anonymous1234
-
Posts
2182 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by anonymous1234
-
-
I think Farfetch'd is more of an inside joke than anoything else. I meand, look at him, then at the name, then back at him.
The Farfetch'd is now diamonds. [hide]
[/hide] -
You're exactly right; morality is opinion-based (I worded that sentence a little oddly, sorry). This is why it is pointless to argue about it. People are not going to change their morals because of factual evidence and legality.
You won't alter your opinions even if evidence is provided to you?
And a lot of legality is determined by our sense of morality: look at the change in laws regulating prostitution and marijuana.
I would alter my opinions based on factual evidence, but there are people in this thread saying it was "wrong" to let the house burn. They are clearly not being swayed by the fact that the family didn't pay the fee.
-
You're exactly right; morality is opinion-based (I worded that sentence a little oddly, sorry). This is why it is pointless to argue about it. People are not going to change their morals because of factual evidence and legality.
-
According to merriam-webster.com, a tax is "a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes." A fee, on the other hand, is "a sum paid or charged for a service" (The first definition given was in regards to feudal lords)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax%5B2%5D
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fee?show=0&t=1286666705
The main difference I can see is that taxes are mandatory, while fees are paid if one desires a service. In the current situation, the people did not pay taxes as they were under no obligation, and did not pay the optional fee, whether by accident or otherwise. If the family did not at any point support the F.D. through paid taxes, and were not paying the fee at the time of the fire, I do not see how the F.D. is obligated to service them.
No one (including myself) is here arguing definitions. Since when does a dictionary come into play concerning morality? The only example that comes to mind is the white-washing of the term "genocide".
Several people were saying how it was not a tax, and instead was a fee. This is true, but in this circumstance, the latter is essentially a replacement for the former. Without clear definitions of what something is, you can't go around debating what something isn't. I did not include morals in my final sentence, I was merely basing it off of the definitions I looked up, and that objectively, the Fire Department had no obligation to put the fire out.
Arguing morals here is pointless, because people will have differing opinions.
-
According to merriam-webster.com, a tax is "a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes." A fee, on the other hand, is "a sum paid or charged for a service" (The first definition given was in regards to feudal lords)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax%5B2%5D
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fee?show=0&t=1286666705
The main difference I can see is that taxes are mandatory, while fees are paid if one desires a service. In the current situation, the people did not pay taxes as they were under no obligation, and did not pay the optional fee, whether by accident or otherwise. If the family did not at any point support the F.D. through paid taxes, and were not paying the fee at the time of the fire, I do not see how the F.D. is obligated to service them.
-
video
That was worth waiting the minute of nothing happening :lol:
-
System is broken: they should have been fined, or the fee more forcible collected. Probably should have been included in their taxes.
Either way, letting their house burn down benefits no one.
Well, one way it can be beneficial is that it sends out a wake-up call to people currently not paying the $75. At the same time, charging the family an incredibly high fee for the emergency because they weren't covered can also be a shock to the uninsured.
-
Another question is, where are these "morals" coming from? Because if we aren't obtaining these "morals" from a uniform source (the law), how do many come to such a united consensus? Religion? Human nature?
-
In regards to morality, it most definitely is a matter of opinion rather than "truth" (our definitions of "truth" differ from person to person). Even in regards to facts, it's very hard to expunge subjectivity from our speech and our ideas.
The definition of truth does not differ from person to person. Truth is objective.
I know, but I never claimed that there are no objective definitions of the word "right". The fact that triangles have three sides is "right". I never argued against that. However, we're specifically talking about morals in this thread. And you did claim that "right" does not refer to opinions, so I posted definitions where they are dependent on opinions as a rebuttal.The simple fact that "right" had definitions for both "truth" and "opinion" is contradictory. Putting in a subjective opinion here, I think that it makes more sense to keep the word right to mean true, and change the opinion version to "morality" or "justice." It does not make sense to use the same word for an objective and subjective meaning.
And how is righteous not the same thing as right? It's one of the definitions.Righteous is almost exclusively used in regards to opinions.
Instead of continually using the word "right" in this discussion, how about we avoid confusion and say "justified?" It is more accurate and has a more uniform definition.
