Game has a morality system

>game sets you on a singular path
>characters criticizes you for fulfilling your objective despite it being the right thing to do

Attached: 78467876.png (480x420, 7K)

>game has morality system

Attached: Max_Stirner-k.jpg (220x231, 13K)

>Game asks you what can change the nature of a man
>Refuse to answer since you cannot claim to speak in such general terms for all men
>WROOOOOOOOONG ANSWERRRR

>Game has no morality system
>Come across a village of people making questionable decisions that only affect themselves
>BUT THAT'S WROOONG

>game poorly references and discusses meme philosophers on the videogame section of a nigerian bone weaving imageboard

>bad path leads you to great riches and power extremely quickly, but lose half of it after going to jail in post-game
>good path leads you to struggles and poorfaggotry, but gain the best equipment in the game in post-game

Attached: B1FF4F5D-BDEB-4430-8F15-2B21EEF1577F.jpg (720x560, 148K)

define 'nature of a man' you absolute pseud

>DUDE SPOOK LMAO XD
Holy cringe.

>Game has a morality system
>It's based around the game clearly defining what is "Good" and what is "Evil", and the player just chosing which one he wants to be.

Stop this shit. The sole benefit of a morality system is to test the player and force him to reconsider what he thinks is right or wrong. Deciding it in advance is both incredibly untrue to how morality in reality works, but also just plain fucking stupid and boring.

>meme philosophers
you probably only read the big names and simply agree with whatever shit they shove down your throat while making 'oooh' and 'yeees true' sounds in your head

>Game has a morality system
>Selfish choices make you an evil devil man
>Selfless choices make you a paragon hero man
>it is explained that selfless choices weaken those around you, showing the morality system to be the farce it is

Attached: Kreia_art.jpg (980x1436, 106K)

>Game has an economy you can crash and burn

Attached: 1534188280940.png (171x266, 55K)

>Game has a clear binary morality system with a myriad choices to make over the course of your journey
>Regardless of the path you take and the choice you make, you are always met with the same ending

No one would be discussing anything even remotely related to Stirner on Yea Forums had it not flourished as a meme on Yea Forums some time ago.

Sounds like a meme philosopher to me brah.

Zoomer detected

Attached: download (8).jpg (264x191, 11K)

Stop playing bad RPGs

>game has dialogue options

Attached: lol ok kid.gif (360x203, 3.05M)

But selflessness is inhumane

>implying Yea Forums actually reads anything and doesn't take all of its 'knowledge' from facebook meme pages and 10 minute youtube videos that basically read out loud wikipedia articles
lmao

>reality
It's a game, user.

humanity isn't real

elaborate

Doing nothing is the wrong answer
*dabs*

>game has two ideological factions
>one roots for equality and justice
>the other wants to forcibly cull the weak
>mfw destroy both

Attached: ouB_ofiTJz0.jpg (1338x1078, 369K)

Get out of my head
GET OUT OF MY HEAD

Shhh, let him read Harry Potter

humanity is a spook

Well, it's not like I disagree with you, Yea Forums's full of pseudo-intellectuals with garbage recommendations and garbage tastes. But that doesn't change the fact that he's still a meme. He's got a stupid little smug meme cartoon face, with smug meme quotes.

Both are concepts made up by humans.

The answer is death. It changes every single man no matter who you are

It's called "the principle of relevance" and it's why fiction matters to us, you retard.

>evil choices give more money and good choices give more experience

Stirner is actually second only to Ayn Rand in terms of how LITTLE fucks anyone gives about them in the actual philosophy academia.
They are only popular among edgy teens with no education.

>why fiction matters to us
You mean why it matters to you.

Attached: 1551871354255.jpg (613x771, 49K)

>ogaa boga why book relevant to me if book not real

No, I mean how fiction as an institution relates to society as a structure.

moral relativism is the gayest shit ever I mean come on nigga are you even trying

because philosophy academia sucks off philosopher who say how important philosophy academia is

Attached: 1522178683292.jpg (625x357, 29K)

Are you suggesting objective morality is a thing? Come on kid, grow up.

