I just don't want to know anymore about this world.
Blackpill [Hard To Swallow Edition] There Is No Such Thing As An "Innocent" In Society [NOT EVEN CHILDREN]
You are talking about personality, I'm talking about biological imperatives, the things you are hardwired to think and feel
You clearly did not read my thread, I already talked about specifics that make your argument pointless
By saying 5 years instead of 10 you are just pushing the buck back a bit further to try and argue innocence from ignorance
BUT ONE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THEIR SINISTER NATURE FOR THE ACT TO NOT BE "INNOCENT"
You seem to be arguing innocence within the context of "simply not knowing", I'm arguing "innocence" from the context of being inclined towards certain thoughts and actions that negatively affect others (and even enjoying it), and that's something ALL CHILDREN DO, humans are inherently sadistic (that's my point)
IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW FAR BACK IN YEARS YOU GO, I'VE ALREADY COVERED THIS, WERE ALL INNATELY SADISTS ON SOME LEVEL
Last edited:
P
Of course, but which moral framework is the "right" one.
NONE, it's all a social construct, nothing is OBJECTIVELY wrong or right
Want to see more moralfags try to argue against biological human behavior
Then in another thread they'll ironically argue that hypergamy is innate to women and hardwired into their biology
Their logic:
"Well they are innocent until they start expressing their innate desires and personally affecting me, until it does affect me or they reach the age when society tells me its alright to judge them, they're innocent"
Ironically proving exactly what I said in my thread:
Well to be fair I already said I didn't read it basically lol, but the person you were agreeing with @lll is making a different argument and appealing to their FUTURE ACTIONS rather than the innate sadistic tendencies in toddlers.
i.e. "they'll do this when they grow up so they're bad and must die" rather than the fact that they are already not innocent like you argued.
Bullshit I almost wish I was that way lol. There is clearly a spectrum of such behavior.
You tried to argue as if nobody could say they didn't want to kill Hitler as a kid when that is not the case under different moral frameworks. It's a contentious question for a reason.
So in fact any moralfag could be completely consistent in his reasoning.
Last edited:
Not all forms of "sadism" are extreme
Don't let me see you in any threads laughing about any roastie getting acid faced, or her crying because Chad left her
All forms of "schadenfreude" is sadism
You not only didn't read my arguments, you clearly didn't even read your own arguments lol
What you're saying doesn't make sense, because my arguments and @III arguments aren't seperate or opposed, ever think that their "future actions" are related to "their innate sadistic tendencies"
I don't see how you rationalize them as not being connected, that makes no sense at all lol
That specifically is a poor example of using someone as a stepping stone. I don't see how anyone even gains any benefit from that. Maybe emotional benefit? I don't know.
The result of these innate sadistic tendencies you describe don't always result in bullying or any specific occurrence whatsoever. Like you just conceded not all forms of sadism are extreme.
That's why you can't appeal to future actions as a justification. Who knows how it will manifest. It could be mild or he could be a future murderer.
Last edited:
personality is already set in stone by first grade nigga. https://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/personality-set-life-grade-new-study-article-1.203576
who will be a bully, an outcast, a whore. Can already be determined to a very large extent by first fucking grade.
Why you hate on satanism worshipping fags if u dont worship the dead kike on a stick?
either that, or cucks/chads
Do you know which one is which and are the bullies by that time so you can select who 'deserves' it?
Also, I can give a very obvious example which disproves this: puberty. Puberty is what determines when people will be attractive or not for the rest of their life. Missing the puberty lottery can completely change your "personality", make you socially stunted, etc. There are people on here who were like that and can attest to that.
"deserves it", "innocence","morality" are arbitrary do you agree with this?
There's no such thing as "deserve", shit just happens (my signature is dedicated to this nonsense because belief in "deserving" is the #1 INDICATOR OF BEING A MORALFAG AND BEING BLUE PILLED)
Did Chad "deserve" to be born better looking than you? (if not, why do you still believe in the concept of "deserving" then?)
A lot of you guys actually believe in the "just world" fallacy and you don't even realize it, you all hold onto certain aspects of the blue pill and you just can't let go
The concept of "deserving" is rooted in the concept of "a just world", as in something bad happening to someone who "deserved it" is a good thing because that's "justice", there's no such thing as justice, all of these blue pilled concepts are shit you were raised to believe
Then why are people appealing to future actions such as "these are the same people who would be my bullies" to justify whatever actions such as killing or whatever on kids? Their first reaction is "those kids are the people who will grow up to be my bullies! They're not innocent! They deserve it!"
Clearly people here have a conception that there are indeed people who "deserve" it such as normies, females, etc and people who don't.
This is why all this edgy LARPing is pointless IMO. You can say morality doesn't exist, but you've been conditioned by the society we're in since birth, you'll be conditioned by it tomorrow, and the day after.
