LiberT

lol You just spewed such a mix of delusions, assumptions, strawmaning, ad hominems and empty but insulting adjectives that i don't even know how can all that mess be addressed No, Stefan does NOT make his core UPB argument on consequential "pragmatic considerations" but on logic and principle, which is important. Logic is indeed in the structure of our universe, an objective physical reality outside ourselves and our subjective feelings. If you research detailed lives of all those tyrants closely you will begin seeing the misery. "It means it is in the fundamental structure of our Universe and how it functions in reality, whether we like it or not." <-- thanks! I noticed the grammar and corrected it! So, which part of it do you not understand exactly? I am warning you I will not answer any delusions like "there is no such thing as objective reality outside my head" as i do no time for trolls. If you do not see any reality independent of you completely, outside your head, then you are "debating" it all with yourself in your head only anyway.

Great! got it. Glad we had this awesome opportunity to resolve it by discussing in the FDR chat, figuring out how to avoid logical and cognitive fallacies; and thank you so much for the link with vids from your Uni teaching how to construct a proper academic argument!

Morality (UPB) stands the test of logic. It means it is in the fundamental structure of our Universe and how it functions in reality, whether we like it or not. You go against the fundamental principles of the universe? fine, you end up doing a lot of damage to everybody and yourself, get sick shortly, and you end up miserable. (Physics --> clear logic --> math --> morality is the way real world works. Not something that exist "only in your head", no. Only the transient language we are using to describe them are in our head. Example: if humanity dies today, there will be nobody saying: 2+2=4 Earth and Moon are 93,000,000 miles apart But it will not change the fact that: 2+2=4 Earth and Moon are 93,000,000 miles apart If aliens from Moon want to come to Earth they will have to fly 93,000,000 miles, and if they build a pyramid on Earth using sound 2+2=4 math, the pyramid will still stand strong as a product existing in beautiful harmony with fundamental principles this universe works.) Imagine real life situation. You're on a date or a job interview. If you seriously tell your life and work partners that you rely on 2+1=5 math in your life, who would want to deal with you? If you build a skyscraper or an airplane based on such science and use them, the result will be your death. And you will miss opportunities to create real advances human life relies on, because math is needed for it. So you'll have no joy of creative accomplishment. Morality to life and relationships is like math to advanced creative achievement. To have the happiness and joy of life long term you will need to have meaningful honest relationships, and for that ethics is a must. Conclusion: Morality / ethics are voluntary. Just like using math / science too is voluntary. (Many useful things are voluntary, You are not obligated to use neither human language nor body language to quickly explain to a doctor where is it that you are bleeding.) It keeps your life incredibly better and more advanced, but it is voluntary. However, regardless if you choose to use them or not, the fact is that they do exist as fundamental principles this world operates. So you can go trolling around saying "2+1=5", "murder is nothing wrong and not immoral" and seemingly "nothing happens", but you will just be wrong!

Morality is universalizable NAP behavior. It could be bad English, but at least i tried. Universalizable (universalize-able) obviously means that the quality of it is such that universality can be applied to it. So what do you think about this definition? Please correct this one if you see holes in it. Thank you.

Morality definition: principles that govern a person's or group's behavior and form of conduct. ^Yes or no? Is there a better way to define the term?

Wow, i have a question as i seem to not understand the joke. Does this joke mean that it is a very common behavior pattern for a narcissist to cross (violate) the boundaries of other people? And the joke makes sense and is obviously funny to most people because any average person understands this fact? Is that the humor of the joke or am i misunderstanding it? Thank you in advance.

To be able to use IRC client would be awesome and very helpful for personal development.