Support NeoGAF

[Ninja Scooter]

HELL. FUCKING. YES. i would. But there would have to be some conditions. She would have to be someone i wasn't in any kind of relationship with (work, friend, ect..) and i can't know the husband.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Can you refute anything I said? If not, kindly stfu. There was nothing "holier than thou" in my posts save for a single comment. I made points. Argue against them or retreat back to your cozy existence where people are allowed to make spurious arguments and screw married chicks, but nobody is allowed to utter a word of disapproval."

I'm sorry, I can't be arsed to full wade through mountains of self-righteous BS text. Could you condense it down into a few sentences?

By the way, I don't care if you disapprove or not, it's just the sheer arrogance in the first few lines of your posts (I really didn't care to read past that, I'm not quite sure what's to be argued between "Hey, I like sleeping with married chicks" and "I don't." That's why I'm not refuting your points, just mocking your arrogance.) is really annoying.

 

[Loki]

So, basically, you're a loser who can waltz in and make wise-ass comments, yet not do the real work of addressing someone's argument? Typical.


Do yourself a favor and grow up. There is no arrogance in my posts (save, perhaps, for one statement). There are arguments. Either deal with them or remove yourself from the discussion. I'm sick of the juvenile bullshit on this board, and you're a prime example.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"So, basically, you're a loser who can waltz in and make wise-ass comments, yet not do the real work of addressing someone's argument? Typical."

Did you not read what I said? I don't *care* about this "argument," as I *really* doubt I care about either side's position my real issue is...



"Do yourself a favor and grow up. There is no arrogance in my posts (save, perhaps for one statement). There are arguments. Either deal with them or remove yourself from the discussion."

Your posts *reek* of arrogance. From your constant speak of who you "know" is right or wrong, blah blah to your Merriam-Webster E-peen waving. You're borderline ridiculous. The only thing that keeps me from laughing is knowing that there's a real human attached to these posts that actually functions with people in society.

 

[Loki]

End yourself, Teknopathetic (fitting name, btw). When you become an adult, come back and perhaps we can have a civilized discussion.


Believe me when I tell you that the only two jokes in here are yourself and Duane. Arguing the opposite viewpoint is not by itself "holier than thou"-- it is simply the opposite fucking viewpoint. He feels there are no moral injunctions against adultery, I find this sort of conduct morally reprehensible; me simply stating my beliefs is not "self-righteousness" in any way, particularly when I have valid reasons for believing such, none of which you have addressed-- likely because you lack the capacity to do so.


Toodles.

 

[Teknopathetic]

Do you jump at the opportunity to prove everything I've said about you?

 

[Loki]

Do you jump at the opportunity to prove everything I've said about you?

Guess I do. You're a child-- oops, I jumped again!


Do you jump at the opportunity to fire off insulting comments while offering nothing of substance? Apparently. There's a word for that, and it starts with "t" and ends with "roll."

 

[ScientificNinja]

Loki, I've never had any bones with your opinions in the past, but you are one fine piece of cultural elitist ass. You might as well just tell every person not living in your idea of a Western society to go fuck off and live in their own countries. The suggestion that a reference to cultural relativism is a betrayal of one's ignorance, followed by a demonstration of your completely homogenised understanding of Western culture, is ignorance in itself. You understand nothing of the Asian culture, you refer to dynastic Chinese sociology very inaccurately and you talk as though hedonism is a bad thing, even though many Western cultures owe their economies to it.

And contracts being the backbone of society? Well, here's the thing. Marriage is a contract between the husband and wife. By definition, I have no privity of contract and I am therefore not bound to the terms of the marriage, whether I know about that agreement or not. So yes, I would feel perfectly entitled to fuck her. Whether I want to or not is a different thing, but in a strictly contractual sense, the marriage is ultimately irrelevant. End of story.

 

[EviLore]

Some folks requested a Cliff Notes version:

Nor was I trying to. I'm intelligent enough to realize that I can't outsmart you, Duane.

'I'm better than you.'

No, but the quality of the arguments you advance as a justification for your beliefs does say something about your intelligence.

