not an invasion of privacy. Watching someone drink coffee at a cafe if you have followed them there, and knew they'd drink there, is
Disambi says (12:35 AM):
 On a public, likely highly used intersection.
Kori says (12:35 AM):
 well, that's not an invasion of privacy unless it's in a private place
Kori says (12:36 AM):
 Mant, that's not really an invasion of privacy
 I wouldn't call it one
 Because there is no privacy there to begin with
Eldrad says (12:36 AM):
 im tired
Kori says (12:36 AM):
 it's creepy
Disambi says (12:36 AM):
 Well, it's more like light stalking in Mant's version.
Eldrad says (12:36 AM):
 this isnt working for me
Kori says (12:36 AM):
 but not an invasion of privacy
 alright, mant
 let's end here
Disambi says (12:36 AM):
 Which would be more harrasment.
Kori says (12:36 AM):
 maybe we can pick up some later time
Disambi says (12:37 AM):
 Yes, this was enjoyable.
Kori says (12:37 AM):
 I've seen Disambi slip like, three times.
 hehe
 It was very enjoyable
Eldrad says (12:37 AM):
 Good night.
Kori says (12:37 AM):
 Glad to have spoken with you all, I learned
Disambi says (12:37 AM):
 Night.
Kori says (12:37 AM):
 Good night