Attached: 1559298305791.jpg (223x286, 47K)

>evil choices give more money
>good choices give fame and unlock new NPC interactions
>altruistic choices give nothing and make you feel like an idiot

Attached: 1547221179943.png (191x201, 80K)

>deontology

Attached: 1507303800187.jpg (690x720, 77K)

>implying there's such a thing as a selfless choice
did you even read Stirner bro

Attached: 1400469162940.gif (680x489, 14K)

Should I give a fuck about who gives a fuck what I like or what I find interesting?
Copying your peers and listening to the authority has a chance of being beneficial in early years since you don't have much experience and can't rely on your own judgement that much, but as an adult? Fuck off .

Nah, it's just that philosophical academia engages works that are not braindead.

objective morality can only exist we we agree on the foundation of morality, and that's of course, subjective

>applying objectivity to something that can't exist without being applied to something first

When good men look a way, evil prevails.

Attached: thehand.png (1280x720, 1.25M)

t. Marx

Attached: 1542044506501.jpg (555x400, 89K)

k sweetie

Attached: 1497214014701.jpg (680x582, 56K)

This, also self isn't real.

that has to be the most braindead shit in this whole thread, are you implying that evil can't exist without good in the first place?

>How Hunter Hunter fans see themselves

Attached: Whores.png (970x676, 643K)

not him but define evil

>game does not have a morality system

Attached: 1560334448171.jpg (626x698, 85K)

That's a nice image. I think I'll save it.

Hunterchads rise up.

Attached: Komugi.png (2034x1104, 803K)

>that's the bare minimum for human being
no, this man is spouting spooks and I want to shoot him

>are you implying that evil can't exist without good in the first place?
not him but yes? a concept of evil can't exist without a concept of good, they are interdependent

it just means if you ignore problems that don't presently concern yourself in order to feel better, it's going to bite you in the ass later on

This is the funniest thing I have heard today
t. almost got a philosophy degree then pursued it on my own time

Attached: 12336543.jpg (327x280, 27K)

It's a colloquial term for all things real or unreal that can endanger or/and not beneficial to the party using the term

>Should I give a fuck about who gives a fuck what I like or what I find interesting?
Yes.
The fact that you even have to ask that question means: You ABOVE MOST PEOPLE should fucking listen to others, because clearly you are insanely immature and just all around very, very dumb.
In fact you probably should not be even given the option.

Fun fact, Stirner and Engels were friends. And today, Stirner's only actual followers are radical leftists.

So did I. Does not change the fact that neither of those authors are or ever were really even worth acknowledging.

isn't the social spook of pursuing sex based on and supported by the objective primal instinct though?

Why is Stirner of all philosophers a meme

>Confronting her early and calling out her bullshit is the "fake" ending
>To get the real ending you have to literally play dumb and doom countless worlds
>All those worlds that you've sacrificed including your original world are gone forever
I really need to finish the 2nd game...

life has no inheritent meaning beyond the purpose of procreation, the biological purpose of all living organisms

>Quest to help a refugee escape
>Help him and get the good reward
>Immediately turn him in and get the evil reward too

I disagree.
I agree with you that it's a colloquial term for the sake of not being caught up in having to define words. But the way I would use it is to describe extra cruelty(From the pov of the person using the word of course) that serves no discernible purpose other than to inflict suffering.

>the fact that you even ask that question

Attached: mfw.jpg (210x240, 18K)

>you are not formally educated and therefore braindead!

concept of existence is not the same as existence, though.

>Being good gives you friends while being evil isolates you
>Evil route never gets a group of crooks and ne'er do wells to hang with

>beyond the purpose of procreation
There is no "inherit meaning" in procreating either wtf are you on about.

>game doesn't even have a morality system, it just sides you with what the devs call 'the good guys'
That's every last AAA game that came out in the last, what, 5-6 years, and going by E3 and the yearly cawadoody, asscreed, that jedi shit from EA, the new Dragons dogma, the ghost recon shit and the new Vampire the masquerade seems like it'll be shit, not even the fucking nosferatu are in. At least anonymous agony is back.

Attached: _.jpg (1280x1280, 541K)

the drawing of him and the easily digestible message of spooks make for prime meme material

Attached: 1463512205008.png (700x419, 52K)

Devilish

Attached: 1559722846968.gif (425x481, 1.51M)

but people that only make decisions based on emotional intelligence tend to be worse off than people who have a formal education and can make decisions on anything other than empirical evidence

You've lost me.