'You're dumb.'

Far be it from me to call someone who merely disagrees with my personal morality "unintelligent"; when their reasoning is suspect and their evidence tenuous, however, I feel that I'm justified in making that call.

'I'm definitely not the sort of person that normally resorts to uncouth behavior, but by all means am I going to take the opportunity to now, considering your unbridled stupidity.' *adjusts beret*

You have made several indefensible statements that do not square with history, sociology, philosophy, or law; the fact that you refuse to recant said statements is evidence of your foolishness and your intransigence.

'How dare you not apologize for your opinion after receiving such a thorough scolding from my obviously superior intellect?'

If you're a moral relativist, then we shouldn't even be having this conversation, as no common ground will ever be reached.

'We shouldn't be having this conversation, but since my obsessive nature compels me otherwise I'll engage in a reply of the utmost hypocrisy.'

My personal argument "against" moral relativism is that certain ideologies and practices have produced tangible results in terms of highly functional societies. When we look for the common denominators in said societies, we witness certain features/beliefs; this can lead us to draw conclusions about the relative merit of certain propositions. When we can trace the effects of a belief or practice throughout history and calculate its import (or inutility, as it may be), we can begin to deduce the objective validity of said beliefs and praxes. Such a functional theory of morality, which has real-world analogues, is not as easily assailable by relativists as more abstract moral frameworks are.

'Relativists are dumb'

First off, I think you should note that I have made few appeals to purely philosophical "morality" (i.e., moral absolutism); for the most part, I have focused on the utility of, and justification for, certain societal beliefs and practices. It is in this sense that what you advocate is immoral, as it does not comport with the way a sound society conducts its business, as borne out by history. You're basically a hedonist except for when the law bars you from being such, and you have a dim understanding of the relationship between beliefs, institutions (the latter flows directly from the former), and their role in the maintenance of a society.

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

A certain variability of conduct between societies, or variable moral/ethical interpretations of actions within a single society, is expected and understandable, and your examples above are all instances of this. These are not fundamental to the maintenance of society; things such as marriage are. The integrity of contracts in general are. A contract is entered into with an expectation as to the fulfillment of its terms and conditions. If you want to change that so that it better comports with your feral sensibilities, then go and change the terms and conditions of the agreement-- don't just blithely point to nature and relativism as an "out" when they are nothing of the sort; you only betray your own ignorance in doing so.

'Things in bold are really really necessary, because they're in bold. Also, you're a dumb hedonist.'

It is, however, the pinnacle of civilization (at least presently), as measured by any objective standard you'd care to proffer. Feel free to disregard that, or call it "ethnocentric", but western values and ideals have shaped these societies into places of great functionality and achievement. The day I see tons of people emigrating from the US, Britain, Canada, and France to places like Grenada, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, or Croatia is the day I concede that all cultures are of equal worth. Every culture has good and noble features, and these deserve to be lauded and maintained by its people; however, don't be so foolish as to assume that all cultures are equal. This belief is simply an outgrowth of your more general moral relativism, which I do not agree with for the stated reasons. However you'd care to define "success", the western world has it in spades while many other places do not. But you go on continuing to believe that western ideals and institutions, of the sort you're trying to tear down and/or discount, had absolutely nothing to do with the ascension of western society.

'Cultural Relativism has no worth as long as people don't emigrate en masse from my country to Vietnam.'

See above. Also, the problem is not that different societies have different beliefs, but that you're in a society which has a certain tradition and belief and you are discounting and/or trying to undermine it based on spurious reasoning. Just as I can't go to Saudi Arabia and expect religious tolerance, so should you not be in the United States and expect people's notions regarding the propriety of adultery to conform to yours.

'You sacrilegious cunt, I can't believe you don't respect the western institution of marriage.'

Here's a news flash: religion itself has been a great socializing force in the world, and many of its features and values have become incorporated into western civilization and its guiding philosophy (it wasn't all Crusades and terrorism, you know); none of this, however, changes the utility of these beliefs/institutions, as their effects can be directly observed as opposed to merely speculated about.