-
righteous
being in accordance with what is just, good, or proper
suitable, appropriate
most favorable or desired : preferable; also : socially acceptable
Righteous is not the same thing as right. Also on that page were several definitions of the "absolute truth" version of right.
conforming to facts or truth : correct <the right answer>
genuine, real
acting or judging in accordance with truth or fact <time proved her right>
-
And that, my friends is why the Netherlands > USA. God Bless the Netherlands.
Did i mention piracy (the software thing, not with the ships ;<) is still legal here if you dont share it with others (IE download but dont upload)
I think that's kind of the case here as well. At any rate an American pirate can get away with it if he doesn't share it, according to a cousin who pirates.
Not the case, the government has been cracking down on piracy lately, and there is the chance that what you download will be logged and tracked. Unless of course you're smart and use a proxy.
-
it's morally subjective.
Precisely. There's no difference between what's "morally right" and what "should be done". When we're talking about morality, objective truth is impossible so I don't understand why you would give me the objective definition of "right".
Because there is no subjective definition of "right." There's moral, fair, and "should," but the word "right" (I actually prefer "correct") is a truth, not an opinion.
-
I'd prefer to hold off a little while as well due to school work, but I'm sure if necessary I can scrounge together some time to battle every now and then.
-
Just because it's what you should do doesn't mean it's right.
Okay, then what is the definition of "right"? :unsure:
"Right"- correct: free from error; especially conforming to fact or truth.
Morals do not make you "right." The fact that an American dollar has the same value as 100 pennies is "right." Saving someone's house from a fire isn't "right," it's morally subjective.
-
If they pay taxes, they should be protected.
If they don't pay taxes, and didn't pay for fire protection, then it's their fault.
/Thread.
-
GameBoy games
-
TMs aren't one-time use anymore. Use them as you wish.
So all TM's are HM's?
-
Similar to the naked photo teat, but less extreme, if you are a guy think of the people you would trust with a picture if you in a bra/bikini. They aren't necessarily friends, but you know you can trust them.
-
If it's any correlation, 4chan has been down since this afternoon. My god, it really is Web War I!
Oh, so it isn't just me. Not that I checked multiple times or anything.
-
Yes, I know. Anonymous by definition doesn't fit any generalizations. I guess what I mean is that the 28-year-olds aren't the ones staging DDOS attacks, and the whole "power through numbers" thing is contradictory to the idea of Anonymous.
Nilfheim: The denial of funding happens when people in developed countries (us) decide to watch a pirated movie instead of buying it, renting it, or seeing it in theaters.
Why wouldn't any 28-year-olds be taking part in the DDoS attacks? All you do is set up a program and walk away, you don't need to be at the computer 8 hours a day.
-
I do not support 4chan. What I see is a bunch of immature 15-year-olds pretending they have some value to the world. They pretend they don't need to belong, but they're flocking into these groups together. Nonconformists conform to nonconformity.
I do not support piracy. It's illegal for a reason - you're stealing content that needs to be payed for. If all movies were free, no good movies would be made because there would be no funding and anyone intelligent would stay away from the industry.
I confess that I do watch pirated movies on occasion, and a good deal of the music I listen to is on Youtube. When legitimate industries can provide content that's as easy and efficient as piracy, then the websites will die off on their own. Until then, they are breaking the law, and it is stealing, so quit whining about it and start saving for a Netflix subscription.
You'd be surprised at the demographics of people on 4chan. They also don't pretend that they don't need to belong, many do belong, and are normal people. I don't know who told you that 4chan is full of wanna-be non-comformists, but this isn't the case.
-
Quick, let's create the league of internets to prevent further conflict!
As long as they're led by Google and Microsoft.
Microsoft will organize it, but won't join because they're going for isolationism.
But after all the other OS's start getting taken down by the Apple Powers, Microsoft is going to have to do something to end the destruction of millions of data files.
On Topic, you can't stop pirates without breaking down everybody's door, so I'm all for antagonizing anti-piracy grouos.
-
-
OT confirmed to be full of closet pedos
Sure hope my kids don't grow up in one of your neighborhoods.
Ah, more ignorance. Pedophiles aren't all rapists. Most have self control like normal people.
The real question here is... has anyone even seen loli/shota before? No? ok then how do we know if it is even gross or disgusting? [hide]
I'm sure most have seen it before. It's quite common.
That's a hard lesson to learn.
in Off-Topic
Posted
My morals say yes.