This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
MrShandavio wrote on 2010-05-02 20:54
I never swear in real life. xD I feel it's inappropriate and pathetic. But, eh, if I get frustrated enough, I'll throw them around. Sometimes they help deliver a point.
-
Virtue wrote on 2010-05-02 20:56
I have an urge to brofist MrShandavio.
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 20:58
I guess my withdrawal is premature.
I request that MrShandavio parse my previous handful of posts, and respond to each point in turn.
If you copy and paste this code it will allow you to close off the quote brackets so that you can reply.
[/QUOTE]
Quote from Syrphid:
Kazuni, please demonstrate how I am a hypocrite. Specific quotations of my ad hominems would be useful, and careful and clear responses from the positive side would also be effective.
[QUOTE=Syrphid;25986]The burden of proof lies on the positive, not the negative. Otherwise,
"you owe me $1000"
"what? why?"
"prove that you don't owe me $1000"
"..."
edit: Philosophic burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote from Syrphid;25967:
I am trying to argue a negative ("there is nothing wrong with incest"). That involves stripping the positive side ("there is definitely something wrong with incest") of all support. As you can see, if the positive side advances no evidence, I really have nothing to do. Since they are unable to show that there is anything wrong with incest, surely the negative side wins by default?
It can't possibly be that hard to show that something wrong is wrong, but to my knowledge everyone on the positive side has failed to defend any of their reasons.
The same can be said about all families. It's a chance any parent is willingly taking, to raise a child. It could be a success, or it can end in tragedy. Why the same is not true for this couple is not obvious. Sure, it's tougher, but does that make it morally wrong to try? I argue that if they are great parents, they can do well, and their child can be happy. It's possible, therefore I think we owe it to the parents to let them try.
It's not like great parents are that few and far between.
Quote from Syrphid;25938:
My opinion is that your opinion is wrong.
Your opinion is completely arbitrary, lacking any form of rational support.
Pretty easy deduction
Quote from Syrphid;25943:
My rational support is your lack of rational support.
Quote from Syrphid;25916:
You assert you are right without specifically supporting your point or attacking mine.
I proclaim victory.
You assert you are right without specifically supporting your point or attacking mine.
I proclaim victory.
It is also interesting and highly disappointing that you both are full of ad hominems. It seems insulting me takes precedence over addressing my arguments. It's like you've never held a conversation with another human being face to face, and think it's ok to throw insults out left and right.
To the bold, love is not logical. I admire this couple for not taking the easy way out, sticking to their guns and fighting for their happinesses. You're telling me you would abandon true love because of social pressure? Hey, a lot of people would, but then again, a lot of people are weak.
To the underlined, that's because your "morals" are completely arbitrary and are not defensible in a debate. You don't have ANY morals, you've just internalized social norms. This is dangerous when the social norms are discriminatory and hateful. You NEED to philosophize, otherwise you are a moral-less being.
Risk is not a basis for morality, when you know NOTHING about them and have to assume EVERYTHING. It is possible for the granny to die tomorrow, it is possible for her to die 30 years from now. I see no reason not to attempt to raise a child, unless you can show me that she will die very very soon, something that no one has been able to do. I do not recall reading about terminal cancer. Even then, plenty of children have arisen from single parents, it's not like it's over.
Morality IS NOT JUST a gut feeling. You do demean centuries of philosophy as "Oh I feel like randomly damning this for the heck of it". There are REASONS. Otherwise, you are just randomly hating on people.
For example, murder is bad because it deprives the victim of the rest of their life.
Incest is bad because...<reason that you have yet to produce and defend in a debate>.
I have no facts to provide, MrShandavio, for the simple fact that I don't need any to say, "Hey you make no sense". Because, well, some people here aren't making any sense.
The immature tendency to sling insults over reasons tells me that I am arguing with little kids who have no life experience outside of elementary/middle/high school. Esp in college, no one gives a crap who your parents are. It's all you.
Quote from Syrphid;25765:
The rule that all people are average?
Yes.
The rule that this random woman who we know nothing about is an unhealthy American w/diabetes, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, and doesn't take care of herself?
Yes.
The rule that all parents do not go out of their way to make their child's life the best that it can be?
Yes.
Please stop generalizing. Stop making moral judgments based on the average. Average people don't go very far anyway.
Quote from Syrphid;25761:
To refine my last post,
The facts, the statistics? What facts, what statistics? You mean the average life expectancy? You ASSUME that this woman is average, that she will die in 5 years. how u kno??
