We need to stop indulging the fiction that all people have equal moral worth. This particular mental illness has caused a lot of problems, and will cause a lot more until it is addressed.
>>536696353You're gonna rot
>reee we need to abort the white kidsFacts don't care about your feelings
>>536696353too much to readhere is my takeall humans are repetative 1 core1 head2 legs 2 armsit gets boring real quickvitiligo and other skin phenomenons dividing people into races is refreshingbut repetativeness of the human accounts for most of what the human represents now whether all humans have equal opportunity, nosex havers have more opportunity due to natural employer skeptocism towards virgin malesoverall let it be bloodshed
Mental sickness!
>>536696353What is even more absurd is there is people who have kids and then the wife hassles her husband in how they should adopt and pick a parentless downy. I know a family through a friend and the few times over gone over there its like the 10 year old downy kid is the mom's full time job and a part time job for everyone else who is in the house at the time. Apparently the father lied about having a second job for a year and he was just not coming home after work.
>>536696353>Words words words>Appeal to natureBoring
>>536696353Tards should be aborted but so should every nog and beaner because they are also doomed to be useless leeches. Sorry/not sorry
The morality of a given abortion depends on the color of the baby
>>536696353It's funny because a person with a paid for fake name twatter account is certainly a retard
>>536696353> We need to stop indulging the fiction that all people have equal moral worth.That's literally Jewish ideology.
>>536697996Not according to Jeff Epstein.See EFTA01827555 for a blatant declaration of female supremacy.Makes me wonder if you're just ignorant or intentionally lying.
>>536697996It's reality. The way this reality is managed is policy. But pretending otherwise is dumb and leads to destructive policies with no basis in reality at all.
>>536697755DefinitelyDo you ever feel these "debates" are just part of the bread and circuses? When I look ar an issue like abortion my response is really just "I don't know."Always being primed for a take doesn't reflect intelligence don't you reckon
>>536698640> pretending otherwise is dumb and leads to destructive policies with no basis in reality at all.The problem is that you can't tell the future. Making judgements now about future developments is too tricky and should be limited to few exceptions. This is even more the case with moral judgements.
I get a kick out of this shit because these people are genetic midwits and don’t even realize it. There ZERO logically sound basis for ascribing either moral value or objective value of any kind with this biology-based worldview. This MIDWIT doesn’t realize that because he is a midwit. He literally does not understand logic 101, deductive reasoning, anything that he would need to understand to analyze presuppositions or appeals to this or that claim. Simply put, “GoySuperstar” is a retard who according to his own system should be put down.
>>536698640I think the general idea is that all baseline humans have an intrinsic value by virtue of being alive and conscious and having bonds but then you deduct points for doing a poo in the street, raping and beheading etcI don't like the impersonal way in which human value has been denigrated in our culture
>>536698803“Value” in this conversation is a completely undefined, vague, nebulous concept that refers at best to something abstract which is never clarified. It’s a ridiculous conversation to have as long as that remains the case.
>>536698764Sure there is. I wouldn't see that was a logical problem, or at least nothing beyond the inherent logical problems with the expression of any sort of preference at all, ever.The basis is that morals and moral values end up shaping society, and if you prefer that society be shaped a certain way (such as not being anti-white, for example), then a moral system which incorporates those goals will be justified through its operation. It is moral because it works in terms of one's stated goals.
>>536698911Maybe, but I think I'm right in noticing that we live in an increasingly impersonal, user pays kind of world where increasingly just being an average person of average means feels like something you have to justify. Clearly that suits several agendas.I'd go futher and say the value is the integrity of the life itself, and access to opportunities to preserve and improve that life.Obviously if you are a stabby cunt, it's forfeit
>>536699052A moral system of 'everyone has inherent worth' naturally leads to open borders and the increasing allotment of resources to the management and growth of the lowest end of the populace. This corrodes and destroys anything resembling an advanced European society over time. The purpose of these kinds of moral standards is partly to de-instrumentalize "people" as a single portable unit. One basic problem with the current moral order is that there is no way to maintain any sort of racial outsider/insider status, which leads to absurd situations such as racial outsiders leading the political apparatuses of white goy nations.A better moral system would forbid this.