Karl Marx wrote an absolutely seething assessment of him. The only reason people remember Stirner at all is because of Marx. He became a meme on Yea Forums with the phil students which then caught on everywhere else.

>Does not change the fact that neither of those authors are or ever were really even worth acknowledging.

I agree that. Ayn Rand is completely worthless and you are better off reading someone like Robert Nozick or even *gasp* Ludwig von Mises and such
Stirner is incredibly entertaining to read and can be a brain teaser, but I also agree that he doesn't add that much to the discussion. Just read Nietzsche.

>try to live using video fame morality system irl
>go for the good playthrough
>get fucked over multiple times
>being selfless actually hurts you more in the long run than being selfish
WTF

explain you pseud

>*agree to that

>game has a morality system
>In order to go Neutral you have to be equal parts a crazy murderer who doesnt care about no one but himself and a paragon of virtue who will help the old lady cross the street or even carry her himself
Also
>In order to get locked into the Neutral route you need to claim to God that you are from one alignment while slightly being from the other alignment.
Guess the game, it was a great game, but I thought this whole deal was dumb.

>the biological purpose of all living organisms
Life doesn't have a purpose, that's entirely a human concept. Natural evolution just does whatever it does, it has no ultimate "purpose" in mind. Thus, the idea that "the purpose of life is to procreate" is a spook.

>phil students
you mean mcdonalds employees

>being evil to the core but also obeying the 7 virtues makes you flawlessly perfect
>red eyes, but carved marble physique and beautiful unblemished alabaster skin

>game tells you to kill your childhood friend for a fortune or to spare her
>the money you get actually isn't much compared to what you already have at that point

>extra cruelty that serves no discernible purpose other than to inflict suffering
That is a pretty narrow definition, but it's the one I would agree with if it weren't misused so much.

>Natural evolution just does whatever it does, it has no ultimate "purpose" in mind
you do realise that organisms have to procreate in order to evolve, right?

>Be a doormat who constantly puts others before themselves
>Woooooooow what the fuck how did I get taken advantage of? How was I supposed to know?

I just killed her because i hate niggers
She's not even my friend

Tenpenny Tower quest

Spreading DNA has no inherent meaning or purpose. The reason it has meaning TO YOU is because of your biological makeup. But there's nothing INHERENTLY meaningful about having off-spring, or continuing the human race.

You can imagine any outlandish concept but it doesn't mean it really exists.

>sacrifice dozens of innocents to the evil god and get stupid broken bow
>then literally bribe the good god for eternal youth and max GBP

Attached: RADICAL EGOISM.png (524x364, 311K)

>you do realise that organisms have to procreate in order to evolve, right?
Right, but evolution doesn't know that, it's just a natural process.

If rock rolls down a hill, the rock doesn't think that it's "supposed" to roll down or that it's ultimate "purpose" is to roll down that hill. It simply does that because it's a natural process. Same with evolution. To assign a "purpose" to it is entirely a human construct.

There is a good reason why Engels and Marx ended up devoting so much time to Stirner: it's because they had so much in common. They all did not wrote philosophy, they wrote pornography aiming at people who do not know any better. Strirner was a twat with a talent of stylistics and thankfuly, less insane ambitions than Marx and Engels, but ultimately - he knew, like they did, that his work is entirely dishonest.
That is why his work is ultimately pretty much worthless in the grand scheme of things.

>go to wipe out an assassin cult
>learn beforehand that every member has killed at least one person to get in
>scene where one of them starts crying about how they thought it was just a fun club and they totally didn't murder anyone
>letting them go gives you good boy points and killing them gives you bad guy points
>if you let them go you later find out that they were in fact an evil assassin cultist murderer and that it wasn't a good idea

Attached: 51PFMIPtoML.jpg (335x465, 47K)

>Game has virtue based morality system
>virtues tend to conflict with each other
>you lose points whenever not following a virtue

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 124K)

>rock analogy
you are right except the part where the rock doesn't willingly roll down on a hill and isn't very aware of it either

Right, but that isn't an objective meaning or purpose. It's as meaningless or meaningful as you ascribe to it.

>Come to village
>Two factions at war
>Play them both
>Ruin the village
>Move on
>mfw

Attached: 13.jpg (700x300, 45K)

All philosophy is just dishonest rationalizations for emotional conclusions.