At the very end of the day you're going to end up falling back on some moralistic argument, point, or line of thinking when communicating like BlkPillPres constantly tries point out in users and then consequently say there aren't blackpilled.
This is why all this blackpill gatekeeping is stupid.
It's the people in this thread who think some people deserve it not me or at least that's why they're talking about how these children will grow up to be the ones that would grow up to bully them as an argument.
Last edited:
Were only making these arguments to show that your moral justifications (even though are false to begin with) are completely flawed
Its called "arguing within context"
You guys are starting off the argument as - "they are innocent" or "they don't deserve X"
Were just continuing within that context to show you that EVEN WITHIN YOUR PROPOSED CONTEXT YOU ARE WRONG, they aren't "innocent"
That doesn't mean we agree with your context (that concepts like "morality" and "deserving" are true), were just showing you that your arguments are so flawed, even within your own context they're wrong
If you're going to mention someone, quote them, this "dodging" shit doesn't make sense
D
You got some proof of this? I want to know, how you came to this conclusion ?
D
Based & high IQ. I HATE kids
Weinstein, Cosby, etc (and those are just the guys who got found out and caught up in scandals JFL), and those are some big names
As for pedophillia, look up Cory Feldman, he has admitted to being sexually abused as a young child actor and has been quite open and vocal about whats going on in the entertainment industry
If you're arguing within "my context" (I'm just pushing buttons) then why are you trying to pull me back into your context and say that "nobody deserves anything."
Shouldn't you stay within the same context when I bring up such a point?
So we're talking about bullies with the implicit understanding that they deserve X and aren't innocent. But when I point out how you can't differentiate at that point in time it's well it doesn't matter anyways?
Why even argue within context anyways and just say people's actions don't matter anyways and killing a future bully is the same as killing a future incel?
It's your thread you get alerts anyways. Lol, how is that dodging?
Last edited:
All I am is saying. Is the concept of innocence itself doesnt exist in objective reality, only exists in the minds of men. Thus kids arent really innocent as innocence,honior,worthiness,morality all of these things dont truly exist.
D
This
@GoffSystemQB - Baby sharks eat eachother in the womb, because that's part of their genetic programming, its hard wired into them, humans are just hardwired with less obviously cruel traits so we get to lie to ourselves and tell ourselves - "I'm a good person deep down"
There's no such thing as "innocent", or are you going to say those baby sharks are "innocent" too while gobbling down their brothers and sisters in the womb JFL ("they don't know any better, their fins aren't even fully formed")
Lacking "less obviously" cruel instincts/traits doesn't make you "good", and that's the only difference between humans and animals, our instincts and traits aren't as "obviously" cruel and brutal
Most humans are just egotistical pieces of shit who don't want to admit to themselves that they aren't "good", because that ruins existence for them, as it "takes away" from their persona
Last edited:
I've always been misanthropic and think most humans are pieces of shit so it's no surprise to me. Obviously this is biological, but there is clearly a spectrum of behavior.
Furthermore society and societal conditioning does indeed restrain us back. Although, it would be nice that I could fight and die for what I want in some theoretically collapsed society I'm not sure how it gets better for incels/men.
There are even more losers in the wild then there are in society that simple. We just probably exited one of the easiest eras for men in all of humankind. You might think you're some sort of high T alpha who will be able to take and get what he wants by force, but I don't have the same opinion regarding myself. Quite frankly it seems odd that any incel would hold the counter opinion actually.
But that doesn't mean I have to think it should be a free-fall against kids or anyone else. There's clearly a societal benefit and utility if not biological for our different actions and behaviors toward children.
Last edited:
Tbh is always a pleasure to read your threads.
I feel warm inside knowing i helped inspire this shitshow
Even though morality existing in society is beneficial for everyone as a whole. For the individual it is best to have no inhibitions,no morals, no emotional attachments. Only focus attaining their desired goal and do whatever they must.
Thanks, good find, beta uprising will happen soon.I feel warm inside knowing i helped inspire this shitshow
Freud made this clear long ago. Good post.
true. in the end someone has to lose
D
All Sons of Adam & Daughters of Eve ingested that very same Apple of the fruit of knowledge (knowing good from bad) on that very same fateful day when we all cast out from the garden of Eden.
Giving up the garden of paradise for pussy.
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
That's all I'll say about that.
Giving up the garden of paradise for pussy.
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
That's all I'll say about that.
Another based thread.
There are no Innocents. Just people that deserves tougher punishments than others.
