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 Morality is cucked

P

Personalityinkwell

mentally crippled by lonely teen years
-
Joined
Dec 27, 2019
Posts
38,921
"Treat someone how you want to be treated"
"Turn the other cheek"

The basis of morality is not using your power over another human being, with no guarantee they will show you mercy. How cucked can you be?
 
Turn the other cheek is such a retarded trope
 
Morality is a social construct created with the intent of controlling the masses. Ofc it's cucked.
 
the only non cucked moral framework would be negative utilitarianism tbh
 
Normies can do whatever the fuck they want to us but we must be stoic :soy: :soy: :soy:
 
what is that?
maximizing human suffering, just like utilitarianism is about centralising happiness so that more happiness in general=more good, negative utilitarianism is more suffering=good
 
Last edited:
maximizing human suffering, just like utilitarianism is about centralising happiness so that more happiness in general=more good, negative utilitarianism is more suffering=good
evils me xd
 
"Treat someone how you want to be treated"
"Turn the other cheek"

The basis of morality is not using your power over another human being, with no guarantee they will show you mercy. How cucked can you be?
Based bro
 
inb4 @based_meme and @BlkPillPres have an epic essay duel in this thread
 
81CBQOaD3L SL1500
 
inb4 @based_meme and @BlkPillPres have an epic essay duel in this thread

I'd rather jump in front of a train while shooting myself in my subhuman face, than argue ethics and morality with somebody who has less than a grade school understanding of it.

Morality and ethics have been debated for thousands - literally thousands - of years by humanity's best minds (and still continues to be debated), yet some edgy faggot on some obscure corner of the internet says it doesn't exist bro and completely handwaives it away, dismissing the efforts and results of human philosophical intellect across millennia.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather jump in front of a train while shooting myself in my subhuman face, than argue ethics and morality with somebody who has less than a grade school understanding of it.

Morality and ethics has been debated for thousands - literally thousands - of years by humanity's best minds (and still continues to be debated), yet some edgy faggot on some obscure corner of the internet says it doesn't exist bro and completely handwaives it away, dismissing the efforts and results of human philosophical intellect across millennia.
That's your argument, that we are just some edgy faggots? You are using appeal to tradition, a logical fallacy.

Not to mention, the word "edgy" has a basis in being immoral, so you are assuming morality exists to assert that it indeed does, which is a circular argument.
 
the only non cucked moral framework would be negative utilitarianism tbh

How, and why?
That's your argument, that we are just some edgy faggots? You are using appeal to tradition, a logical fallacy.

Not to mention, the word "edgy" has a basis in being immoral, so you are assuming morality exists to assert that it indeed does, which is a circular argument.

Bro, just don't. Several posts ago you didn't even know that negative utilitarianism was a concept that existed.

I'm not trying to be condescending, but you don't know what you're talking about. You have the libraries of the internet at your disposal. Go learn.
 
Last edited:
Bro, just don't. Several posts ago you didn't even know that negative utilitarianism was a concept that existed.

I'm not trying to be condescending, but you don't know what you're talking about. You have the libraries of the internet at your disposal. Go learn.
Bro, I understand morality as a social construct. But that's what it is, something that is a social construct, not something that is concrete and objective, Blkpillpres has gone over this many times.

And I knew what utilitarianism was, just not negative utilitarianism.
 
The basis of morality is compassion.
But rarely is a person capable of feeling that.
 
Morality is basically a warning/threat.
  • Don't be angry about your circumstances.
  • Be submissive.
  • Or else we'll kill you.
If I got superpowers but still had an incel body, I would use them to dominate/destroy humanity. At that time, no moral structure could hold me, so why bother being high inhib?
 
Bro, I understand morality as a social construct. But that's what it is, something that is a social construct, not something that is concrete and objective, Blkpillpres has gone over this many times.

And I knew what utilitarianism was, just not negative utilitarianism.

Morality is a lot more complex than your one-dimensional characterization of it. Your understanding of it really is juvenile, no offence.
 
Yes it is tbh but what can we do, we have laws.
 
I thought you were going to encourage degeneracy. Wew lad.
 
Morality is a lot more complex than your one-dimensional characterization of it. Your understanding of it really is juvenile, no offence.
LOL every single one of your arguments relies on ad hominem. Why don't you try to argue besides saying "I'm smart, you're dumb". The other day blkpillpres made a long post and you just ignored it because you couldn't argue it.
Yes it is tbh but what can we do, we have laws.
legality=/=morality
 
LOL every single one of your arguments relies on ad hominem. Why don't you try to argue besides saying "I'm smart, you're dumb". The other day blkpillpres made a long post and you just ignored it because you couldn't argue it.

You're confusing unwillingness with inability. I didn't argue with him for the same reason I'm not arguing with you: lack of substance without the fundamental knowledge necessary to move the discussion forward. You end up arguing past each other.

I'm not trying to be an asshole (that comes naturally anyway), but the reason I'm not addressing what you're saying is because you give the impression that you have little to no foundation on the subject.
 
LOL every single one of your arguments relies on ad hominem. Why don't you try to argue besides saying "I'm smart, you're dumb". The other day blkpillpres made a long post and you just ignored it because you couldn't argue it.

legality=/=morality
The whole concept of morality is based on laws. Without laws, there would be no such thing as good or bad.
 
The whole concept of morality is based on laws. Without laws, there would be no such thing as good or bad.
No, morality is about doing what is "right" or "wrong". But what is considered right or wrong is extremely arbitrary and subjective, not objective at all.
You're confusing unwillingness with inability. I didn't argue with him for the same reason I'm not arguing with you: lack of substance without the fundamental knowledge necessary to move the discussion forward. You end up arguing past each other.