>except the part where the rock doesn't willingly roll down on a hill and isn't very aware of it either
What, you think a rock is sentient?

can YOU prove that you're sentient?

Not really.

>Either Gotta be a psycho who wants to rule/destroy everything or a chosen hero yore that will save the world
>Mfw I just want adventure and gold
>Good and Evil route is still just being a glorified errand boy that works for tips and "exposure" instead of a respectable contractor with a pension plan and health benefits

Attached: 1507710822369.png (1280x758, 500K)

no, thats why its a bad analogy

Bad philosophy often is.

Right, we've gotten so much important and meaningful objective knowledge from philosophy, of course, such as....

uh....

Attached: 1554821913454.jpg (300x365, 20K)

Isn't it ultimately evil to turn a person with pre-established backstory and personality into a sock puppet for some outside entity with it's own notions of morality, for amusement?

Yea, all you have to do is say the N word.

How so? Are you saying that an immortal organism that does not procreate cannot evolve?

It's all bad. Humans do whatever they want and rationalize it later. This is science.

based and nonspooked

Attached: spooky vidya.png (710x960, 111K)

imagine actually thinking this, I know its a bait/ironic post but holy shit I just shiver when I think there are actual people that think like this

The idea of a greater collective called “humanity” doesn’t exist except in relation to existential threats such as hypothetical murderous advanced aliens, which will probably never happen. The term “humanity” is used by progressive globalists to justify the erasure of nation-states, their borders, ethnic and racial homogeneity, etc. I feel no attachment with people of other races. No other tribe deserves my loyalty but my own. Stirner is still an asshole much like Ayn Rand, though. Humans do exist, but we aren’t all the same and shouldn’t be treated as such either. “Humanity” as global entity does not exist except in globalist rhetoric to appeal to weak people’s morality. In games like Fallout, the concept of “humanity” is taken to its natural conclusion after the apocalypse. Everyone but the Enclave (and a few vault dwellers) are mixed savages with no heritage or ancestral history. The only man who attempts to restore this in the wasteland that we know of is Caesar who is LARPing as a Roman dictator from over 2000 years ago at that point.
Stirner is himself a “spook”.

It's a great analogy exactly for that reason, in fact I think it strengthens the original argument. Evolution isn't sentient either so ascribing a "purpose" to it is equally as daft ascribing "purpose" to a rock.

Only Race is real.

How does one evolve on a physical level with a body that wasn't programmed for self-rewiring?

>an immortal organism
such as?

to be fair you were kinda fucked in infamous if you didn't go full edgy or full goody goody because then you would be locked out of power ups.

>what is math

Catherine?

Okay. But how can evil exist without a good to compare it to? These words are meaningless without each other

It it doesn't matter to you then why are you here?

I'm really more scared of all the psycho kids going to colleges and getting their brains filled with fucked up psued rhetoric than I am of people that dismiss philosophy, personally.

>math is totally philosophy guys, all science is before the formalization of scientific study
Come one, argue in good faith. Math didn't come into existence because some old men were yelling at each other about how the universe is composed or the nature of the gods.

That's the problem with most morality systems. It's clear it can come to bite you/others but it's"mean" so it must be evil. Showing mercy doesn't mean being a dipshit

Formal logic?
Epistemological scepticism, experimental method, positivism, and falsification principle?
Ethical golden rule?
Presumption of human equality?
Theory of categories, polythetic and monothetic categories?
Theory of relevance?
Communication maxims?
Logocentric understanding of the world?

That is the entire foundations of science, academia, civic society, math and logical structures, and modern theory of communication.

>Humans do exist

There is no way to prove it, actually. Humanity may as well be a con or a hallucination.

>be a villager
>never suffer flood or drought for your entire life, not knowing they can happen
>"Life's okay"
>one day your crops mutate making them 2 times bigger that they were
>"Holy shit, what a good day"
wow

The irony is think here. That is precisely how it came into being.

Actually SMT IV, though I guess they work the same, and in SMT IV you jjsut declare to some retard spirits who want to destroy existence.

That is very much wrong, and amazingly scientifically and historically illiterate.

that really depends, most kids aren't capable of actually understanding what's being told to them so whenever something that coincides with what they have been told is said they just repeat the conclusion of what they have been told, you can easily counter them by fucking up their narative with another narative

Arguing that you can make up a fuckhuge complex abstract system to utilize for something more than old men's musings can sound ridiculous, but that's how it is.