>>536698958No, there’s objectively not. In a biology-based worldview all truth is rendered subject to simple assertion. There is no morally right or wrong. There’s simply what’s possible. This retard is arguing in favor for a particular moral code not realizing it’s already been refuted by popular will and will of people biologically superior to him. That’s what makes it so ironic.
>>536699270Let us know when you aŕrive at one
>>536696353did you screencap your own reddit post and bring it here?
>>536699052All ideology and argument today is just post-hoc rhetoric tricks to justify what the individual making the argument or pushing the ideology already decided they want through a mechanism the individual couldn’t even explain to you. When this midwit in the OP argues for a moral code that devalues human life on the basis of biological ranking, it’s because he decided a priori that he is higher up on the ranking and assumes that will go untested, which it will but only because the people whom would test it have gracefully attributed value to life even as worthless as his. In other words, the people with the biological power to assert their ideas over others have gracefully allowed this midwit to pretend his ideas matter, when in reality they don’t, and he is only pushing them for selfish reasons and no other reasons at all (nothing to do with truthfulness)>>536699270Blatant non-sequitur you buffoon. This pattern of thinking drawing out some kind of necessary consequence from some historical occurrence or matter of fact status quo simply because both happened is THE biggest problem in contemporary “philosophy”. It’s a blatant non-sequitur and you midwits are just uneducated to realize that.
>>536699363That's not a real issue. There is no 'morally right or wrong' under any system if the standard is that 'morals' manifest as some kind of tangible object. Religion can't do that. Secular systems can't do that. It's irrelevant. This is also clearly not an appeal to Darwinism, either. Following the 'natural' or default course of evolution can obviously lead to undesirable outcomes like extinction. The point here is that moral classifications have consequences in terms of how society develops. Your moral system should be consistent with the outcomes which you find desirable. And there is actually a big disjunction here between what many white Christians would admit they desire if they are being honest, and the actual consequences of the morals they claim to support. If you ask many of them if they'd prefer a strong, white-run society, they'd say yes. But equality nonsense leads us further away from that goal over time.How they reconcile pro-eugenic morality with their religion is up to them, but I encourage them to do so.
>>536699562Some elements of such a system are obvious. For example, dropping nonsense about 'equality.' That's the point here.
>>536696353Luckily he will never have a chance to give birth to a retard. Too bad his parents didnt take his own advice and kill him as a baby. What a fucking windbag waste of space. Making retarded kids happy is easy. And some people enjoy it. Who are you to say they cant live a life they enjoy?
>>536696506The White race doesn't need defective retards dragging us down. We'll do just fine without them.
>>536699738I never mentioned equalityJust the intrinsic value and potential of life itself
>>536696642Bone chilling! How dare they spare someone being a fucking disabled tard.
Everyone who says open borders and refugees welcome deserves a migrant delivered to their apartment.Anyone who says abortion is morally wrong, even for sick fetuses deserves a down syndrome kid delivered to their apartment to raise.
>>536699838Its all fun and games until they count autists as retards and gas everyone posting on /pol/
>>536699852The existence of potential works both ways. The tard abortion debate is, to a large extent, about eliminating a huge amount of downside potential against the lives of the parents of the tards. Something I support. Furthermore, values (intrinsic or not) can have negative worth, as in the case of violent destructive criminals. I have no moral objecting to culling such people, nor should anyone else.
Egalitarianism is the great lie and christcucks are its source.
>>536696353yeah the fiction that You, Specifically are better because Very Scientific Reasons is so much better
My problem is they weren't even given a chance. I'm more a proponent of natural selection than eugenics, because it's objective and unbiased. But that requires that people are given an opportunity to prove that they're not genetic detritus. If the child grows up to be defective and ends up dying, so be it, but I think he should've at least been given a chance to prove himself.
