Jump to content

ofd

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    645

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ofd

  1. ofd
    I think the modern world in the West resembles more and more the Mouse experiments done by Calhoun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun#Mouse_experiments
  2. ofd
    Individualist rights we enjoy (private property, freedom of speech) have to be collectively enforced. If they are not, you can claim to have them, but in reality you don't. Evolution selected people with an individualist mindset in Western Europe because of marriage laws, the way manors worked and because of geographical / climatical conditions.
  3. ofd
    What's your score?
  4. ofd

    The morality of luck

    ofd replied to ofd's topic in Philosophy

    Well, you can't quantify the role of luck in absolute terms but you can in relative. Texting and driving is more dangerous for pedestrians than concentrating on the road. You can behave in a reckless way if you can't quantify exactly how reckless it is in the individual. But given the law of large numbers, reckless behaviour will cause bad outcomes for some, while others may be spared. The bad outcome itself isn't determined by morality but by sheer luck.
  5. ofd
    The Petrodollar is of importance, because it gives the US seniorage. Furthermore, they can print money a part of which is then re-invested in the US. In short, it's a form of Rehypothecation, that's beneficial for financial institutions but bad for the average shmuck, since inflation is increased while the interest level is artificially decreased. Without that artificial demand for Dollars, the US couldn't enjoy the living standard it has today while running enormous deficits at the same time.
  6. ofd
    In other words, you have no clue about concepts like betriebliche Mitbestimmung?
  7. ofd
    Sure. But what was more likely: Dying from a disease or getting killed by some other dude Replace it with evolve genetically. Morality is a subset of biology. Those (human) groups who have developed morals when it comes to their internal behaviour have had a higher chance of surviving as a group that didn't have those. The same is true for all eusocial mammals which is why the basic moral system is more or less the same for all in groups.
  8. ofd
    Rand took the basic concepts, changed a few words, glimpsed at a few books, started a cult and called that Objectivisim.
  9. ofd
    Yeah, but I am afraid you are going to the wrong place. The Roman Catholic Church is one of the most pozzed institutions there is. I like visiting the SSPX who are more serious or a Russian Orthodox church, who are closer to me culturally.
  10. ofd
    He may be for alt light people, young men looking for a father figure and people with messy rooms. However, he is not willing to come up with clear answers when they don't suit him, like "Are you a Christian?" let alone questions where one answer has social stigma connected with it. The one good thing about JP, Sargon, Rubin et al is that they serve as a gateway to people who are more serious and more honest like JF Gariepy or Alternative Hypothesis.
  11. ofd
    Do tell me more about the IG-Metall Südwest
  12. ofd
    If you dont have the know how, setting up stolen equipment is cargo cult production. Western Germany had both the knowledge and the capital to start production soon after the war. Every European country, except the UK, had a boom after WW2. The unions and the employer generally work together, which makes Germany different from neighbouring countries where strikes were a frequent nuisance.
  13. ofd
    With regards to Judaism, see Culture of Critique Every Protestant sect that is universal will eventually become left. There is a good reason to assume that Puritan Universalism was Communism 2.0. https://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2013/09/technology-communism-and-brown-scare.htmle is a good intro for that line of thinking. The only Christian institutions that seem to be relatively immune are National Orthodox churches.
  14. ofd
    Court documents don't exist?
  15. ofd
    Then why do that in the only place where it makes it more likely that it doesn't go into the right direction?
  16. ofd
    How does that matter? The lawyers can claim mistrial after the verdict has been spoken. Why risk something when for once something is going the right direction, people who participate in grooming gangs getting accused and receiving a verdict? At any other place Robinson could have spread the message without interfering in the legal proceedings. How so?
  17. ofd
    Stalin simply rescinded the most damaging social policies implemened by previous Bolsheviks who were of a particular faith. That and removing them from the access to power was what caused the Jewish intellegencia (for a large part) to become Trotzkyist / Neocon.
  18. ofd
    What Robinson did was stupid on many levels. Filming the accused child rapists while entering the court gives any lawyer that defend them to argue for a mistrial. His actions make it easier for the lawyers to defend them. It that was his goal, he achieved it. He knew what he was doing since he was convicted of the same offense a year earlier. Doing this stunt, knowing about the consequences for him and the victims of the grooming gangs is stupid and reckless. He picked the only place to present his message that might impede justice for the victims.
  19. ofd
    Arguments a priori can be applied but the consequences don't matter, as long as the implemented actions don't violate the axioms or the deductions made from the principles. The point of philosophy is also to notice that everything comes at a cost. You can either have logically sound moral systems that pay no attention to the outcomes or you can have systems that are consistent but take effects into account.
  20. ofd
    Because your arguments stem from observations. I was arguing a priori from the NAP. For somebody who adheres to it, the negative outcomes don't matter as long as it is not violated. We can argue about the effects this bill will have and if it's moral but then we have to leave philosophy and muddy ourselves with observations, symptoms, causes and negative outcomes.
  21. ofd
    Sure, but those are arguments from effect, not from first principles.
  22. ofd
    The Libertarian / Ancap argument from first principles is pretty simple and straightforward. You have no right to be supported by someone else this is also true for embryos. A woman has, according to the NAP, every right to evict a fetus, forcing her not to violates the ownership of her body.
  23. ofd
    @RichardY A single occurence within a process.
  24. ofd
    The argument for determinism is simple. Determinism means that antecedent events together with the laws of nature necessitate future events. You can neither change previous events nor alter the laws of nature.
  25. ofd
    Those are the programming equivalent of learning how to flip a burger.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept