Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Blackpill [Hard To Swallow Edition] There Is No Such Thing As An "Innocent" In Society [NOT EVEN CHILDREN]

This is an astronomically retarded take, I’m disappointed bro.

Pedantically speaking “Innocents dying” in regards to a mass murder odoes not mean that they were pure hearted angels, just that they were innocent of any transgression. If you have a gang shootout and the Pajeet gas station attendant is shot and dies that’s still an innocent dying, even if he goes home at night and beats his kids or whatever. If the two tyrones kill each other neither of them are innocents, even if both were acting with clear consciousness and doing something arguably righteous like avenging the unpunished murder of their brother.
 
Kids are always assumed to be innocent because it’s perceived that they do not have control over their action because they lack maturity and are therefore not responsible for their actions. This is why kids always receives lesser sentences after committing crimes and tend to be placed more frequently in rehabilitation programs. Every society has their own arbitrary cut off of what makes someone an autonomous individual responsibility who is held responsible for their actions and an innocent child who just hasn’t matured and been socially conditioned enough. Maybe children are viewed as innocent because society allocates them a set period of time to get their shit together and become functional members of society
 
Last edited:
Innocence is just some made up concept humans came up with, there's no such thing
by that logic so is evil, therefore no child ''inherently evil'' the same way no child is innocent
 
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
I went to an all boys high school so I can't compare.

Part of the reason I went was because the bullying
 
I’m not innocent tbh
 
Agreed, human nature is the root of most problems. That's not to say that we can't work with it or that humans are horrible, but claiming that innocence is default ignores the fact that many of the evils in society stem from out nature given to us at birth.
 
U are actually low iq disguised as high iq
 
by that logic so is evil, therefore no child ''inherently evil'' the same way no child is innocent

Yes, that's exactly my point, I'm only using terms like "evil" to phrase things within the context moralfags would understand, as far as I'm concerned things like "justice", "honor", "deserving", etc don't exist, they are just made up concepts to control and restrict peoples actions
 
Didn't read but finally a blk pill pres thread I agree with. At least the title.
 
Wouldn’t bullying be more severe in an all boys school?
absolutely not.

Boys bully as a way to show off in front of females. Without females around, there is no need to show off
 
A lot of people, even incels, are against mass murders based on the false perception of "innocents", I'm here to argue there's no such thing

Aren't we all aware that pedophilia and rape is rampant in Hollywood?

Most people living in areas with drug king pins know who is running the area yet do nothing until a close family member or friend is affected (or they themselves)

Etc, etc, etc

There are many things about the reality we live in that we "just accept" because it doesn't affect us enough for us to care

Society doesn't care about the things that affect men (divorce laws, child support, alimony, etc), so the entirety of society is complicit in this

ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT IF EVERY PERSON BANDED TOGETHER TO GET THESE LAWS CHANGED IT WOULDN'T CHANGE IN A MONTH?

Of course we could get things changed as a collective

But we don't, and that's because we don't really give a fuck unless something affects us directly, that's how humans are, AND THAT MAKES US ALL COMPLICIT IN THESE SYSTEMS

Everyone is fucking aware of what is going on in some sense but they do nothing about it because it doesn't affect them and/or they come out on top in the scenario, so THEY ARE COMPLICIT

THERE ARE NO INNOCENTS




Now onto why children aren't "innocent", that has more to do with THE NATURE OF WHAT IT IS TO BE HUMAN

WE ARE INNATELY SADISTS AND SELFISH (FROM BIRTH)

Children are not innocent, they are somewhat ignorant but not innocent, kids engage in the same vile acts adults do, just "lesser" forms of them, and we label these lesser forums as "acceptable" because "its a kid", its all based on emotion and us as a society avoiding an existential crisis, THAT CRISIS COMING FROM US REALIZING WHAT WE REALLY ARE

There is no difference to a 10 year old girl telling the ugly kid in class to get away from her because "he's icky" and that same 10 year old (at the age of 20) telling the incel at her college to get away from her because he's an "ugly loser who is stupid enough to think he had a chance with her"

There is no difference between a 15 year old bully that takes children's lunch money, and a 35 year old that makes the local small businesses in his area pay a "protection fee". BOTH are forms of "racketeering", one is just treated as "lesser" and basically ignored because "its a kid"

ALL OF THESE "LESSER FORMS" OF ACTS/THOUGHTS ARE INDICATORS OF HUMAN NATURE AND THAT PERSON'S MINDSET

Having a more "advanced understanding" of your thoughts and actions don't make you more or less innocent, because at the end of the day, you comprehended the act/thought on some level, and you enjoyed what you were doing, so how the fuck can you be "innocent", its just special pleading BECAUSE HUMANS DON'T WANT TO ADMIT TO OURSELVES WHAT WE ARE, HOW INNATELY CRUEL AND FUCKED UP WE ARE EVEN FROM CHILDHOOD


There's no such thing as "innocent", we just label these "lesser acts/thoughts" that children have as innocent because we want a "just world" perception of things