'I love being a Christian, since its roots in western civilization (humanity's greatest achievement under God - at least in part thanks to my existence) substantiate its greatness. Would you like a pamphlet?'

No worries, as you exhibit both. But just keep pointing to ocelots and aardvarks as justification for your liaisons. It suits you well.

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

A lack of scruples, apparently.

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

:lol

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

Do you realize how much of a child you sound like? What are you, like 26 years old? What a shame. Yeah, you're "more of a man" than he is-- because we all know that the measure of a man is his sexual prowess. The law of the wild, indeed; more evidence of your affinity for hedonism and your desire to elevate "natural law" to the law of human societies.

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

(Are we noticing a pattern?)

Like I said, you don't want social Darwinism-- you only want it when it suits you. I could just as easily say that the rich should exploit the poor as far as possible, because they have power and should seek to retain it-- but your flagrant communism doesn't quite square with Darwinism in that case, now, does it. All of a sudden you want law, ideals, and philosophy-- you want civilization. You're a hypocrite in that sense, not to mention an unscrupulous, profligate twit. Your ill-considered idiocy has been allowed to go unspoken to for far too long. You pollute threads with the worst sort of reasoning, frequently holding up the worst of human conduct as admirable-- a clear indication of your broken moral compass. You're a joke, and I don't say that often. I've held my tongue many times, but will do so no longer.

'You're a dumb hedonist.'

The rich stick it to the poor, and this is as it should be, because the poor are weak, and don't deserve to survive. Sound good to you? Thought not.

'Bask in my prowess with forming belittling analogies.'

I'm sure it's not that hard to do...if you have no sense of decency about you, that is. Unfortunately, I was raised to be a decent and honorable person, and you were obviously not. You act like there's some big mystery to having casual sex. News flash: licentiousness is not hard-- if anything, it's easy. In many cases, too easy.

'I wish I wasn't so hung up on Christian morality, because the pleasures of fornication are difficult to resist.'

Though I personally find such a notion distasteful, I would not have condemned it verbally if we were speaking of two single people. I am a believer in personal liberty-- people can do as they wish, even as you are allowed to post your rubbish on a public board with no consequence. What I took (and take) issue with is the fact that there is a very important social compact here which is being violated, and you are using sophistry to try and justify it.

'I sure wish I could be a mod at GAF so I could ban people for disagreeing with me.'

Thug life, yo-- keepin' it real. What a way to live. It's sad that this is what we've come to as a people. Do you shed and shit in public, too? Because you might as well be an animal, really. Darwinism when it suits you, Duane...Darwinism when it suits you. You're a fraud.

One personal attack too many.

 

[btrboyev]

this thread got interesting, and my answer is no..she's married....get over it, find somebody not married or not in a relationship..don't be a dick.

 

[Incognito]

I'd fuck her solely because she IS married. Hot hot hot.

 

[Boogie]

Loki banned? Boogie am cry.

At least he'll be able to get Zelda:OoT beaten now.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Loki's a MD to be? Don't worry, homie, I've completely losted my ability to detect my arrogance. I thought it was something people just made up to throw stereotypes around but it's probably true. Oh well.

 

[Pimpwerx]

Hehe, don't give him too much time, Evil. I didn't even read that reply, it's too damn long. I clearly struck a nerve, but the reaction was worth the effort. :lol He's a good guy otherwise. PEACE.

 

[lexy]

Loki; a God among mere mortals.

Respect.

 

[J2 Cool]

Batman am cry. And no, he wouldn't sleep with a married woman. Wtf is wrong with you people?! You're like a moral bags of mixed fruit you psychos. And it's squeezing all the juice out of you!

No. No I wouldn't!

 

[Pimpwerx]

LOL! Got around to reading it. I could have made a brief reply, but unnecessary now. Bottom line: I don't live by other people's morals, I live by mine. Everyone forms their own sense of morality. I'm not gonna have mine dictated to me. Hell, I'm even following the Golden Rule. Anyone's free to sleep with my gf or wife if I'm not cutting it at home. Of course, they don't exist, so it doesn't bother me a lick. Doing unto others as can never be done unto me. PEACE.