Yet to the last 20..40 years it more or less worked.
kids are more cruel than adults
doesn't anyone here remember how awful junior high was? there was much more bullying going on than vs high school
Moral justifications have to be backed by threats, its the threats that worked not the justification
I wouldn't even say they are more cruel, they are just in a simpler environment where you have to "play human" less, there's less pretending involved
Mostly modern US + some parts of Europe IMO. But that's not how the rest of the world recently worked. In later USSR for ex morals were largly backed by themselves, not potential treats/punishments. And there were no public degeneracy like nowdays. Context got changed and sheeps simply followed each other leaded by television/hollywood /internet "jew" propaganda.
If the main reason of explicitly enabled and further encouraged foids hypergamy is to control population grow its over - too much resources/efforts were already put into it and investors are looking forward to collect the ROI.
D
Because kids bullying others isn’t a thing.
When I say threats, I also mean things like social ostracization, there were consequences to being a whore in the past, what I'm saying its not the moral justification that really mattered, it was the punishment associated with failing to meet that moral standard that mattered, it was the threat that mattered not the rule itself, because a rule doesn't matter unless its back by a punishment
Innocence is engaging in an act without fully understanding the consequences/harm the act might inflict on someone else. In that sense, children are innocent. Children often play with insects, dissect them, etc simply because they have little understanding of the concept of life, death, suffering, morals, etc.
Now that being said, are all children innocent? Fuck no. A lot of serial killers were fucked up kids who enjoyed torturing their pets. It must be genetic since in a lot of those cases, there was no underlying abuse or an incident that could have sparked this kind of behavior.
Tldr : Most children are innocent and it is wise to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Now that being said, are all children innocent? Fuck no. A lot of serial killers were fucked up kids who enjoyed torturing their pets. It must be genetic since in a lot of those cases, there was no underlying abuse or an incident that could have sparked this kind of behavior.
Tldr : Most children are innocent and it is wise to give them the benefit of the doubt.
You are arguing innocence from ignorance, I'm talking about innocence within the context of one being inclined towards certain thoughts and/or actions, in that regard, nobody is innocent, as one can't be "innocent of their instincts"
Studies even show that babies respond better to good looking people, and girls don't just start rejecting boys for their looks at the age of 16, it starts from way younger
Males don't start bullying when they hit the age of 18, they are doing it from way younger too
Whatever we like to classify as "evil" is "already inside us" FROM BIRTH, that's my point
I even used examples, for example how babies laugh when playing with their parents and that parent makes a pained face when attacked, don't you find it weird that a response of glee comes from an expression of pain, we already know things INSTINCTIVELY, so it doesn't matter if a child has the "socialized understanding" of being a human, because they already have hardwired the "biological understanding" of being a human, its instinctual
THAT'S WHY NOBODY IS INNOCENT
Children don't magically "become bullies", females don't magically "become whores", etc, THEY WERE ALWAYS THOSE THINGS, THAT'S WHAT HUMANS ARE
"low" classes(masses) were always bound by inevitable punishment/public shaming but "high" ones were mostly self-controlled by morals(since they are already in full control of [self]punishment(as Inventors) and should advance further the primitive sin -> punishment link) until one day they started to fail to limit themselves - afterwards the control of lower classes got lifted/loosen too, as a consequence.
Babies react instinctively to someone's looks. While i agree babes are quite racist/lookist, they can hardly fathom the consequences of their actions. This ignorance in this case makes their actions innocent.
No it doesn't
You don't seem to be getting my point, the fact that a baby is capable of such discrimination is what I mean by humans not being "innocent", there is an instinctual "evil" to the very nature of existing as a biological creature
Innocence is just some made up concept humans came up with, there's no such thing
R
destroyed him tbh
in that case, everything is made up.
if everything is made up, the word made up becomes meaningless
see how you say "most"?
even you know deep inside that SOME people are good. you just destroyed ur own argument
Last edited:
"Evil" imo is doing something with the intention of causing harm. The innocence factor comes in when your brain is incapable of handling complex factors such as suffering/morality.
I agree that humans are naturally sadistic, the only thing stopping us from being more so is the filter provided by our rational mind - rationality being a projection of our prefrontal cortex, which isn’t fully developed until we are 25 - this explains why children are more likely to express this ‘blind cruelty’ you described in the form of the 15 year old who continues to inflict pain without thinking deeply about why he does it.
But the truth is, ‘innocence’ and ‘culpability’ do not warrant any kind of punitive response in the way you attempt to rationally justify, they aren’t rational to begin with. They are merely imaginary social constructs projected by human consciousness as a result of our evolutionary programming for the sake of maintaining a sustainable society. No one has any control over the type of person they will become, or the extent to which the sadism present in all of us is a predominant feature of their character.
