DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 20957--------------------------------------------------
Moral dualism
By: rp Date: July 16, 2023, 11:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Meme ridiculing moral relativism (bottom pic is a caricature of
George R.R. Martin (Jew)):
[img]
HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F1CvZcqagAA9_qc?format=png&name=900x900[/img]
#Post#: 20958--------------------------------------------------
Re: Moral dualism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: July 16, 2023, 2:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Too bad the moral absolutist is portrayed as a traditional moral
absolutist, which gives the impression that the past was solely
traditional. We should expand this meme by adding a
representation of an anti-traditional moral absolutist. Would
you like to do this?
#Post#: 20961--------------------------------------------------
Re: Moral dualism
By: rp Date: July 16, 2023, 3:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't have any experience with making memes, but I can try.
Also, the moral absolutist drawing has its origins in this
meme:
HTML https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/569/458/f2e.png<br
/>which was portraying Mediterraneans as more "chad" (presumably
higher in sexual dimorphism, as evidenced by the facial hair)
than Nordics. Although, this could also be used for depicting
Aryan personalities, as "chad" is just the top 20% of men, and
stripping the facial hair certainly leans in this direction, as
the "chad" has a good gonial angle/fwhr compared to the
subhuman Martin or the "nordcuck".
#Post#: 23905--------------------------------------------------
Re: Random Thoughts....
By: SirGalahad Date: November 20, 2023, 4:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It’s always striking to me how thoroughly unconvincing the
mainstream Christian and Islamic arguments for solving the
problem of evil are. The most egregious argument used to solve
the problem of evil, is when they say “Evil exists so that we
can discern the good. Without evil, good couldn’t exist, and
there would be no way of describing or perceiving it. Everything
needs its opposite.” This is a blatant admission that the people
who truly believe this argument have no real intent to oppose
evil, and that if they were ever given an opportunity to destroy
evil once and for all, they would not take it
@90sRetroFan What are your opinions on the free will argument,
that evil exists so we may choose good, as well as the
“Suffering and evil exist to test us” argument? I have an idea
of why these arguments are unsatisfactory in justifying the
existence of evil, but I think I’m having trouble articulating
them, so I wanted to see if you could articulate it better. And
I thought it was a discussion worth having, just so that this
forum has something to reference back to when the topic
inevitably comes up again. Maybe this should be its own thread
Anyways, these unconvincing arguments especially irk me because
certain religions already did a near perfect job at solving the
problem of evil. In Zoroastrianism, God is good, and is
ultimately responsible for all that is good in the world. The
Devil is the opposite. Neither derives fron the other. Bam, nice
and simple.
“A good tree only produces good fruit. A good tree cannot
produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Thus
you will know them by their fruits” - Jesus
Then Christian and Islamic orthodoxy came along and took a
massive step backwards, making everything more complicated for
no reason. Mani attempted to course-correct by reintroducing
dualism and proselytizing his own religion to as many people as
he and his followers could, but the religion was ultimately
overshadowed and then stamped out
#Post#: 23915--------------------------------------------------
Re: Moral dualism
By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 20, 2023, 6:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"“Evil exists so that we can discern the good. Without evil,
good couldn’t exist, and there would be no way of describing or
perceiving it. Everything needs its opposite.”"
Good should not want to exist. That is the attitude that makes
good good.
The moment "good" starts to become attached to its own
existence, it is already no longer good. The proof of this is
the argument you quoted, since it would implicitly tolerate evil
existing alongside itself if that were the only way for it to
continue its own existence. Whatever tolerates evil can by
definition no longer call itself good.
"if they were ever given an opportunity to destroy evil once and
for all, they would not take it"
Exactly. Can such people call themselves good? They cannot. They
are in fact evil, as we could trivially deduce from your
description alone.
"What are your opinions on the free will argument, that evil
exists so we may choose good"
And not everyone will. So is it more important that those who
choose good get to congratulate themselves on being better than
those who did not, or is more important that evil is prevented?
"as well as the “Suffering and evil exist to test us” argument?"
If the Devil created evil, and then God has no choice but to use
it to test which of us should be deployed to fight against the
Devil, then we can hardly blame God for trying to find the best
people for the job. But if it is the same deity who both created
evil and then uses it to experiment on us, then that deity is
surely our enemy.
"Then Christian and Islamic orthodoxy came along and took a
massive step backwards, making everything more complicated for
no reason"
The reason was to fit in with Judaism.
#Post#: 26544--------------------------------------------------
Re: Moral dualism
By: SirGalahad Date: May 23, 2024, 8:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
False left promotion of the idea that narratives of good and
evil are dangerous:
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoAYzkjD3bA
*****************************************************