Is this a pirate site? - Page 25

DawnFalcon · 03-16-2010, 05:10 PM

Thanks for standing up for the BNP. Simply because you've not been stalked doesn't mean it's not directly relevant.

If you feel that personal and statistical data are the same, you'd not use a pseudonym. And yet you do, hence evidently by your posts you don't feel they are. What's the words? Ah yes, "two-faced". (But no, keep digging)

(I'd also note that the skinheads, while totally misguided, were behaving in accordance and constantly with a belief system. You're acting in accordance with a selfish, evidently two-faced desire to belittle someone simply because you can.)

TGS · 03-16-2010, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

No nothing is simplistic about it, it's very clear what is wrong is what the society you live in says is wrong.

Dodgy ground I think - female circumcision, ethnic cleansing, torturing people in prison, keeping slaves, certain interpretations of jihad; all candidates for being morally indefensible yet not thought to be wrong in/by the societies in which they are practiced. Would agree if you were saying that what is illegal is what the society you live in says is illegal - but that's a different thing - not all illegal things are morally wrong, and not all morally wrong things are illegal.

kennyc · 03-16-2010, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben Thornton

S...
Under that definition, any attempt to change the accepted view is by definition wrong. But, if it works, it's right!
..

Right!

Bilbo1967 · 03-16-2010, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Thanks for standing up for the BNP.

Oh, that redirect just changed to this post. You are a walking 'non-sequitur' machine. Really, I would laugh if it weren't so sad

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Simply because you've not been stalked doesn't mean it's not directly relevant.

If you feel that personal and statistical data are the same, you'd not use a pseudonym. And yet you do, hence evidently by your posts you don't feel they are. What's the words? Ah yes, "two-faced". (But no, keep digging)

I really have no interest in learning anything personal about you, but if it makes you feel happy to assume that people are fascinated then please feel free to assume I do. I like to help 'care in the community' whenever I can

PKFFW · 03-16-2010, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tompe

You seem to miss that the simplistic concept of right and wrong that was talked about is just a very simplistic concept that cannot be used if you start to think more seriously about how moral theories works and what the words mean. What does it mean for something to be right for example? And so on.

I do not miss that this is your contention. Again, simply because I do not agree does not mean I do not understand or that I miss your point. Suggesting such shows you clearly do not understand this most basic concept of intelligent discourse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tompe

Some people say simplistic things like "killing people is wrong" but when they analyse it they do not mean that. They mean something like "killing people is usually wrong but not in the following cases...". And even that is problematic since most people cannot really specify what they mean by "wrong".

Ah see, but this is not what you and Krystian Galaj stated.

I totally agree that some people do not say what they mean. I agree that most people can not properly specify what they mean. I never argued differently.

However, what was stated is that the concepts of right and wrong should not be used as a basis for making decisions. I disagree with that assertion. I contend that assertion is different to asserting most people can't tell you what them mean by right and wrong.

Many people can not explain the concepts of calculus, algebra and other such mathematical things but these concepts(amongst others I'm sure) should still be used when deciding load limits and safety requirements for buildings should they not?

Further, to address your example of killing. Discussing whether killing a person is right or wrong is one thing, deciding whether to actually kill someone is entirely different and would of course depend on the circumstances. As an example I believe most people would decide it is "wrong" to cold bloodedly kill someone in order to steal their wallet. Hence, most people would decide not to do so. On the other hand, killing someone because it was the only way to stop them killing you or your loved ones I believe most people would think is ok and therefore would decide to do so if the situation arose.

Now, you could come up with a whole bunch of variations. In each the person would have to decide what is right or wrong to them. Just because they may not be able to do so in advance and at your request in order to prove to you that they can think of every eventuality, I do not think means they shouldn't make their decision based on right and wrong.

