If you're a Redditor, you can not justify the claim that rape is immoral for numerous reasons.
Redditors are naturalists, hence they can not resolve the following problems:
1. There is no objective morality for multiple reasons.
A. Lack of epistemic justification. They can not resolve the is-ought problem. You don't get an ought from an is. Even if rape is very painful and psychologically traumatizing, why ought I not rape you? It does not follow. It's just an assertion.
B. Lack of ontological status. What binds morality to matter? Is there any morality outside our minds in an external world, or is that just an abstraction? Unless morality is woven into an external world somehow, you wind up with relativism, because to assert otherwise would be a reification fallacy. Morality becomes contingent. My moral inclinations are that I ought rape women. Who are you to tell me otherwise?
2. Naturalism leads to determinism, making libertarian free will impossible.
According to naturalists, everything is just matter being forced to move according to the laws of physics. "We" are nothing but matter being forced to move. Our brains are nothing but matter being forced to move in a way that produces all thoughts and actions.
Hence, how can it be "our" fault that we rape women? We can't choose otherwise. The laws of physics force us to rape women just as they force Redditors to write retarded shit on Reddit.
Furthermore, how can a Redditor justify any knowledge claims if all of their thoughts are determined by the laws of physics? It is impossible for them to choose to believe the alternative. They are forced to think and believe a certain way. Why would their thoughts be true?
3. There is no "you" under determinism.
All of women's pain and trauma would just be sense experience forced upon unconscious matter, so there really isn't any "them" suffering. After all, where is consciousness? Matter is just being forced to move around and produce sense experience, but there's nobody to perceive it.
4. There is no identity over time.
Even if there somehow is a perceiver that is reducible to matter, matter is in constant flux, meaning that whatever is "your" subjective experience has no continuous stream. It's just momentary sensations in time. There is no rapist and there is no victim; it's just a bunch of changing arrangements of matter that could never be responsible for anything.
5. Naturalism leads to nominalism
Under nominalism, women and men don't actually exist because they're universals. Rape doesn't either because it's also a universal action. You can't bring me "men" or "women" or "rape" because they're kinds of things, and according to the Reddit paradigm, kinds of things are just abstractions. You would need something to instantiate them, such as Incel A performing Rape A to Woman A. Every "rape" would just be a new action that is not the same as any other "rape."
t;dr: In order to be philosophically consistent, Redditors must admit that a man is never to blame for rape.
Redditors are naturalists, hence they can not resolve the following problems:
1. There is no objective morality for multiple reasons.
A. Lack of epistemic justification. They can not resolve the is-ought problem. You don't get an ought from an is. Even if rape is very painful and psychologically traumatizing, why ought I not rape you? It does not follow. It's just an assertion.
B. Lack of ontological status. What binds morality to matter? Is there any morality outside our minds in an external world, or is that just an abstraction? Unless morality is woven into an external world somehow, you wind up with relativism, because to assert otherwise would be a reification fallacy. Morality becomes contingent. My moral inclinations are that I ought rape women. Who are you to tell me otherwise?
2. Naturalism leads to determinism, making libertarian free will impossible.
According to naturalists, everything is just matter being forced to move according to the laws of physics. "We" are nothing but matter being forced to move. Our brains are nothing but matter being forced to move in a way that produces all thoughts and actions.
Hence, how can it be "our" fault that we rape women? We can't choose otherwise. The laws of physics force us to rape women just as they force Redditors to write retarded shit on Reddit.
Furthermore, how can a Redditor justify any knowledge claims if all of their thoughts are determined by the laws of physics? It is impossible for them to choose to believe the alternative. They are forced to think and believe a certain way. Why would their thoughts be true?
3. There is no "you" under determinism.
All of women's pain and trauma would just be sense experience forced upon unconscious matter, so there really isn't any "them" suffering. After all, where is consciousness? Matter is just being forced to move around and produce sense experience, but there's nobody to perceive it.
4. There is no identity over time.
Even if there somehow is a perceiver that is reducible to matter, matter is in constant flux, meaning that whatever is "your" subjective experience has no continuous stream. It's just momentary sensations in time. There is no rapist and there is no victim; it's just a bunch of changing arrangements of matter that could never be responsible for anything.
5. Naturalism leads to nominalism
Under nominalism, women and men don't actually exist because they're universals. Rape doesn't either because it's also a universal action. You can't bring me "men" or "women" or "rape" because they're kinds of things, and according to the Reddit paradigm, kinds of things are just abstractions. You would need something to instantiate them, such as Incel A performing Rape A to Woman A. Every "rape" would just be a new action that is not the same as any other "rape."
t;dr: In order to be philosophically consistent, Redditors must admit that a man is never to blame for rape.