>tfw elon musk and other peeps were right and this is all a simulation

>never suffer flood or drought for your entire life, not knowing they can happen
why are they growing crops if they're unaware of the concept of starving

Attached: 1519237144806.jpg (412x360, 19K)

>Game trains you all game that needs of the few = bad, needs of the many = good
>You can focus fire an attacking alien vessel who threatens thousands of lives or go save a handful of powerful politicians
>Full good boy run, do the heroic thing and fight the alien for the good of the many
>WOW YOU RACIST YOU MURDERED ALL THOSE POLITICIANS BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T HUMAN

Attached: se7en.png (756x567, 373K)

It's belief you idiot. Whatever you believe can change the nature of a man, can.

You can't counter a fire-bomb with words, though.

lmao of course Yea Forumsermin will actually agree with this cringe meme philosopher

Attached: 1558743610843.jpg (179x170, 10K)

?????????

this but unironically
youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

How can the farmer say "life is okay" if his life is always okay with nothing bad happening? It would be more along the lines of "this is life", the same thing that would be said by a person that lives a horrible life with bad things happening everyday. He wouldn't understand the concept of a good day going his way so he would never say "wow my life sucks" he would just say "this is life".

Not in D&D.

i assumed in your example you were trying to paint a world where no one knows anything but bliss

You are confusing the menu with the meal. There is a word "fhfkejfhejkf" (used it right now), does fhfkejfhejkf exist now?

>why are they growing crops if they're unaware of the concept of starving
If you stop eating you get hungry and want to eat. Dumb ass.

>fire-bomb
more like fire-fart, they can't keep their arguments up for much due to lack of actual insight on the subject, once they back down, just say 'muh feelings is your only argument' on everything they say from that point and they will eventually shut up, saw this little trick at a college debate where some girl was about to cry because of this

I think I just have a hate for "philosophy" because all I've ever associated it with is navel-gazing, pointless arguments about nothing.

vocaroo.com/i/s0EkDdSP8xuN

and being hungry is bad

everything is pointless user, arguing it even more so

Everything may be inherently pointless but that doesn't stop you from enforcing your will on the world. Nobody ever changed their circumstances for the better by coming up with a clever GOTCHA to beat some other faggot who disagreed with him about the sky's width or whatever.

I'm confused. We're now arguing whether evil and good exist. I was arguing that if you believe one exists you must believe the other exists

One would only say this is life, if he has no concept of calm and "okay" times. If he has no concept of boredom or bad then life is always good. If he has not ever felt calm or good, then he's always suffering.

>childhood friend
Whisper was a cunt

What if that gotcha drove the other man to existential crisis and drove him to suicide?

>implying the decisions you make in games are important
>implying games are important
>playing games instead of just masturbating all day

Attached: 5E2BE198-06B8-4610-9058-59AD12CAD3BB.jpg (1800x1322, 3.32M)

>Nobody ever changed their circumstances for the better by coming up with a clever GOTCHA to beat some other faggot who disagreed with him about the sky's width or whatever.
I wonder if you are like intentionally bringing this up as a masterful bait, or if you just stumbled upon this irony by sheer ignorance.

what if i look and somewhat enjoy what I see?

Then what are you, and what am I? Are we not living, breathing organisms of the species known as Homo sapiens? If you mean that everything created by us, including the languages we use to describe things are “social constructs” and thus not worthy of consideration, then I have no conversation with you, that’s just dumb. If you mean that all of reality is in fact a non-entity or “simulation” in some other entity’s mind or reality, then you are also dumb. Lay off the meme ideas and DMT.
We can observe things with our senses, and our senses show that such things as simple as the grass, trees, and other people are indeed real. It doesn’t matter what we call them, that’s up to our interpretation. We could call onions “onion” or “Zwiebel” but both are talking about the same tangible thing, a vegetable that often grows below the ground and is used by humans to flavor foods.

That's a fantasy. It's like when those spergs start talking about how they epic owned someone on the internet and now that faggot tranny will commit sudoku. Although I guess if you were just a 500IQ galaxy brain that destroyed their life and philosophy, it could happen. Food for thought, thank you user.

vidya gaems are more fun than masturbating

Okay, okay, I'll stop, sorry.

