Debate user @PoweraHuskCryonon the subtle differences between a femboi and a troon

[Lightsaber Dildo]

Hold up there's a "Retard of the Month" award? If there's some shit to be won, I want it, I don't give a fuck what it is.

 

[SentinentCloud]

Hold up there's a "Retard of the Month" award? If there's some shit to be won, I want it, I don't give a fuck what it is.

all you ahve to do is to tape a video showing your face as you gobble up some cum chalice

the award is the respect of the Farms ♥

 

[Illuminati Order Official]

Humans have the capacity to generate higher tiers of evolution such as society and ideology, which makes us inherently more valuable than animals that do not possess that capacity. Societies and ideologies act to preserve themselves and impose a moral structure to that end; what's moral is what's useful to that end.

This is, once again, utilitarianism.
Society is good because it allows us to prosper and thrive - and that's utilitarian perspective.
Ideologies, at least for me, don't have inherit moral value, some are good, some are bad, all are fun to discuss.
Personally I'm leaning towards utilitarianism (usefulness is good) and moral relativism (moral value of an action is determined by context in which this action is taken).

And if you disagree with that system of morality, congrats, you're antisocial.

It means someone is asocial. Antisocial means actively acting to jeopardize society. Not taking it into account is asocial.

 

[grimacefetishist]

Trans rights theory is carried on the backs of those opposing the state's power to enforce dress and behavior.

It's not a matter of internal motivations, it's a matter of politics. Being a femboii would get you arrested or murdered in many times and places. You are trans.

 

[JudyTester]

The worst part of all this is that I'm majoring in cybersecurity.

And somewhere, Jackie Singh just felt a wave of relief wash over her that she is now not the only turbo retard who claims that as her field of choice.

I don't think this is going away in a month, "Retard since birth" would be a better username.

Well, it says "Retard of the month". It doesn't specify which month, maybe it's just whichever month you're reading it in? AKA forever.

 

[Kirtto]

Personally I'm leaning towards utilitarianism (usefulness is good) and moral relativism (moral value of an action is determined by context in which this action is taken).

Utilitarianism as applied today in the West is why Western civilization is extremely moribund. Ultimately Utilitarianism only cares about the maximum common good and not about the importance of systems and actions that do not produce good even if it keeps society functioning and efficient. It is the logic behind for the rise of the LGBT movement, Trans movement, open borders/take unlimited refugees, among other socially destructive movements.

Personally I am a deontologist

 

[Retard of the Month]

Well, it says "Retard of the month". It doesn't specify which month, maybe it's just whichever month you're reading it in? AKA forever.

Retard of the month, every month~!

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

Then what is valuable?

Animals weren't created in the image of God

 

[Illuminati Order Official]

Utilitarianism as applied today in the West is why Western civilization is extremely moribund. Ultimately Utilitarianism only cares about the maximum common good and not about the importance of systems and actions that do not produce good even if it keeps society functioning and efficient. It is the logic behind for the rise of the LGBT movement, Trans movement, open borders/take unlimited refugees, among other socially destructive movements.

Neither of those things is utilitarian. Preserving society and making it profitable for members of the society to be as productive as possible while deterring them from being disruptive is utilitarian. Maintaining systems and institutions that work as intended is utilitarian.
What you describe is some corrupted utopia, not utilitarianism.

Animals weren't created in the image of God

I'm not religious so this doesn't mean anything to me.

 

[Kirtto]

Neither of those things is utilitarian. Preserving society and making it profitable for members of the society to be as productive as possible while deterring them from being disruptive is utilitarian. Maintaining systems and institutions that work as intended is utilitarian.

Well so long as they produce the highest good/utility possible to the most people possible. Utilitarianism is a hedonistic philosophy which is why the happiness of the individuals outweighs the good of the state. This is what differentiates Utilitarianism from Mohist philosophy:

Unlike utilitarianism, which views utility as the sole moral good, "the basic goods in Mohist consequentialist thinking are...order, material wealth, and increase in population." During the time of Mozi, war and famine were common, and population growth was seen as a moral necessity for a harmonious society. The "material wealth" of Mohist consequentialism refers to basic needs, like shelter and clothing; and "order" refers to Mozi's stance against warfare and violence, which he viewed as pointless and a threat to social stability.

The Mohists believed that morality is based on "promoting the benefit of all under heaven and eliminating harm to all under heaven." In contrast to Jeremy Bentham's views, state consequentialism is not utilitarian because it is not hedonistic or individualistic. The importance of outcomes that are good for the community outweigh the importance of individual pleasure and pain. The term state consequentialism has also been applied to the political philosophy of the Confucian philosopher Xunzi. On the other hand, "legalist" Han Fei "is motivated almost totally from the ruler's point of view."

