Essential The Locker Room's Random Thoughts
- Thread starter patscorpio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- life
Tenchi Ryu
Ashtray B!tch
blockburna420
Consecutive thumbs up
_genocidecutter_
All Star
I find it funny that commie's hate Christopher Columbus for being a mass murderer but idolize Mao Zedong.
WhatsGoodTy
Ya feel me
Ughhhh these old people some days man. nikka on the toilet but shyt on the trash can and wall
PharaohAtem
King Of Egypt.
What happened to the coli coin
Women know they ugly so all they dating profile pics is with a group of actual attractive women
As if u gone trick a nikka into thinking u cute by affiliation
Bih a Honda parked next to 3 Ferraris don't suddenly make people see it as a Ferrari too
As if u gone trick a nikka into thinking u cute by affiliation
Bih a Honda parked next to 3 Ferraris don't suddenly make people see it as a Ferrari too
fukking finally!
deadline.com
‘Trill League’ Animated Superhero Series From Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson & Lionsgate Lands At BET+ For Development
EXCLUSIVE: In a competitive situation, BET+ has acquired Trill League, an adaptation of Anthony Piper’s webcomic of the same name, for series development. The animated superhero series, writt…
deadline.com
Reflected
Living in fear in the year of the tiger.
People don't mind congregating around a conclusion and forming strong bonds at that point, and that's a major problem. I don't like standing on the same conclusion if those that reached the conclusion did so through shaky means, those same means will only cripple them down the line, even turning them against their original position.
An example of what I'm talking about:
Veganism. I'm a vegan because I can't map out an argument in support of my continued contribution to animal suffering, and I can't discern a reasonable difference between human and non-human species in order to justify their mistreatment for what is essentially my taste pleasure. There are vegans that simply went vegan because they felt bad about the treatment of the animals, their position, whether recognized or not, is based on empathy. Empathy is a shaky basis for anything, we have varying levels of empathy from human to human, and although it pains me to kill an insect, my reasons for not wanting to kill an insect does not rest on my empathy towards them. So when vegans base their position on empathy, they are arguing with non-vegans and trying to create a bond purely on empathic reasons, but if their interlocutor is damn near devoid of empathy, let's say they lack the empathy level required to simply agree with the position on the basis of empathy, they can't be convinced towards veganism and all the emphatic vegan is doing proving arguments that can be explained away by "I don't feel that way", as opposed of catching them on contradictions and forming what is a more concrete basis for supporting veganism.
To think, a vegan formed on empathy, is only points of some kind of quantifiable empathy score from no longer being vegan. So they could take some pills that have an impact on their ability to empathize or have a bad experience with animals or just vegans and then they will forfeit the position and are back to eating meat, it's because their basis was shaky, this could always happen.
========
I bring all of this up because when it comes to politics, my political opinions are informed by my opinions on ethics and morality. So if an illegal Mexican harms my family, you won't see me outside saying fukk illegals and I'm voting Republican to get them out of here from now on, because my basis for supporting undocumented immigrants isn't based on my feelings towards the undocumented people, or the few personal experiences I have had with them, it's on the basis of how I treat sentient life.
So when in political hiveminds (i know), it's annoying if a conservative makes a position that is valid, and by valid I mean logically valid, and it's something we can simply disagree with but people take towards suggesting that not only is it something we can disagree with, it's also illogical, when it isn't illogical, we run into errors. Because those people are against conservatives because they hate conservatives, I'm against conservatives because, when mapping out arguments, and attempting to stay consistent, conservatives are often wildly inconsistent because their basis is terrible.
But when I have to highlight, "what they said was dumb but not illogical", I will be met with people assuming I'm in support of that position no matter what. Those people suggest that purely because, while we share the same conclusion, we did not reach it in a similar manner.
TLDR: We need to start calling out bad arguments, even if what concludes from them is something we would be inclined to agree with. The problems that stem from bad arguments or a shaky basis are much greater than the harm caused from disturbing our ecosystem to simply acknowledge an argument as valid.
An example of what I'm talking about:
Veganism. I'm a vegan because I can't map out an argument in support of my continued contribution to animal suffering, and I can't discern a reasonable difference between human and non-human species in order to justify their mistreatment for what is essentially my taste pleasure. There are vegans that simply went vegan because they felt bad about the treatment of the animals, their position, whether recognized or not, is based on empathy. Empathy is a shaky basis for anything, we have varying levels of empathy from human to human, and although it pains me to kill an insect, my reasons for not wanting to kill an insect does not rest on my empathy towards them. So when vegans base their position on empathy, they are arguing with non-vegans and trying to create a bond purely on empathic reasons, but if their interlocutor is damn near devoid of empathy, let's say they lack the empathy level required to simply agree with the position on the basis of empathy, they can't be convinced towards veganism and all the emphatic vegan is doing proving arguments that can be explained away by "I don't feel that way", as opposed of catching them on contradictions and forming what is a more concrete basis for supporting veganism.
To think, a vegan formed on empathy, is only points of some kind of quantifiable empathy score from no longer being vegan. So they could take some pills that have an impact on their ability to empathize or have a bad experience with animals or just vegans and then they will forfeit the position and are back to eating meat, it's because their basis was shaky, this could always happen.
========
I bring all of this up because when it comes to politics, my political opinions are informed by my opinions on ethics and morality. So if an illegal Mexican harms my family, you won't see me outside saying fukk illegals and I'm voting Republican to get them out of here from now on, because my basis for supporting undocumented immigrants isn't based on my feelings towards the undocumented people, or the few personal experiences I have had with them, it's on the basis of how I treat sentient life.
So when in political hiveminds (i know), it's annoying if a conservative makes a position that is valid, and by valid I mean logically valid, and it's something we can simply disagree with but people take towards suggesting that not only is it something we can disagree with, it's also illogical, when it isn't illogical, we run into errors. Because those people are against conservatives because they hate conservatives, I'm against conservatives because, when mapping out arguments, and attempting to stay consistent, conservatives are often wildly inconsistent because their basis is terrible.
But when I have to highlight, "what they said was dumb but not illogical", I will be met with people assuming I'm in support of that position no matter what. Those people suggest that purely because, while we share the same conclusion, we did not reach it in a similar manner.
TLDR: We need to start calling out bad arguments, even if what concludes from them is something we would be inclined to agree with. The problems that stem from bad arguments or a shaky basis are much greater than the harm caused from disturbing our ecosystem to simply acknowledge an argument as valid.
Mafukkas so gay on here
See a shirtless celeb
Run on here to make a thread
See a shirtless celeb
Run on here to make a thread
= my reaction all day