Attached: 1558381733352.jpg (320x309, 31K)

>we can observe things with our senses
are you implying that the one part of your body that can be affected by the motherfucking schizophrenia can be trusted in any way? Are you insane?

The penis never lies.

Not him, but there are two faults in your reasoning.
First one is "it's a social construct and thus not worth consideration", which is a completely illogical step that frankly I don't think your opponent commited, that is your faulty reasoning.

The second one is arguing via sensory experience. I can bring you enough casuistics of schisophreniacs that experience things they utterly and unquestionably experienced as real through their senses, yet were completely figments of their imagination.

Sensory experience alone is not a sufficient justification for anything, honestly.

By the way, I'm not saying your opponent is right. I am just - for the hell of it - pointing out lines of reasoning that won't fly, regardless of whenever I ultimately agree with you or I don't.

>stick a long needle in user's brain
>show him a photo of a turd
>he doesn't like it
>turn the needle
>now he has a boner for turds

>having things instead of not having things

Attached: E55987CB-3CCD-4B02-AE74-2435E9A6A7DC.jpg (400x602, 39K)

not have your life poser

Based Neutral Player

You say that but you can't do it. Nobody can. Brains is complicated.

I will poke at it until It happens, like in the olden times.

player choice is not what you think it is

games trick you

most games that feature "moral choices" aren't actually moral choices at all and rather play with the idea of choice in virtual worlds, more like tests.

that's why people kid themselves when they think the choices in fallout 3 are moral choices, rather than a play on the idea of choice beyond player choice, the one choice, so many games do this all throughout game history, right from system shock through to new vegas to mass effect.

Sorry bud, but while we can definitely say humans are indeed a concrete species, Homo sapiens, there are indeed distinct sup-groups (“sub-species” if you will) that we humans have called races. Races are formed by thousands of years or genetic isolation and evolution caused by geographic isolation. The Inuits are not the same as the Nilots in Eastern Africa, this we know for certain.
On the concept of humanity, yes indeed some or even many philosophers and religions have spoken of man as a whole. I however do not see any usefulness in doing this though. Except when describing species-wide common features, fighting disease, etc, the term only exists in emotional rhetoric that comes from some philosophers, politicians, priests.
On the mistake of when Caesar (of reality) existed I do not know the exact date, and so I must apologize for that, even as a student of history I do not know much, having much to learn. I do however implore you to avoid calling anyone “scientific and historically illiterate”, you can claim such things, but it does not make it true.

You'll kill me or make me gay or something first I bet

Fool that you are, that you can not be as virtuous as a dog

Attached: 48F0B411-5AD2-496E-997C-B05194A008A7.jpg (170x227, 8K)

if you actually take it apart and see it, it makes sense.

like new vegas is not morally grey at all, there are no real moral choices, it only presents in such a way in the context of the game world.

this board can do it without being physical with you

Motherfucker was just an ancient otherkin with a huge mind

I just do whatever makes my pp hard, take that nerds.

That's a myth, unless you mean gay as in demonstrating homosexual behavior, as opposed to gay feelings. Besides, what if I want this board to get physical with me, did you think about that?

He was a chad who taught his philosophy through his actions instead of lectures

Attached: 3162D985-A3C9-4E84-AB14-3A4A208772C7.jpg (400x363, 57K)

>what if I want this board to get physical with me
but that's gay

Wait a second, I thought everyone here was a little girl?

>In his opus magnum Joël writes: 'The Ego' is the "most rampant heretic book a human hand has ever written", and Stirner laid with it the foundation for a veritable "devil's religion." The "destruction of alienation", that Stirner aims for, he says, amounts to "the return to authenticity", and this would be "nothing else than the destruction of culture, the return to animality [...] the return to the pre-human status."
>Even Nietzsche appears, according to Kolakowski, "weak and inconsistent compared to him [Stirner]."
>Calasso too regards Stirner's "Egoist" or rather "Owner" as an "artificial barbarian", an "anthropological monster" etc.. 'The Egoist' is the "writing on the wall", signalling the doom of occidental culture.
>No, the intrinsic reason, which was passed down probably by accident, was that [Husserl] wanted to protect his students (and perhaps himself?) against their "temptational power".
>Theodor Adorno once admitted to his inner circle that it was Stirner alone who had "let the cat out of the bag". However, he took care to avoid arguing such ideas or even mentioning Stirner's name.
>Nevertheless in his study of Nietzsche, [Klages] was prompted to commemorate the author Stirner as a "sheer demoniacal dialectician." He concedes to him that his thinking, in comparison to Nietzsche's, is "often more radical, less circumlocutory, analytically more exact", and that he "gives ultimate conclusions, for the most part, with more conciseness." Klages regards Stirner as that "antipode of Nietzsche, who in any case should be taken seriously." Stirner, he says, is the reason why Nietzsche is of paramount importance, because "the day on which Stirner's program becomes the will-guiding conviction of all, this alone would suffice for it to be the 'doomsday' of mankind."