The reason we have also developed empathy is because without it we would have a situation of moral anarchy (which you profess to prefer, though I don’t think you’ve really thought through the implications of what that would look like as a society-wide paradigm, it doesn’t leave any room the Machiavellian arts of cunning or manipulation, as these things require a base level of trust (even if it is later to be betrayed) in the first place, it would more just be a might = right scenario where there can be no cooperation and anyone stronger than you is likely to murder you on sight for your resources. Humanity would quickly die out without empathy because our children cannot survive their early years without massive input from a guardian, and this sacrifice of time and resources is a form of empathy)
The thing is, I totally understand why you want to see the world burn. It’s because of your early experiences of having been rejected by it that have conditioned you against developing the psychological traits that draw people together, and thus you have been driven to despise these traits as weak and unproductive - mainly because in your experience they have been, they have likely resulted in nothing but further pain for you. ER was similar in this regard, this is actually how most extreme cases of sadism develop, which is what most normal people don’t understand - that’s why they irrationally see justice in the punitive treatment of sadists, your logic is merely a more extreme version of theirs, in which everyone is deserving of pain because they are inherently sadistic on at least some level.
You can profess that technically no one is ‘innocent’ because everyone is naturally born with some degree of sadism within them, but that doesn’t mean that they are by default deserving of having pain levelled against them in response. By that same logic, do you think it can be considered justifiable to skin and boil a cat alive as punishment for having a natural proclivity to play with its prey before eating it in a way that a rabbit does not? It is no more at fault for its own nature than the rabbit. You are making the mistake of consciously blaming people for their unconscious inborn psychological proclivities and responding with punishment in kind. This is the kind of thinking I despise Christianity for as it is a reimagining of the doctrine of original sin, and makes absolutely no sense.
If you are going to endorse this ‘survival of the fittest’ mentality where the inborn sadism of humanity warrants a punitive response in the form of pain inflicted by another, then you must accept there should be an ascending scale to this dynamic, where those who are more naturally sadistic are naturally more deserving of pain. As you believe even children who have had little time to actively express their sadistic tendencies on the earth are not exempt from the preemptive justice you consider this infliction of pain to be, by your own moral logic you could not complain if the door burst in now and the government dragged you away to be tortured for years on end because your proclivity for sadism massively outdoes that of the normal person, who already lacks the innocence to deserve not to die a brutal death according to your logic.
But the truth is, ‘innocence’ and ‘culpability’ do not warrant any kind of punitive response in the way you attempt to rationally justify, they aren’t rational to begin with. They are merely imaginary social constructs projected by human consciousness as a result of our evolutionary programming for the sake of maintaining a sustainable society. No one has any control over the type of person they will become, or the extent to which the sadism present in all of us is a predominant feature of their character.
The reason we have also developed empathy is because without it we would have a situation of moral anarchy (which you profess to prefer, though I don’t think you’ve really thought through the implications of what that would look like as a society-wide paradigm, it doesn’t leave any room the Machiavellian arts of cunning or manipulation, as these things require a base level of trust (even if it is later to be betrayed) in the first place, it would more just be a might = right scenario where there can be no cooperation and anyone stronger than you is likely to murder you on sight for your resources. Humanity would quickly die out without empathy because our children cannot survive their early years without massive input from a guardian, and this sacrifice of time and resources is a form of empathy)
The thing is, I totally understand why you want to see the world burn. It’s because of your early experiences of having been rejected by it that have conditioned you against developing the psychological traits that draw people together, and thus you have been driven to despise these traits as weak and unproductive - mainly because in your experience they have been, they have likely resulted in nothing but further pain for you. ER was similar in this regard, this is actually how most extreme cases of sadism develop, which is what most normal people don’t understand - that’s why they irrationally see justice in the punitive treatment of sadists, your logic is merely a more extreme version of theirs, in which everyone is deserving of pain because they are inherently sadistic on at least some level.
You can profess that technically no one is ‘innocent’ because everyone is naturally born with some degree of sadism within them, but that doesn’t mean that they are by default deserving of having pain levelled against them in response. By that same logic, do you think it can be considered justifiable to skin and boil a cat alive as punishment for having a natural proclivity to play with its prey before eating it in a way that a rabbit does not? It is no more at fault for its own nature than the rabbit. You are making the mistake of consciously blaming people for their unconscious inborn psychological proclivities and responding with punishment in kind. This is the kind of thinking I despise Christianity for as it is a reimagining of the doctrine of original sin, and makes absolutely no sense.
If you are going to endorse this ‘survival of the fittest’ mentality where the inborn sadism of humanity warrants a punitive response in the form of pain inflicted by another, then you must accept there should be an ascending scale to this dynamic, where those who are more naturally sadistic are naturally more deserving of pain. As you believe even children who have had little time to actively express their sadistic tendencies on the earth are not exempt from the preemptive justice you consider this infliction of pain to be, by your own moral logic you could not complain if the door burst in now and the government dragged you away to be tortured for years on end because your proclivity for sadism massively outdoes that of the normal person, who already lacks the innocence to deserve not to die a brutal death according to your logic.
I am not in the mood to quarrel with BlackPillPres tbh.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