It was further stated that "if one does reason with such, the results of reasoning will be flawed, and usually untrue" and "when applying fixes which are results of such "reasoning", it always turns out society is more complicated, and there are side-effects, or the "fix" makes things worse." Both of which are simply assumptions with no verifiable data or proof. In other words they are simply opinions. Obviously they are opinions I disagree with as well. They are also opinions that go way beyond "people don't say what they mean".

Let me be clear, if your position is simply that most people don't say what they mean and most people can't adequately define what they mean by right and wrong in every conceivable situation in advance then I agree.

If your position is what you actually stated then I disagree.(and note, just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't understand)

Cheers,
PKFFW

DawnFalcon · 03-16-2010, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

I really have no interest in learning anything personal about you, but if it makes you feel happy to assume that people are fascinated then please feel free to assume I do. I like to help 'care in the community' whenever I can

Again, I don't know you or your assumptions, and people have in the past used personal data to plan an attack on me. So...viewed in that light, your humour...well:

Is that China down there? Oh my.

kennyc · 03-16-2010, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGS

Dodgy ground I think - female circumcision, ethnic cleansing, torturing people in prison, keeping slaves, certain interpretations of jihad; all candidates for being morally indefensible yet not thought to be wrong in/by the societies in which they are practiced. Would agree if you were saying that what is illegal is what the society you live in says is illegal - but that's a different thing - not all illegal things are morally wrong, and not all morally wrong things are illegal.

Again, only true if you believe in absolutes of right and wrong. It doesn't matter what the act or behavior is, the law of society (whether written down or not) is what determines what is right or wrong based on the morals and ethics of that society.

It's no different than what I said about criminals -- for them (individually) what they do is right to them.

Bilbo1967 · 03-16-2010, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Is that China down there? Oh my.

Really quite pathetic

TGS · 03-16-2010, 05:18 PM

Now I think this dead horse is being not just being flogged but abused in a decidedly unhealthy sort of way.

kennyc · 03-16-2010, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

...

I really have no interest in learning anything personal about you, ....

and I already know enough.

DawnFalcon · 03-16-2010, 05:21 PM

No Kenny, many criminals, unless they have certain types of personality disorder, know the difference between right and wrong and know what they're doing is wrong. Many don't care, but that's different from believing what they're doing is right.

Oh, there are some categories of crime - cannabis use or minor IP crimes for example - where that's not true, but in general...

Bilbo1967 - Thanks for recognising that you are. It's always good when a malefactor owns up to being self-centred.

PKFFW · 03-16-2010, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Oh I'm so pleased you think that attempted GBH by skinhead thugs is so amusing. This says everything anyone needs to know about your moral stance then*. There is absolutely nothing amusing about this whatsoever.

Well how could I think such when I have no idea if that is what you were referring to because you refuse to give "personal data".

I'm not sure how I could even be expected to make the leap from someone stealing your idea and you using the word took to skinheads stalking you with the intent to cause GBH. But whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

And no, you're asking for personal data. Again.

*To be clear: you care about getting cheap kicks rather than the actual facts because you're continuing to press for personal data when you know this is nothing to do with the statistical data I've asked for in the past. This shows your posturing of a few pages ago up nicely, and also your comment on what "some people want". I bet.

Yeah whatever.

I'm asking you to provide data about your assertion.

Cheers,
PKFFW

PKFFW · 03-16-2010, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Thanks for standing up for the BNP. Simply because you've not been stalked doesn't mean it's not directly relevant.

If you feel that personal and statistical data are the same, you'd not use a pseudonym. And yet you do, hence evidently by your posts you don't feel they are. What's the words? Ah yes, "two-faced". (But no, keep digging)

I've given alot of personal data about myself on this board and would have little hesitation providing some sort of personal data about any claim I made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

(I'd also note that the skinheads, while totally misguided, were behaving in accordance and constantly with a belief system. You're acting in accordance with a selfish, evidently two-faced desire to belittle someone simply because you can.)

No, I'm asking your provide some sort of a proof or data about a claim you made. If you see that as belittling then perhaps you should not ask the same of others.