Asians are nice people, get to know them. My HS was 80% Asian. You ASSUME this couple is incapable of finding a good neighborhood where their child can grow. how u kno??
ALL assumptions NO reason. You have no argument. ALL of my counterpoints remain standing. All you're doing is throwing a temper tantrum.
If it wasn't obvious, your I'm-not-open-minded-because-I'm-not-perfect argument makes no sense.
How do you fault me for feeling the pull of social and genetic forces? I have already admitted that this gut reaction is wrong, and I have stated that I wish I did not have this reaction, and that I would try my best to contain it. What more do you want from me?
The difference between me and a lot of people in this thread is in bold.
No, indeed I don't. I am not average, and I have my extraordinary parents to thank for that.
As it stands, I do not see why this couple cannot be extraordinary in more ways than one.
Quote from Syrphid;25732:
Hey, nothing against the forum cat. I just raise my voice when I feel I need to :)
I am weirded out because I am not immune to social prejudices. This does not mean that I act on my arbitrary and hateful gut reactions. I feel it is gross, but I know it is right. I support them, even if I would never do this myself.
Brad argued that the marriage was immoral because the grandma would die early. My point countered that nicely, I fail to understand why I am a smartass who failed to make a point. Perhaps you could elaborate??
Also, maybe you also care to elaborate on your position. Currently I interpret your departing line as "I think it's wrong but I don't want to state why because I can't."
What makes any relationship ok?
That was my very, very first impression too. However, this is baseless gossip, hurtful and demeaning and absolutely unneeded. I try not to judge people if that requires assuming significant things like "there is obviously no love in that relationship", because after all, how do you know? What if they are truly soulmates?
Brad,
I understand that my responses to you have been rather hostile. Let me cool down and tell you how I see things.
You argue that incest is bad. You support your position thusly,
1) It's gross.
2) It goes against your standards.
3) Bad genetics for baby
4) Close blood marriage is immoral
5) Little school kids will make fun of the kid
6) Grandma will die early
I respond thusly,
1) Irrelevant, gross has no bearing on morality.
2) Your standards are irrelevant and arbitrary. You have given no reason for others to accept your standard. In fact, you have given no reason for YOU to accept your own standard. It's just there, just like other forms of societal prejudices. Hate crimes, xenophobia, racism. No one can justify them, yet they exist because people feel like perpetuating pointlessly hateful traditions.
3) As Chiri said, worse legal combinations exist. Also, worse dysfunctional couples exist. I'd rather be raised by this couple, than by an abusive father and a useless mother.
4) Prove it.
5) This is so insignificant you seem to have forgotten this argument. To think that you would let your adult life be governed by little kids.
6) Who died and made you one of the Fates?
As it stands you have failed to address ANY of my responses, which means all of my responses have successfully countered all of your reasons, which means you currently have an unsupported position.
*edit, also pt 3 is irrelevant since the baby is being made w/a surrogate mother
Quote from Syrphid;25750:
Are you perfect? Do you always practice what you preach?
Have you ever done something when you were mad, and later regretted it?
Are you on a diet, and have you ever broken down and had a bite of unhealthy food?
Ever felt too lazy to do homework?
How do you fault me for feeling the pull of social and genetic forces? I have already admitted that this gut reaction is wrong, and I have stated that I wish I did not have this reaction, and that I would try my best to contain it. What more do you want from me?
Morally wrong why? You don't just FIND something to be morally wrong. You philosophize. It's wrong because...
Oh, she has diabetes, high cholesterol and blood pressure, a family history of osteoporosis and eats fast food 5+ times a week? How you know??
I doubt my experience is that atypical. You presume the worst.
Mark of a coward
Finish what you started or don't start it in the first place.
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-05-02 21:01
"You assert you are right without specifically supporting your point or attacking mine.
I proclaim victory."
A contradiction in itself.
"ALL assumptions NO reason. You have no argument. ALL of my counterpoints remain standing. All you're doing is throwing a temper tantrum."
No offense, I hate caps. I really do. It's overused and makes me itch. And yet another point in which you assume you are completely correct and everyone else is "throwing a temper tantrum". Everything here is based on assumption, including all your points. We don't have enough information to truly judge anything.
"Asians are nice people, get to know them. My HS was 80% Asian. You ASSUME this couple is incapable of finding a good neighborhood where their child can grow. how u kno??"