So does that mean you are wrong? You said the concept of evil could exist without the concept of good, but now it seems that you're admitting that you can't explain evil without good, because a man living an evil/bad life wouldn't understand how bad he has it without a good life to compare to.

All little girls lust for each other

>“Humanity” as global entity does not exist except in globalist rhetoric to appeal to weak people’s morality.
Except that's entirely wrong, you fucking retard
Humanity has been and can always be used a catch-all term for the entire human population. If you somehow think that individuals cannot be able to socialize, develop bonds, or empathize with other individuals because of mass population-vs-population dynamics that develop because people are not being able to actualize people they have little to no social interaction with, then you're either a retard or lack social experience

Races ought to be more separated from each other just out of the fact it reduces the harm from ethnic conflict, but you denying the existence of humanity because the rich and people in senior offices believe that everyone can just magically treat all human beings as actual individuals by the power of education and anti-racism campaigns means you're just as retarded as they are

Attached: BANKAI.webm (1422x800, 2.41M)

Maybe you're just a retarded onion, sleeping in a hammock, dreaming about being a human.

Yeah but that's not gay it's pure

First of all, those groups are correctly identified as phenotypes, and they are largely irrelevant. As you mentioned, they were formed over thousands of years, which is biologically speaking, INSANELY short time. The fact that they are phenotypes, but not genotypes, is also vital: look up the distinction if you want to know more. It's why so many people (somewhat misleadingly) claim that "race is not a biological notion" - it's a half truism, race is not a genotypical notion.

Second of all, no evidence proves that these different phenotypes differ in the core and most important biological trates that ultimately result in the notion of universal humanity to be far more efficient and favorable than otherwise. In fact, there is concrete evidence to the contrary.

What makes human "Human" is beyond morphology that lends itself to tool-use and genetical properties that allow for reliable and viable breeding: the "secret ingredient of human species", is a hidden trait called "capacity of agent-neutral perspective". Which again, has been test and identified among infants absolutely regardless of their ethnic background. Only people with MASSIVE developmentary distorders - extremely severely retarded people, most autistic people and some kinds of psychopaths (but not most of them) do not have the capacity of agent neutral perspective.

Agent neutral perspective is a condition of higher-structure cooperation. Higher-structure cooperation is the foundation of any form of cultural institution, and is virtually ALWAYS more advantageous than hostility.

To treat people as one universal "humanity" is merely to recognize this biological fact. Everything else is a subject of strictly CULTURAL differences and issues.

Stirner is the real redpill, and he was just shitposting

But we know schizophrenia is a mental illness, and not the “normal” of humans senses. I like that you argue from other points of view, though. Playing the devil’s advocate is quite fun sometimes.
On the first line of “faulty reasoning”, I was using the example of social constructs as just that, an example of what he might have been thinking. I provided two lines of thought, and while I do not believe he is so thoughtless as to use the “social construct” argument put forth by some people, I still left it as a possibility just in case. Honestly, we all know arguing on the internet is retarded anyways. Nobody convinces anyone, and overall it’s just a shit flinging-fest until someone finds a “gotcha” Moment and pretends they “won” the argument.

Where does a "superior" culture come from?

I thought you just linked them together when you awaken the crystals and the worlds that are really gone forever are just the ones Ouroboros destroys.
Each world's Norende gets fucked up by the pillar of light, though.

If only I could banish hunger as easily as rubbing my belly

A man doesn't need to know abstract concepts to feel good bad or ok. His body dictates what is or isn't for that's all he is.

Absolute stupidity.