Cheers,
PKFFW

TGS · 03-16-2010, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

Again, only true if you believe in absolutes of right and wrong.

I don't think one needs to committed to absolutes if that means counting out on principal the possibility that certain acts can ever be morally justified. In all the circumstance that have arisen and might realistically arise I would say that genocide, for example, is immoral. I am not thereby committed to saying that in any circumstances whatever genocide would be immoral - I do though find it difficult to imagine circumstances in which it wouldn't be. However, that may be a limitation of my imagination, not something that has to do with the absolute nature of, in this example, genocide.

DawnFalcon · 03-16-2010, 05:29 PM

PKFFW:

Your choice to provide personal data is just that, a choice. I chose not to, for very good reasons, and you should respect my decision.

Personal data is not statistical data. Your instance that they're the same thing shows a fairly stunning lack on your part: one which you are continuing to insist on highlighting. This is of course your own business, but I'd not want to brag about that.

Your instance on personal attacks rather than attacking any given argument I've made is getting old as well. You've managed to turn what was a lighthearted joke I had with another member of the forum into a nasty display of someone repeatedly demanding personal data from another member.

03-16-2010, 05:10 PM	#361
DawnFalcon Banned Posts: 2,094 Karma: 2682 Join Date: Aug 2009 Device: N/A	Thanks for standing up for the BNP. Simply because you've not been stalked doesn't mean it's not directly relevant. If you feel that personal and statistical data are the same, you'd not use a pseudonym. And yet you do, hence evidently by your posts you don't feel they are. What's the words? Ah yes, "two-faced". (But no, keep digging) (I'd also note that the skinheads, while totally misguided, were behaving in accordance and constantly with a belief system. You're acting in accordance with a selfish, evidently two-faced desire to belittle someone simply because you can.) Last edited by DawnFalcon; 03-16-2010 at 05:13 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pirate Coelho	der-Matt	E-Books	5	01-21-2010 02:05 PM
Pirate Bay sold: now to become a legit site	Patricia	News	34	07-20-2009 05:51 PM
Is the enclosed a pirate site? Delete as necessary.	BookCat	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	5	07-12-2009 01:01 PM
You Are a Pirate Arrr!!	Moejoe	Lounge	76	04-07-2009 01:28 PM
Are you an e-book Pirate?	Alexander Turcic	News	15	05-14-2004 01:02 AM

03-16-2010, 05:18 PM	#369
TGS Country Member Posts: 9,058 Karma: 7676767 Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Denmark Device: Liseuse: Irex DR800. PRS 505 in the house, and the missus has an iPad.	Now I think this dead horse is being not just being flogged but abused in a decidedly unhealthy sort of way.

03-16-2010, 05:21 PM	#371
DawnFalcon Banned Posts: 2,094 Karma: 2682 Join Date: Aug 2009 Device: N/A	No Kenny, many criminals, unless they have certain types of personality disorder, know the difference between right and wrong and know what they're doing is wrong. Many don't care, but that's different from believing what they're doing is right. Oh, there are some categories of crime - cannabis use or minor IP crimes for example - where that's not true, but in general... Bilbo1967 - Thanks for recognising that you are. It's always good when a malefactor owns up to being self-centred.

03-16-2010, 05:29 PM	#375
DawnFalcon Banned Posts: 2,094 Karma: 2682 Join Date: Aug 2009 Device: N/A	PKFFW: Your choice to provide personal data is just that, a choice. I chose not to, for very good reasons, and you should respect my decision. Personal data is not statistical data. Your instance that they're the same thing shows a fairly stunning lack on your part: one which you are continuing to insist on highlighting. This is of course your own business, but I'd not want to brag about that. Your instance on personal attacks rather than attacking any given argument I've made is getting old as well. You've managed to turn what was a lighthearted joke I had with another member of the forum into a nasty display of someone repeatedly demanding personal data from another member.