Ever notice how babies laugh while "playing" with their parents if said parent makes a pained face after they hit them, that's an indicator of the INNATE SADISM we have as a species

We go on to label that act/thought as "innocent" because "its a baby", but that's ridiculous, its really fucking sinister when you think about it, the fact that a baby laughs because you are in pain, the fact that its wired into a being to find enjoyment in an expression associated with discomfort

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS INNOCENCE

What ever you'd like to call "evil" is "inside of us" FROM BIRTH, its just that some age groups get excused, while others are judged for it

Its the same reason why a "child" can be "charged as a minor" for murder rather than charged for murder like every other adult, and its because "they don't know any better, its a child"

Complete BS, we all know on some level, WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHY

That 15 year old school bully who gets off on beating kids knows what he's doing, he just isn't completely aware of why he enjoys it

That 15 year old girl in school that publicly rejects guys so that they get mocked and teased knows what she is doing, she just isn't completely aware of why she enjoys it

Humans are fucked up, society likes to pretend that children aren't because then nobody has to admit to themselves that they were always fucked up, they can give themselves the excuse that "SOMETHING CHANGED THEM" and "were not all bad"
Mt Everest IQ
 
Yes it does what are you on about?
Do you even know what a degenerate is? You clearly don't. A degenerate is a premarital sex-haver, alcohol drinker and/or drugs user.
 
A degenerate is someone who is morally bankrupt in the traditional sense. I would consider picking on someone for your own sadistic pleasure to be quite degenerate.
 
Utilitarianism is not the only moral framework.

Also I forgot to tag @based_meme for more drama.

Why do you want drama? Foid trait.

Also, this is just moral nihilism repackaged to be edgy and have shock value. It's nothing new or special. These threads do have some value, however. They make it easier to see who's high, average and low IQ.
 
Last edited:
Why do you want drama? Foid trait.

Also, this is just moral nihilism repackaged to be edgy and have shock value. It's nothing new or special.
not everyone who is a moral nihilist is just trying to " be edgy for shock value".
 
These threads do have some value, however. They make it easier to see who's high, average and low IQ.
I'm mostly amazed by how a somewhat serious thread has serious replies and barely any postmaxxer tbh
 
Last edited:
you still have never defined what objective morality is. You just evade and reference how people for thousands of years have been debating social constructs which are just meant to control people
 
I'm mostly amazed by how a somewhat-serious thread has serious replies and barely any postmaxxer tbh

Postmaxxers have greener pastures than this thread imo.

you still have never defined what objective morality is. You just evade and reference how people for thousands of years have been debating social constructs which are just meant to control people

k
 
Why do you want drama? Foid trait.

Also, this is just moral nihilism repackaged to be edgy and have shock value. It's nothing new or special. These threads do have some value, however. They make it easier to see who's high, average and low IQ.
Lol. Don't let me ever see you use :feelsPop: :feelsPop: those emojis.
 
Adam Lanza is a Saint. :feelsokman: He managed to see past societies façade and the programming society tries on you to make you comply and never question.

I agree with everything @BlkPillPres says.

Personally I am inclined to think of Ayman Aziz and Salman Abedi as some of the more cultured Saints of our time. But that is just me. :dab::feelsautistic: Both of them will always have a place in my mind. They give me pause for thought and I remember that yes, Toilets will suffer, all I have to do is wait and watch, silently from the shadows. I wonder if I should make a shrine to Aziz and Abedi.. that'd be quite a nice memory for me.
 
Computer, how do I use a search engine?

Also, why are you bringing that up? What does that have to do with me, or this?
I'm "bringing it up" because you have never answered the question, and neither has any place on the internet.
 
I'm "bringing it up" because you have never answered the question, and neither has any place on the internet.

giphy.gif


@CuckedRedditor This is the kind of shit I'm talking about. It's gone from sad to entertaining.
 
giphy.gif


@CuckedRedditor This is the kind of shit I'm talking about. It's gone from sad to entertaining.
see, you are completely evading the question, just as suspected, because you KNOW deep down there is no such thing as an OBJECTIVE wrong or right.
 
WE ARE INNATELY SADISTS AND SELFISH (FROM BIRTH)
We all like to pretend we care, but when the opportunity arises, we have no problem stepping on others for our own personal gain.
[/QUOTE]
 
I'm "bringing it up" because you have never answered the question, and neither has any place on the internet.
Serious answer: from religion if you believe in it.
 
see, you are completely evading the question, just as suspected, because you KNOW deep down there is no such thing as an OBJECTIVE wrong or right.

I'm telling you to take 10-15 minutes to use a search engine and educate yourself, but you're too dumb to do even that. Instead, you expect me to spoonfeed you. Even then, you'd be too lazy/ignorant to discuss the topic, so you'll tag others to do it for you when you quickly hit that ceiling.

JFL
 
I'm telling you to take 10-15 minutes to use a search engine and educate yourself, but you're too dumb to do even that. Instead, you expect me to spoonfeed you. Even then, you'd be too lazy/ignorant to discuss the topic, so you'll tag others to do it for you when you quickly hit that ceiling.