I'm not trying to be an asshole (that comes naturally anyway), but the reason I'm not addressing what you're saying is because you give the impression that you have little to no foundation on the subject.
see above
 
Last edited:
Morality is the only thing potentially keeping a person from randomly knifing you in the face, or throwing acid at you. I honestly don't care if its a social construct. It keeps order, and all the low inhib degenerate crazy mother fuckers in line. A society cannot exist without morality.
 
Morality is the only thing potentially keeping a person from randomly knifing you in the face, or throwing acid at you. I honestly don't care if its a social construct. It keeps order, and all the low inhib degenerate crazy mother fuckers in line. A society cannot exist without morality.
they can create laws
 
no they don't, because morality is just a construct, there is no concrete morality to base it off of.

Laws are created to enforce an overall enforceable standard of behavior. If morality did not exist in law, imagine what type world we would live in.
 
Laws are created to enforce an overall enforceable standard of behavior. If morality did not exist in law, imagine what type world we would live in.
You still are confusing legality and morality.

In Nazi Germany, it was illegal to hide jews in your attic to protect them. Do you consider that to be immoral?
 
No, morality is about doing what is "right" or "wrong". But what is considered right or wrong is extremely arbitrary and subjective, not objective at all.
That's why they're related to each other. Law lies beneath all moral structures. So there is a compulsion. Most people against rape would say that, if they were honestly expressing their thoughts, it was a legal problem, not morally. People back then didn't give shit about what's right or wrong.
 
no they don't, because morality is just a construct, there is no concrete morality to base it off of.

What's the concrete basis for laws? The scary men with guns?
 
You still are confusing legality and morality.

In Nazi Germany, it was illegal to hide jews in your attic to protect them. Do you consider that to be immoral?

There's a reason that isn't a illegal anymore.

I don't believe it is possible to create a law without taking into account how it will affect people, or whether its right or wrong.
 
What's the concrete basis for laws? The scary men with guns?
Law enforcement, correct. Laws without law enforcement are useless. They wouldn't exist.
Law lies beneath all moral structures.
Wrong, laws are about enforcing power.
That's why they're related to each other. So there is a compulsion. Most people against rape would say that, if they were honestly expressing their thoughts, it was a legal problem, not morally. People back then didn't give shit about what's right or wrong.
I'm pretty sure people view rape as a moral issue.
There's a reason that isn't a illegal anymore.

I don't believe it is possible to create a law without taking into account how it will affect people, or whether its right or wrong.
The nazis did it, and evil governments today still do it. Laws are about POWER
 
Bro, I understand morality as a social construct. But that's what it is, something that is a social construct, not something that is concrete and objective, Blkpillpres has gone over this many times.

And I knew what utilitarianism was, just not negative utilitarianism.
fuck, i meant very specific variation of RADICAL negative utilitarianism, there is a difference since negative utilitarianism is mainly just a term meant to describe moral frameworks that operate based on asymmetry between suffering and happiness, i was mainly referencing my own idea i got from this article https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d9aaad_4d3e08f426904b8c8be516230722087a.pdf

Consider a few short descriptions of agent subtypes motivated by consequentialist ethical theories. Unlike the other subsections above and below, this discussion is somewhat abstract given that few individuals have openly acknowledged a moral desire to annihilate humanity if doing so were possible, even though this prescription follows directly from certain moral commitments associated with forms of classical utilitarianism and negative utilitarianism.

(ii)Radical negative utilitarians(NUs). As Thaddeus Metz (2012)puts it, radical NUs accept the ethical theory of antinatalism as well as pro-mortalism, the view that it is often prudent for individuals to kill themselves and often right for them to kill others, even without their consent. It pretty clearly has these implications if one can kill oneself or others painlessly, but probably does so even if there would be terror beforehand; for there would be terror regardless of when death comes, and if death were to come sooner rather than later, then additional bads that would have been expected in the course of a life would be nipped in the bud.

@based_meme tbh im not going to try and debate you since i can tell youre more articulate and knowledgeable on the subject, though i disagree with you on a lot of things you say i still appreciate your high iq posts:)
 
Last edited:
inb4 @based_meme and @BlkPillPres have an epic essay duel in this thread

JFL there is no duel to be had, I've explained this too many times, the guy is an idiot who can only use circular reasoning

The last time we argued he said he'd only argue with me once I understood ethics (so basically an appeal to authority), but its also circular logic, because my entire argument is that morality (ethics) doesn't exist and doesn't matter, and he's telling me that I have to first agree that theories on ethics (morality) are valid to THEN argue with him on whether they are invalid JFL

It makes no sense, he's just going to duck and weave from the arguments and then assert that you must go learn all these philosophical theories about something you don't agree with, to argue whether its valid or not

A perfect analogy would be me saying "there are only 2 genders" and @based_meme responds with - "you don't understand theories on gender and sex, you need to first go learn what I have on these topics to have an argument with me"

He doesn't seem to get that my entire point is that those theories are false and they don't matter because THERE ARE ONLY 2 GENDERS, just like MORALITY DOES NOT EXIST
 
Last edited:
so fucking true, especially if you're ugly. be low inhib, dont give a fuck, do what you want ffs
 
Pretty sure it was inability JFL

Whatever helps you cope.

When you get hosed with a deluge of garbage it's a challenge to find something useful in it.
 

Similar threads

D
Replies
9
Views
236
Acorn
Acorn
Balikesir
Replies
60
Views
863
Racial-Identitarian
Racial-Identitarian
Grodd
Replies
40
Views
624
Simba
Simba
Darth Aries
Replies
1
Views
118
Starfish Vs Koala
Starfish Vs Koala

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top