>>536699684What are you even talking about? I’m not asserting it’s “an issue”. I’m asserting it’s idiotic. I’m also not asserting it’s “a tangible object”. I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean. I think you’ve completely failed to parse what I’m suggesting. To be clear, I’m suggesting that per the OP’s very own moral system, HIS LIFE is devalued, and he is too dumb to understand. But more importantly, his moral system is based on unjustified assertions or logical contradictions. Ergo, it doesn’t actually even make sense. And the reason for that is because a worldview rooted in biological fact, reduces every claim to this or that truth to the assertion of brute facts. That means if I come along and my biology is bigger and stronger than OP I just kill him and his opinion means jack fuck all. Do you get that?
>>536700319Let's put it in more concrete terms - what moral equivalence does a functional, capable white man have with a typical hood negro with a bunch of arrests and a typical chaotic hood negro life? >Well, they both have inherent moral worth because-Bullshit. We all know intuitively that this is a whole lot of nonsense. If you are white, imagine accepting a moral system which places hood negroes on the same moral plane as yourself, your relatives, etc. Imagine the policy effects of this moral system including those hood negroes being able to vote and serve on juries and so on.You can easily see the problems.
>>536696353OP my rough estimate is that at least 20-23% of society are retarded and or full blown dark triad. Stupid and bad opinions are going to happen no mater how smart or right you hopefully are. What's the running estimate at? Something like 50% of people don't have inner monologs.
>>536700606It’s a retarded question. Morals have nothing to do with biology-based value judgements that are inherently subjective at best. How people don’t get this boggles my mind, but everyone is a fucking midwit pseud now apparently.
> moral worth Is an oxymoron by the way. An act is either moral or it’s not. A moral is either justified or it’s not. Scale value judgements don’t come into play at all. “Moral worth” is gobbledegook libshit speak and this thread shows like progressive leftism wins everytime. You think you’re disputing them when you’re actually speaking their language and adopting their presuppositions wholesale.
>>536700602This isn't a Darwinist/evolutionary argument. The claim is not something like 'might makes right.' It's trivially true that weakness can lead to outcomes such as extinction, but we know that already. Those are simply aspects of physical reality.The claim is that a moral system unmoored from biological realities will tend to drift into madness, as we see today. Biology has led to things such as racial difference, which cannot simply be wished away (in terms of practical effects) by a moral system.Morals affect social behavior, which leads to specific concrete implementations in law and policy. A bad moral system with planks like 'equality of man' takes the character of a mental virus which actively cripples and harms groups such as white men. We should reject such moral systems and replace them with systems that accord more honestly to biological realities, and which service our interests.
people who post twatter screenshots on 4chud should be aborted
>>536700800'Moral worth' is an ongoing expression of reality. When different groups enact different behaviors, we can categorize those behaviors in terms of desirability, with those we find more desirable being 'good'/superior, and those which we find undesirable to be 'bad'/inferior.This is a perfectly coherent way to evaluate moral 'worth.'
>>536700902It doesn’t matter if it’s specifically Darwinist. His claim is ultimately appealing to so-called biological fact. The criticism stands regardless. He is in fact not arguing about a moral system “unmoored” but rather arguing for a moral system BASED ON so-called biological fact. These are very diffident things. We have to differentiate between moral imperatives that merely consider nature and one based in theory on nature. This renders the moral code unjustified subjective BS either way, Darwinist, naturalist, whatever. If you base your morals on an appeal to nature your morals are refuted by default. Period. >>536701065More shitlib gobbledegook. Words don’t get to mean whatever you want them to mean. “Moral worth” literally refers to a value judgement of morals. Here’s the only value judgement that makes sense: are these morals justified and are these actions moral? That’s it. When we speak about morals we speak about imperatives that have good reasons or not. That’s where the value judgement starts and ends. The rest of your reply is pseud spew. There is non spectrum or subjective basis by which we can evaluate morals and make a value judgement that makes any sense at all. It’s like saying “truth value”. It’s either truthful, or it’s not. There is no spectrum subjective value judgement in play here.
>>536696353>guy with no bitches talking about the natural order again