JFL
I HAVE used a search engine, and what I have found is that there is no such thing as an "objective" morality, and that it is all a social construct.
 
I'm telling you to take 10-15 minutes to use a search engine and educate yourself, but you're too dumb to do even that. Instead, you expect me to spoonfeed you. Even then, you'd be too lazy/ignorant to discuss the topic, so you'll tag others to do it for you when you quickly hit that ceiling.

JFL

Dude you really are just evading the question and at this point you are just trolling, I would not bother responding to him @Personalityinkwell

There's obviously no such thing as objective morality, all morality is subjective, even if God exists its still subjective because morality is just the rules he came up with for a world that he came up with, the rules are just as imaginary as that world which did not exist till he created it, everything is subjective from God's eyes as none of it is really "real", its like a programmer looking at lines of code
 
I HAVE used a search engine, and what I have found is that there is no such thing as an "objective" morality, and that it is all a social construct.

It's OK, go postmaxx bro. Don't think too hard about it.
Dude you really are just evading the question and at this point you are just trolling, I would not bother responding to him @Personalityinkwell

There's obviously no such thing as objective morality, all morality is subjective, even if God exists its still objective because morality is just the rules he came up with for a world that he came up with, the rules are just as imaginary as that world which did not exist till he created it, everything is subjective from God's eyes as none of it is really "real", its like a programmer looking at lines of code

You guys are so fucking retarded.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=objective+morality+definition

Literally the first few links cover the basics. For more rigorous definitions and formalisms, consult an encyclopedia.
 
Last edited:
It's OK, go postmaxx bro. Don't think too hard about it.


You guys are so fucking retarded.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=objective+morality+definition

Literally the first few links cover the basics. For more rigorous definitions and formalisms, consult an encyclopedia.
Those link are shit, I looked at this one:

"There is a need, at least a felt need, for clear, definite moral lines".

So he's saying that the need is FELT. Feelings=subjective.

And he didn't even define what makes something objectively moral or immoral. He referenced harm, but did not say what harm is okay and what was not okay.

Here's a link on why objective morality is garbage:


See, I can link to stuff too.

The burden of proof is on you to prove that morality can be "objective", because the concept of morality has ALWAYS been changing over different times and places, depending on what people FEEL.
 
It's OK, go postmaxx bro. Don't think too hard about it.


You guys are so fucking retarded.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=objective+morality+definition

Literally the first few links cover the basics. For more rigorous definitions and formalisms, consult an encyclopedia.
https://lmgtfy.com/?q=feminism+is+about+equality

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=personality+matters

Well would you look at that, I guess if you just search anything and find some sources agreeing with it, it must be true

This is when I start thinking that a person is trolling, its when they start using arguments that are so fallacious, so obviously false, that there's no way they are being serious, they have to be joking, you can't be this fucking stupid
 
Last edited:
The burden of proof is on you to prove that morality can be "objective", because the concept of morality has ALWAYS been changing over different times and places, depending on what people FEEL.

There is no burden of proof, dumbass. This is dialectic. This shit has been established in the moral philosophical literature for hundreds of years.

And if you actually read my five sentence post, I mentioned to consult an encyclopedia for a more rigorous understanding. Psychology today and some dude's blog isn't an encyclopedia.

Try this:

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=feminism+is+about+equality

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=personality+matters

Well would you look at that, I guess if you just search anything and find some sources agreeing with it, it must be true

This is when I start thinking that a person is trolling, its when they start using arguments that are so fallacious, so obviously false, that there's no way they are being serious, they have to be joking, you can't be this fucking stupid

You are the perfect poster child for the Dunning-Krueger effect.
 
Last edited:
Water is wet... but 100% true ngl.
 
There is no burden of proof, dumbass. This shit has been established in the moral philosophical literature for hundreds of years.

And if you actually read my five sentence post, I mentioned to consult a encyclopedia for a more rigorous understanding. Psychology today and some dude's blog isn't an encyclopedia.

Try this:

Once again, you are using appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.

You're wrong, the burden of proof is still on you.

I clicked on your stupid link and looked up objective morality

I found nothing of the sort. They couldn't even find a precise definition of morality. They even agreed that morality changes over time.
 
Once again, you are using appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.

Linking an encyclopedia and encouraging self-learning is now an appeal to authority.

giphy.gif


I just can't be bothered anymore.

"When one is faced with insurmountable stupidity sometimes there is nothing left but to be intellectually arrogant."

The thing you're looking for is "moral objectivism." Spend more time reading and less time posting.
 

Similar threads

PunishedNEETcel
Replies
2
Views
157
Nikalas
Nikalas
light
Replies
16
Views
240
MassEffectKoala
MassEffectKoala
BSGMANLET
Replies
6
Views
146
BSGMANLET
BSGMANLET
Flagellum_Dei
Replies
3
Views
206
user
user
Gott _mit _uns94
Replies
3
Views
121
Darth Aries
Darth Aries

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top