You assume they can. You assume Asians are nice. You say everyone else is assuming, but you're doing the same.
There are more but I don't want to spend my time on this when I'm supposed to be studying, anyways.
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 21:08
Quote from Kazuni;26165:
"You assert you are right without specifically supporting your point or attacking mine.
I proclaim victory."
A contradiction in itself.
"ALL assumptions NO reason. You have no argument. ALL of my counterpoints remain standing. All you're doing is throwing a temper tantrum."
No offense, I hate caps. I really do. It's overused and makes me itch. And yet another point in which you assume you are completely correct and everyone else is "throwing a temper tantrum". Everything here is based on assumption, including all your points. We don't have enough information to truly judge anything.
"Asians are nice people, get to know them. My HS was 80% Asian. You ASSUME this couple is incapable of finding a good neighborhood where their child can grow. how u kno??"
You assume they can. You assume Asians are nice. You say everyone else is assuming, but you're doing the same.
There are more but I don't want to spend my time on this when I'm supposed to be studying, anyways.
I already explained that my remark about being victorious was because they had announced premature withdrawal. It is customary that the last person standing be considered the victor.
My accusation of somebody throwing a temper tantrum was because they started ****ing *** **** + other ad hominems. When I get annoyed I just caps. I assumed nothing. They have no reason, no argument. Or perhaps I missed it, feel free to quote their actual reason/argument, and let's see if my accusation was baseless.
I do not assume Asians are nice. My community is highly Asian. My community is very chill. This is fact. A significant slice of Asian Americans are too busy studying for college to waste time bullying people for no reason. Perhaps the couple can move here, or to some other more liberal area where people don't judge you based on your parents. In any event, my comments about Asians being nice was offhand and really one of the least important comments I made.
So, I still fail to see how I am a hypocrite. You made the accusation. Your duty to prove it.
Calling people out is always fun, but now I counter-call you out. So let's have it.
-
MrShandavio wrote on 2010-05-02 21:10
Don't feed the trolls...
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 21:11
Quote from MrShandavio;26172:
Don't feed the trolls...
With this, I withdraw from this festering pool of irrationality, bigotry, intellectual cowardice and nerd rage.
Intellectual cowardice, check
C'mon dude, bring it. Finish what you started. You only have to prove me wrong once.
-
Kazuni wrote on 2010-05-02 21:13
I'll reply to that wall in a sec, but you're saying that you had no part in making this "festering pool of irrationality, bigotry, intellectual cowardice and nerd rage"?
-
Virtue wrote on 2010-05-02 21:14
Quote from Syrphid;26174:
C'mon dude, bring it. Finish what you started. You only have to prove me wrong once.
No one can be proven wrong in a discussion of morality.
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 21:15
Quote from Kazuni;26176:
I'll reply to that wall in a sec, but you're saying that you had no part in making this "festering pool of irrationality, bigotry, intellectual cowardice and nerd rage"?
Feel free to quote instances of me demonstrating irrationality, bigotry, intellectual cowardice or nerd rage. As for me inspiring that in others, is it my fault they lack the maturity to maintain a discussion? All I think I did was tell people that they are wrong, and explained why I thought so. If people flip out when I do that, that's cause they're lacking.
-
MrShandavio wrote on 2010-05-02 21:17
And we are telling you that you're wrong, and explaining why we think so. So we can do this all day. Apparently you've got the time to waste.
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 21:17
Quote from Sin;26178:
No one can be proven wrong in a discussion of morality.
Moral principle: "The world is better with more arbitrary hate."
This statement should be ripped to shreds in seconds.
Similarly, I have ripped apart some moral statements earlier in the thread. I now request that shandavio do the same to me.
Quote from MrShandavio;26183:
And we are telling you that you're wrong, and explaining why we think so. So we can do this all day. Apparently you've got the time to waste.
Please requote any evidence and reason that you are willing to defend in a debate, supporting why I am wrong.
-
Syrphid wrote on 2010-05-02 21:18
Quote from MrShandavio;26183:
And we are telling you that you're wrong, and explaining why we think so. So we can do this all day. Apparently you've got the time to waste.
Please requote any evidence and reason that you are willing to defend in a debate, supporting why I am wrong.
-
Intex wrote on 2010-05-02 21:19
This is ridiculous.
This is going no where at all and the insults keep flying.
-
MrShandavio wrote on 2010-05-02 21:19
I've already provided my argument and you ignore it. :P I'm not saying you're wrong, you're just retarded.