Koroviev

This is incorrect. This is how I understood at first as well it took me a couple reads through to really understand what exactly UPB was. However, you can just look at this sentence itself and see that what you are saying does not make sense. Universally preferable behavior is relative to society. Stating something is both universal and relative is self defeating. Although, yes UPB does correlate a lot with libertarian ideals that is only because both happen to be derived from the idea of inherent property rights. Inherent property rights means that property rights are universal (inherent = permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute). Since property rights are inherent all people have them (universal). A moral framework that deems anything immoral that infringes on an inherent property is not relative but universal. I have an earlier comment but it's still waiting on approval

Trump says something "mean" >> Trump is done for he will never recover he is the worst human alive Hillary is actually responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, actually responsible for the situation that caused Trump to be "mean," is corrupt, irresponsible, and a pathological liar >> Meh...

I think I know what you meant but just in case, the scientific method doesn't think anything up, scientists come up with a theory and use the scientific method to validate that theory. Why do you have to "get" people to abide by it? you don't have to "get" people to abide by the scientific method do you? And yes you are correct if people want to use UPB they will and if they do not they wont. Just like if people want to use the scientific method they will and if they don't they won't. That doesn't make either any more or less valid and it does not make either more or less subjective. Just because a lot of people smoke cigarettes does not make cigarettes good for you. What do you mean "what's next?" What's next is people make a choice they either do what is moral or what is immoral, and either way there are consequences to their actions. We're not talking about the law of gravity, we're talking about the theory of gravity. Just like you have to test the theory of gravity using the scientific method you test a moral theory (is X immoral) using UPB. Whether or not people believe it, or what they do with that knowledge is irrelevant.

Again I'm not sure what "binding" has to do with anything? You could say the exact same thing about the scientific theory. If you have a preference for testing hypotheses. If you have a preference for those hypotheses to be rationally consistent and empirically proven. The scientific method is the best method for doing science. Regardless of how people follow it agree with, value or care about it. Likewise if you have a preference for signs from the universe and if you have a preference dor those signs to be in the form of chicken entrails then consulting chicken entrails is the best method for discovering whether or not your hypothesis is valid regardless of etc, etc.... Religion is different from UPB as a moral system because it is not rationally consistent and relys on the interpretations of others to decide whether or not something is true it is also often heavily reliant on having a heirarchy where someone else has power over you. You could say that the bible is a moral framework however again it is not rationally consistent and is more a (poorly constructed) list of shall/shall nots rather than a framework of how to come to those conclusions for yourself. As i said above UPB is objective the same way the scientific method is objective. It doesnt matter what your opinions are you always come to the same conclusions. Religion, lets just say christianity for arguments sake, is subjective because the bible can be interpreted in many different ways and especially in sects like catholicism is continually changing.

If UPB was, as you say, the collective preferences of society wouldn't you be able to lay it out in one or more thou shall/thou shall not statements? Then you would have to change those statements over time, and it would be invalidated by any group who did hold those statements as true. Also wouldn't UPB the book just be those statements maybe with each chapter explainin how/why those statements are true?

exactly! UPB is a method not a preference

couldn't you also say that about methods for finding the truth? there are many different methods for finding the truth (prayer, reading the bible, reading tea leaves) and lots of different people think those are the best ways of finding the truth does that make reason and evidence and the scientific method subjective? I was asking a question to clarify what @EclecticIdealist Why would people agreeing on something make it objective? why would people disagreeing with something make it subjective? What does "binding" have to do with anything? UPB is not a preference it is a methodology like the scientific method. As I mentioned above some people may prefer to read the bible rather than use the scientific method, that does not make the scientific method subjective.

Because some people might disagree or use a different standard that makes UPB not objective??

1. No the point of the framework is to define universal morality. In christianity the bible defines morality. UPB is a way to define morality. UPB fills the moral gap left by religion. 2. It is objective in that if an action fails the UPB test you know it is immoral. As opposed to something like political correctness where whatever you feel to be offensive could be considered immoral. It is an objective framework arrived at through rationality thus unlike the bible (or any other moral framework) it does not need someone (preachers/god) or something (bibles) to tell you whether it is right or wrong.

UPB is a system of deciding whether or not something is moral. It is a rational proof in that it is rational arguments in support of a theory (of universal secular ethics). The examples you point out are specific examples showing that UPB would consider rape, murder, and stealing immoral since, as Stefan points out, a moral theory cannot be valid if it concludes that those things are moral. Those examples also serve to show how UPB can be applied. Part of the theory is that morality is universal (stemming from our inherent property rights) thus anything that is not applied universally would fall under aesthetics. 1. Morality is not simply like or dislike, morality is questions of right and wrong. I may dislike when people are late but that doesn't mean someone is immoral for being late. 2. Morality, historically, has been nothing more than taking personal preferences and putting them forward as a way to judge others. UPB is a framework that moves morality out of the realm of aesthetics (subjectivity), in an attempt to fill the moral gap left by atheism. It took me a couple reads through to understand UPB.

you also kind of seem to be missing the point in none of the videos is Stef saying that cops are wonderful and it's all the fault of the poor black people. In fact several time Stef has said we should get rid of the government all together...many...many times. The point is the lies that are being spread by the government controlled media and Stef is pushing back against those lies by presenting facts about the things that are going on. As for the all cops are bad cops, well can you really call someone evil who has been told their entire life that what they are doing is wonderful and everyone around them is telling them that they are the pinnacle of morality thus are doing the best they can in the situation that they are in? If that is the case then all of the libertarians who are not taking an active stance against spanking are MUCH more immoral than the cops since they have been exposed to the truth and are actively rejecting it. Don't get me wrong there are a lot of cops who do a lot of bad things and I'm not a fan of them, however the racist lies being spread by the government controlled media is, at this point in time, a much more pressing matter and one that can actively and productively be pushed back against. On top of all of that IF you can get people to begin to listen to reason and evidence then the need for the government (and government police officers) becomes much less. Whereas if, as you have done, you take the stance that all cops are bad thus it is all their fault you are simply attacking a symptom as opposed to the problem itself.

you could ask? I am wary of comparing to others' experience especially looking at them as better or worse. We all have different situations and experience and process those situations in different ways.

In Adios America Ann Coulter points out that Hollywood was created by Jewish people...so it makes perfect sense that they would continue to be an influence on it and with the influence we know that Hollywood has on people, especially the U.S., it makes sense that they would be able to go from there into politics as well. You don't need any conspiracy to explain it. Also, they're spreading their "influence" through entertainment and programs that seem to at least start with good intentions which again without the state would have very small, if any, negative effects.

Many people "in the know" agree that the Tor network is one big honeypot. 2 years ago, a couple days before they gave a talk announcing and releasing Tor at Defcon and Blackhat, news came out that Tor was funded by the U.S. Government. if you look at the court docs linked in the article it even refers to Tor as being developed for U.S. Naval Research. There are numerous accounts (including this one) where the CIA and FBI have set up honeypots specifically to incriminate people. Whether or not these people actually did something wrong (which is questionable) they were only able to do it and only did it because of the situation the State created for them. I realize that may have come off as confusing but what I mean is the FBI owns, runs, and continues to operate the child porn site this guy allegedly went to and they run it specifically to catch people who want to go to sites like this (a.k.a. honeypot).

great resources, just what I was looking for Thanks guys! anyone else who has resources keep 'em coming. @Thus_Spake_the_Nightspirit keep me posted my 7 week old may be able to use it in a few years