Freeman Stephen

If you really want to research climate change, you could do worse than have a gander at the Lake Vostok Climate Data. Ice cores are drilled into the deepest known lake in antartica. The cores are then sliced and sampled for bubbles of air. The bubbles are measured for co2 and methane. During warm periods one of these gases are more prevalent and during cold periods the other. The average air temperature over the earth at the time the bubble was trapped is said to be estimable from the sample in the arctic. Anyway, engineers drilled up half a million years worth of ice cores and scientists discovered a 100,000 year repeating cycle thats been going on for as far back as ... well half a million years. Thats the good news, theres a natural cycle that does not appear to be manmade but heres the bad news .... guess what point on this cycle we are at today? We are at the end of a relatively warm 10-15,000 year "interglacial period" and on the brink of an ice age which will occur suddenly any day now and last around a hundred thousand years before the next interglacial period which will begin with an even more sudden flood.

"Its okay to say your pricked your finger, just dont say you fingered your prick" - george carlin

Fuck modern interpretations of what profane means. Most cunts are profane, not because they swear like motherfuckers but because they are a bunch of gobshites with nothing profound to say. I hope this post doesnt get deleted for being profane!

I think most of your points are outwith the remit of the question such as "being caught" as an argument favouring justice or "a better society" being the reason individuals should behave justly despite clear advantages to the individuals who behave unjust. You also make the same mistake as me in saying morality is rational because its moral. The one good argument youve given is that immorality goads to insanity, though Im not convinced of your argument but still interested in investigating what can be arrived at. You said that I lose the belief in the rights over my own body when I disrespect those same rights in others (or words to that affect). This would be a great argument in showing just conduct is preferable to unjust conduct despite the free chocolate and would perhaps explain the consistant dehumanisation of enemies which is practiced by the barbaric forces which pervade our world. Is it an argument which can be made to stand against the barbarians attempt to justify their own acts as somehow good? I will ponder this.

Part of my overall point is "victim? so what, this is a tasty chocolate bar". Its like an argument against behaving unethically built upon the fact it would be unethical. IE A matter of choice for those without conscience. Victims dont matter in the context as they dont affect the enjoyment of the stolen chocolate bar unless you care about being ethical. The only good argument youve provided is the consequences of getting caught which must be something of greater importance than doing injustice. IE Its not the rape or the murder or the theft thats a problem, but getting caught. Modern societies provide no disinsentive to being unjust, only disincentives for being caught being unjust. Is there not some argument that says that behaving justly is preferable to behaving unjustly? Suppose you had the power to make yourself invisible and through this special power you became aware that a very rich man had a chest of gold in a his vault and he didnt even realise it was there. Using this power you could easily steal the chest of gold with no chance of being caught or even suspected later when you came to sell it. A hypothetical circumstance where your unjust action will be to your advantage and it is not possible you will suffer any consequences by being caught. Is there not some argument to say that it would infact be disadvantageous to steal the chest? Maybe my hypothetical scenario is too strict to allow the disadvantage of injustice to be shown. Feel free to create your own if this is so, but remember Im not talking about the disadvantage of being caught but looking for the disadvantage of injustice in and of itself.

So being just is not neccessarily rational. To be unjust seems more rational as it brings greater material rewards than being just. To hinge a society justly may be a materially beneficial thing but to hinge an individual justly, is this not to cause harm to that individual, or at least to deny them what is beneficial - the ability to do injustice. Is the promotion of justice in society not to sacrifice the benefit of the individual for the benefit of society. (It scares me where this going too. Are we retards to behave justly?)

I only used the "stab someone to death for a chocolate bar" scenario just to emphasise the point. More realistically, think about conning someone out of a hundred bank notes. The conscientious are at a great material disadvantage. It seems that the unjust fair better than the just, yet to behave justly is perceived as the rational way to live. Ive been in dire poverty and couldnt bring myself to steal, yet there are those living the high life who seem to have no moral problem whatsoever stealing from people if they can get away with it. Is it not maybe me who is in someway stunted by what would appear an irrational need to be conscientious and not steal (or murder people for chocolate bars). If I was a pickpocket or a hitman or any number of occupations which require injustice, would I not be better off than earning an honest living. This, what I say, even if society or others are worse off. Without a conscience, it doesnt matter how badly these others are affected because Im at a gain and it wouldnt matter if anyone else is at a loss because of me. Is my own gain not a rational pursuit and the loss of others neither rational nor irrational?

I got 8 no problem without !!! you know what. 1 really stumped me and i didnt notice 0 until I watched the spoilers. Theres a much simpler way to do 8.

Please dont say UPB blah blah blah, elucidate it yourself instead of referring me to someone else. For some reason, I cant bring myself to harm people for my own gain but I notice this is not a universal human quality - some people are "evil". I often find myself justifying a certain stance as rational because only this stance supports what is morally right. For exsmple, dont support coersive organisations because coersion is morally wrong, therefor it is irrational to support governments and lesser forms of organised crime but .... whats wrong with behaviour that isnt moral? If you have a chocolate bar and I want a chocolate bar, if I stab you to death and take the chocolate bar, am I not better off to the tune of one chocolate bar? Okay it didnt work so well for you because your now dead but for me, well this chocolate bar is very tasty, and I have no one but myself to thank for it because your dead now. My point is that this behaviour is completely immoral and psychopathic but is it irrational? You could say "yes" because the cops will now be chasing me but suppose I was the boss of cops or I had some other schrme meaning I wasnt getting caught? Ive made a gain at someones expense and although its completely evil, is it irrational? Are psychopaths mad or just evil? Is being conscientious actually a disability - the psychopath gets more free chocolate!

Its being hinted at that the same bitcoin numbers (prime numbers) could be the basis for other bitcoinalikes - great!!! erm .... wheres the limitation of supply? We should use labour-hour as the only currency as it seems its all currency has ever been used to extract. I know, in theory it really smoothes the economic supply lines between a guy with coconuts wanting cheese burgers from a guy with bananas, but since the lydians standardised currency, its never been far from where people are having their sweat collected into someone elses vat. Let currency run laissez faire and a currency will arise all on its ownsome. Now who wants coconuts for some tobacco?