>>18420992See, the problem with this image is that rather than make any arguments, it relies on the knee-jerk disgust of the audience, which works right up until the audience no longer shares your values.
>>18420992Philosophers are morons.
>>18420992>philosophy is bad because my abuelitas got el diabetico after trying to read in EnglishYeah okay religitard
Philosophers are midwits. Every. Single. One.
>>18421514i can't tell if you're for or against moral philosophy.but also - >""disgust" , i.e. an emotion of unacceptability in the audience. "there''s a difference between not liking cocks and balls and not liking murder. >"then you'll just change your axioms"yes that is the point of philosophy.
>>18421495Being stupid actually increases your SMV
>>18421778Like I said >>18422060
>>18422042>there''s a difference between not liking cocks and balls and not liking murder.prove it , you dumb bastard.>>"then [as a result of feeling disgust] you'll just change your axioms">yes that is the point of philosophy.So you're admitting that "moral philosophy" relies on disgust.which makes the criticism by >>18421514 of >>18421008's point valid. 18421008 is being a hypocrite.
>>18420992How do we understand morality? From a fucking book? What do you do when two people read the book and have different interpretations?
>>18421514Maybe if you stick to pure philosophy. If you look towards any other field of science morality generally corresponds to physical realities. Not in every case, but in most cases it does. For example, why is cannibalism a moral wrong? Because it might give you a prion disease. It also just so happens to have been considered amoral by most of humanity for millennia prior to this discovery. Woah!
