Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
Post Reply
BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by BrianBlackwell »

Jebus wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 9:13 am
brimstoneSalad wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 2:52 amYou're a moron.
Aren't you being a bit too kind here?
It's generally considered cowardly to voice insults to parties other than those to which the insult is concerned.

Whether you agree with my position or not, are you honestly saying that you believe my intellectual capacity to be inferior to that of a moron? If so, I would ask you to defend your assertion. Make your case. Show me how you feel justified in drawing this conclusion, or admit that you're simply taking a cheap shot because you don't like what I'm saying. Do you actually have anything to say; any support for your insult; any rebuttals to my arguments?
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

BrianBlackwell wrote: Wed Sep 27, 2017 12:30 pm We're done. Anyone who resorts to blatant, adolescent insults reveals himself to be arguing from emotion, rather than intellect. Please don't respond to my posts, you're incapable of understanding them anyway.
I already explained multiple times how violence is declining and gave you a reference to read up on.
Don't be a baby, you've done at least as bad and you have already insulted me more than I you. The point was that I made an argument and debunked your claims, and you continue to assert this nonsense. You can't make an argument, so you're pretending to be offended.

You're also violating forum rules by what appears pretty clearly to be intentionally twisting and conflating words. You apparently can't make an argument so you discredit logic and science instead for your agenda.

You can leave if you want. Literally nobody has the patience to argue with you here given your persistent and stubborn dishonesty and unwillingness to consider empirical facts provided that contradict your claims (you've also refused to provide evidence to support yourself).
teo123
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:46 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by teo123 »

Violence is declining exactly because there is less government power. In the Middle Ages, knights were bossing everyone around, yet you couldn't safely cross a street.
BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by BrianBlackwell »

brimstoneSalad wrote: Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:08 pm You can't make an argument, so you're pretending to be offended..
You're either completely deluded, or full of shit. You side-step my arguments, never hitting them directly on the head, and even accused me of "the fallacy of ambiguity" after I literally defined my terms using dictionary definitions available to everyone. I'm not ending my interaction with you because I'm offended, I'm ending it because you're more interested in winning an argument and pushing an agenda than in seeking the truth.

My personal opinion is that you honestly think your "rebuttals" are pointed and valid, so I'm not saying you're a troll, but I fear that you've ceased reviewing your own thinking and checking your own premises, which makes all discussion a waste of time.
BrianBlackwell
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 9:37 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by BrianBlackwell »

teo123 wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:41 am Violence is declining exactly because there is less government power.
The fundamental idea that violence declines with the reduction of governmental power is sound, and should be quite obvious to everyone (unfortunately, the opposite is true). To say, "We need to grant power to a group of violent thieves and murderers, in order to protect us from violent thieves and murderers" shows a nigh-unto-unfathomable level of cognitive dissonance.

Government must be immoral and violent, in all cases, because the very characteristic that makes it government is an exception from morality, and the enforcement of law via violence. If people would simply ask themselves the question, "Would it be morally justified for me to do the things that government does?" the logical disconnect would become apparent.

Would it be OK to personally insist that your neighbor pay for your children's schooling, under threat of violence? Would it be OK to storm into your neighbor's house, search for a particular substance, and if found, drag him to your basement and throw him in a cage; beating (and even killing) him if he tries to defend himself by resisting? Would it be OK to walk up to someone in the street, ask for a particular piece of paper, and if he cannot produce it, forcibly remove him from an arbitrarily-defined area under threat of violence?

If you do not feel you have the right to do these things, how can you "grant" the right for someone else to do them? How can you give what you don't have? How does going into a booth and pushing a button magically grant someone else an exemption from the very morality that you feel beholden to? It doesn't matter whether you think government is "necessary" because you're scared of what will happen without it; the very notion that government can justifiably exist is a fallacy. You seem to understand this, which is very encouraging.
User avatar
AMP3083
Junior Member
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu May 11, 2017 2:43 pm
Diet: Meat-Eater

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by AMP3083 »

Brian,

I think it's funny that, despite your run-in with Isaac(Ask Yourself) a few months ago, both of you guys now feel the same way about Brimstone. :lol:
Last edited by AMP3083 on Thu Sep 28, 2017 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AMP3083
Junior Member
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu May 11, 2017 2:43 pm
Diet: Meat-Eater

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by AMP3083 »

brimstoneSalad wrote:Why do people show up for jury duty today? Because they have to, and they're generally compensated. Although they aren't compensated very well ($40-$50 a day).
(page 2)

Yes, true, they have to. But, let's read between the lines. "They have to" because their summons threatens that if they don't show up they will be subject to imprisonment, and this is true of taxes as well. Just noticed this while scanning the thread and wanted to add that tiny, but important, note.
User avatar
Jebus
Master of the Forum
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:08 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by Jebus »

AMP3083 wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 11:37 am Brian,

I think it's funny that, despite your run-in with Isaac(Ask Yourself) a few months ago, both of you guys now feel the same way about Brimstone. :lol:
I think it's funny that in one day Brimstone both called someone a moron and was called a moron by someone else.
How to become vegan in 4.5 hours:
1.Watch Forks over Knives (Health)
2.Watch Cowspiracy (Environment)
3. Watch Earthlings (Ethics)
Congratulations, unless you are a complete idiot you are now a vegan.
teo123
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:46 pm
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by teo123 »

Jebus wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 1:13 pm
AMP3083 wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 11:37 am Brian,

I think it's funny that, despite your run-in with Isaac(Ask Yourself) a few months ago, both of you guys now feel the same way about Brimstone. :lol:
I think it's funny that in one day Brimstone both called someone a moron and was called a moron by someone else.
He is otherwise a very bright guy. My guess is that he hasn't really studied social sciences, so he doesn't know how to recognize pseudoscience in them. I have studied a lot of linguistics, and I don't really see why it would be a "soft" science. Just look at, for example, the Grimm's law. He just trusts a book written by some neuroscientist that claims that tribal (supposedly anarchist) societies have some primitive ethics, that makes people murder. That's a typical pseudoscience. What's the difference between that and the claims about the so-called primitive languages? Absolutely no difference. Claims about primitive languages were proven wrong with the development of linguistics. But they were used to justify the oppression of "primitive tribes". The same will happen with the claims about primitive ethics of the tribal societies when a science develops to investigate them. And, no, the statistics he cites are not science any more than statistics that showed there was a surplus of food during the Great Chinese Famine were science.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Is it actually a good thing to trust the institutions?

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Jebus wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 1:13 pm
AMP3083 wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 11:37 am Brian,

I think it's funny that, despite your run-in with Isaac(Ask Yourself) a few months ago, both of you guys now feel the same way about Brimstone. :lol:
I think it's funny that in one day Brimstone both called someone a moron and was called a moron by someone else.
I uphold a much higher burden of evidence, though, when I use it these days. I think it was fair.
BrianBlackwell wrote: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:45 am and even accused me of "the fallacy of ambiguity" after I literally defined my terms using dictionary definitions available to everyone.
You don't understand what the fallacy of ambiguity is; it usually uses dictionary definitions, just mixing applicable and non-applicable ones, or using non-applicable aspects of definitions to draw conclusions incorrectly.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/17/Ambiguity-Fallacy
This is more extensive: http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e06c.htm

Look Brian, you've been warned. If you don't understand the mistake you made, take time to try to get it.
If you do it again you'll probably get banned. The combination of rejecting the validity of logic and violating it repeatedly with fallacies that you insist are valid is not acceptable debate practice.
If you want to recognize your mistake and apologize for it, we'll understand it's a mistake next time too. But you can't keep doing this without learning anything. You're wasting people's time.
Post Reply