Play
Multi-Player
Coins
Community
Settings
Help
Community   Maps   Forum   Mail   Tournaments   Ladders   Clans   Recent Games
Sign In | Sign Up
<< Back to Off-topic Forum   

Posts 1 - 16 of 16   
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 04:27:00

TabbyCat
Level 7
Report
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 05:38:24

TabbyCat
Level 7
Report
Moralistic lunatics, stop! Reality does not have to obey your ideals.

Edited 9/7/2017 05:40:09
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 06:36:28


Bane 
Level 60
Report
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 12:13:16


Eklipse
Level 57
Report
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 12:46:16


Cata Cauda
Level 58
Report
Moralistic lunatics, stop! Reality does not have to obey your ideals.
Humans also dont obey to absolute rationality (which is by the way not possible anyway). They do what they want. You can change society (Renaissance for example), but you cant chnage humans basic ways to think and interact.

Edited 9/7/2017 12:48:10
- downvoted post by TabbyCat
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 13:05:24


Eklipse
Level 57
Report
"Upgraded" I.E: Anyone who disagrees with Tabby will have their brain forcibly altered so that they agree with him.

Because screw free thinking.

Edited 9/7/2017 13:05:45
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 13:12:17


Cata Cauda
Level 58
Report
Humans need to be upgraded to be more rational. That's for sure. However we don't even have the required technologies yet.
Why though? If you want your ideology to come true, you have to show that yours is better than the current one.

Practically everyone as individual is rejecting your ideas because it doesnt garuntee they, their families, their friends live better with it. You must understand that the majority of humans are like matter, they want stability. Like a ball always rolling downhill to achieve the most stabil position. Hitler came to power, because he brought stability to the country. Far-rights are gaining power nowadays because they promise stability. Humans always aim for stability, even if it means being conservative (dark ages as example). Revolutionary ideas are rarely accepted, because most of the time they are doomed to fail and make the situation even worse.
You need to work on your advertisment.
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 13:16:44

TabbyCat
Level 7
Report
^^Implying that whatever Tabby believes never changed or Tabbism requires everyone to be a replica of Tabby.

I love free rational thinking unrestricted by the society so nope. Address my other points then, not only the one you can find the most people who oppose it. For example you can argue that my idea of reality is flawed which is more plausible than the idea that different people literally have different realities. You can also concede that I happen to be factually accurate on that one but still factually incorrect on other ideas. You can not just reject "Tabby's reality" unless it is not actually reality. Reality is objective.

^Agreed. I promise instability and struggle, not stability.

Edited 9/7/2017 13:46:44
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 14:14:00


Zephyrum 
Level 60
Report
I reject your reality and substitute my own.


"NICE! Dungeonmaster!"

"Eh? What? No! Mythbusters. What the hell is a dungeon master?"

"Oh... I was so happy there for a second..."
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 14:21:03


Eklipse
Level 57
Report
"which is more plausible than the idea that different people literally have different realities. You can also concede that I happen to be factually accurate on that one but still factually incorrect on other ideas. You can not just reject "Tabby's reality" unless it is not actually reality. Reality is objective."

Do you comprehend what a joke is? Or what a meme is? My first post wasn't even meant to be taken seriously.
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 14:56:26


Zephyrum 
Level 60
Report
Tabby can't get the two movies and one anime reference you made in a single sentence, Eklipse.

He's not a man of C U L T U R E.
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 15:14:15

TabbyCat
Level 7
Report
^What? Are you ******* sure that it contains three references? I thought that it was literal.

I actually believed that that sentence is just Eklipse emotionally reacting to my reasoning because I questioned his emotionally important anti-epistemology required to protect specific beliefs with emotional significance that he knows to be questionable. Then he invented the ad hoc meme bullshit so that he does not appear to have lost a debate to the resident autistic fascist with very poor social reputation. You know, most NTs absurdly believe that the social status of the speaker is somehow relevant to whether the speech is factually accurate. If Tabby says that 1+1=2 then 1+1 must be something other than 2 or Tabby will make sense. Of course Tabby must never be allowed to be right hence 1+1 must not be 2.

Edited 9/7/2017 15:24:23
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 15:45:00


Zephyrum 
Level 60
Report
^What? Are you ******* sure that it contains three references? I thought that it was literal.


The Dungeonmaster (1984), Mythbusters (2005) and Sword Art Online abridged episode 11 (2017). There's your three references.

Edited 9/7/2017 16:02:41
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 15:47:43


Bane 
Level 60
Report
one anime reference

gross
Moralistic fallacy: 9/7/2017 22:38:24


OxTheAutist 
Level 58
Report
Tabby's too R A T I O N A L for pop culture, or anything beyond his own twisted view of reality.
Posts 1 - 16 of 16   

Contact | About WarLight | Play Risk Online | Multiplayer Strategy Game | Challenge Friends, Win Money | Skill Game | Terms of Service