 

[Illuminati Order Official]

Well as long as they produce the highest good/utility possible. Utilitarianism is a hedonistic philosophy which is why the happiness of the individuals outweighs the good of the state. This is what differentiates Utilitarianism rom Mohist philosophy:

Maintaining the state and participating in society should be the logical consequence of benefits it offers to an individual. The principle of "promoting the benefit of all under heaven and eliminating harm to all under heaven" is wise and wort pursuing, even if not fully attainable.

 

[Punished Magician]

This guy has learned nothing from this experience, because his response to a horde of people digging for personal information about him was to share what he's going to college for.

 

[dick brain]

This is, once again, utilitarianism.
Society is good because it allows us to prosper and thrive - and that's utilitarian perspective.
Ideologies, at least for me, don't have inherit moral value, some are good, some are bad, all are fun to discuss.
Personally I'm leaning towards utilitarianism (usefulness is good) and moral relativism (moral value of an action is determined by context in which this action is taken).


It means someone is asocial. Antisocial means actively acting to jeopardize society. Not taking it into account is asocial.

Yes I know what utilitarianism is, I'm explaining to you that in the context of Western society utilitarianism and morality are the same thing, because you seem to be under the impression that they're not.

And yes, if your personal moral compass is at odds with the morality prescribed by society, you are antisocial; maybe not in your own eyes, but certainly in the eyes of society.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

Utilitarianism as applied today in the West is why Western civilization is extremely moribund. Ultimately Utilitarianism only cares about the maximum common good and not about the importance of systems and actions that do not produce good even if it keeps society functioning and efficient. It is the logic behind for the rise of the LGBT movement, Trans movement, open borders/take unlimited refugees, among other socially destructive movements.

Personally I am a deontologist

Fun fact: Jeremy Bentham invented the term, "deonology/deontologism."

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

I'm not religious so this doesn't mean anything to me.

It's a simple presupposition built on something objective (canon law and scriptural tradition). Utilitarian ethics, you'll find, is far more subjective (everyone defines usefulness differently).

The goal isn't to change YOUR mind, but to change the mind of the autists reading this.

 

[SanicBlackMagic]

It's a simple presupposition built on something objective (canon law and scriptural tradition). Utilitarian ethics, you'll find, is far more subjective (everyone defines usefulness differently).

The goal isn't to change YOUR mind, but to change the mind of the autists reading this.

Would you two please, PLEASE take your pseudointellectual philosophical sperging to a containment thread so we can continue laughing at the @Retard of the Month unimpeded? Thank you and Jersh bless.

@Retard of the Month is fat and retarded and I would not have sex with him, nor would I allow him to continue to sex his cat or continue to write god awful books. Best of luck in your imminent gravitational collapse, catfucking lardass.

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

Would you two please, PLEASE take your pseudointellectual philosophical sperging to a containment thread so we can continue laughing at the @Retard of the Month unimpeded? Thank you and Jersh bless.

No

You WILL discuss ethics with me and you WILL enjoy it

 

[SanicBlackMagic]

No

View attachment 5829043

You WILL discuss ethics with me and you WILL enjoy it

A nigger who managed one of four gun safety principles? I think you've just found a niggle in a gaystack. *golfclap*

Very well, let us argue the ethics of letting @Retard of the Month molest cats as long as he foregoes sticking his lard covered pecker in anything bearing two X chromosomes.

My contention is as follows: between the two extremes of lardass fucking his cat and lardass fucking his sister, the consequences of him fucking his cat to society are far less dire than the consequence of him impregnating some poor, blind girl and siring lardass 2.0.

 

[John R. Brown M.D.]

What are the deontological boundary considerations and utility calculus of me dropping you literal moralfags into a woodchipper?
On one hand the slaughter would cause negative utility as it would painful and scary.
On the other hand the quality of the thread would improve ten fold, which could be argued would improve the net welbeing of concious beings.


As for the boundaries, you're not people so that's no issue and I've no duty or responsability for you so that's no issue.

 

[SanicBlackMagic]

What are the deontological boundary considerations and utility calculus of me dropping you literal moralfags into a woodchipper?
On one hand the slaughter would cause negative utility as it would painful and scary.
On the other hand the quality of the thread would improve ten fold, which could be argued would improve the net welbeing of concious beings.


As for the boundaries, you're not people so that's no issue and I've no duty or responsability for you so that's no issue.

If we perform an integral on the derivative of the universal constant of catfucking weaboo animay avatars we are faced with an infinite recursion problem. Here we have to delineate the twank constant of the faggs boson field and find its inverse as faggotry approaches ∞. This is highly unusal and tends to create a scrotumdiggers catfucker paradox. The problem has only one solution: Σ[[a^(n*i)/m*a^y]+[D^3/4th]]