Can you prove that all humans aren't born with a fucked up sense of reality like in the case of schizophrenia when "normalcy" is dependent on what the general population looks like?

And a man usually experiences good feelings with bad feelings so he can understand which is which by comparing and contrasting. Point is, you can't have one without the other and you aren't really saying anything to make me side with you.

>But we know schizophrenia is a mental illness, and not the “normal” of humans senses.
The question is HOW do we know that? And curiously enough, for better portion of our history, we generally tended to actually think the actual opposite.
Again: I'm a pragmatic, philosophically speaking, leaning towards positivism as far as modern neuro-cognitive theories allow for.

But I did go through classical philosophical education, and on top of that, I'm an anthropologist by trade, so the incredible plurality of both our own's history, and different cultures when it comes to basic epistemology is interesting to me, and I try to push people to think about it a little more.

We can't say that we simply "know" our sensory experience is "correct" while the schizo's is "false". Because ultimately, it's basically a word-against-a-word scenario.

>"wooo, how do we know WE are not the crazy ones and THEY are actually the ones who see the world as it is, woooo!

is obviously a very silly sounding problem, but it is a problem non the less. You need something more to get over this.

>game is a /trannypol/ thread

Attached: 868.jpg (700x760, 103K)

Attached: 1445892613429.png (510x346, 209K)

What if a man feels like every bad feeling is also good? Not only on a physical but also a conceptual level? How can he compare and contrast then?

Humanity is a made up concept, is a bunch of humans just as a bunch of rocks is a bunch of rocks

Killing everyone isn't exactly what I would call "neutral", but it is funny to choose non of the above

Not him, and if by culture I assume you mean how their race/culture leads their development as a civilization, then it comes from the increase in IQ that came from the low-time preference encouraged by the development of agriculture compared to cultures that lived in areas that did not select for low-time preference as agriculture was not needed at least until relatively recently
In layman terms, farming made people smarter because it encouraged people to think into the future, where as if you live in one of the most plentiful and fertile places on the planet you can live more so in the present and not worry about food

It isn't socialism though.

Not him, but I'd argue that you can easily tell the schizo world view is wrong because it lacks consistency. Consistency is important to the scientific method. If you can't gather up a group of schizos that all see the same things then how can you honestly believe that their view is the correct one?

That is a provably false theory too. Where the fuck are you people getting this shit?

>game doesn't have morality system
>"good" choices always reward you more than "evil" ones

Hunters were smarter than farmers

>Consistency
What is quantum mechanics

My denial of “humanity” as concept is not based on denying biology. There are a universal species known as Homo sapiens. This is the universal humanity, nothing more, nothing less. I do not deny that there bullions of individuals that are alike very much in their collective biology, as a humanity. My issue with the term “humanity” is solely a ideological/cultural one. In fact, it seems you and I agree more than we disagree, especially on the issue of race. I take issue only with how morons and elites use the term to justify horrible biological and cultural atrocities, like what the (post)-modern world is currently going through. Sorry if I failed to clarify that.

>heh, Im going to be a reductionist engaging in borderline nihilism
Pathetic and highschool-freshman-tier

Attached: 1545931778619.gif (274x154, 2M)

>game has good and bad endings
>both good and bad endings are bad
>only the neutral ending is good even Tho is neutral

Because if everything feels good then everything just IS. So good doesn't exist because bad doesn't exist, and vice versa.

>nihilism
What's nihilistic about his post?

>Play game
>Engage in literally any action provided the game doesn't punish me for it, just to see the results
>If an action is punishable, refuse to ever engage in it

I've seen schizo's that were pretty consistent in their theories, but otherwise I do actually very much like that line of reasoning. Consistency, and some kind of symmetry is generally a pretty good litmus test for separating nonsense from potentially realiable knowledge.
However, then you'll immediately run into another problem: such as various religious prophets. They will present you often with exceptionally consistent metaphysics and theories about the world, yet most secular people still see their claims as riddiculous.

So again: the tools for separating knowledge from delusion needs further refining.
And basically, this is what most of philosophy has been doing through out it's entire history. That IS core of western philosophy. Just sharping the tools used to weed "sensible" from "nonsensical" theories.
(By the way, not the word "Sensible" coming from the word "senses". That is English tradition of thinking. If England did not exist, we would be still saying only "rational" or "logica", never "sensible").

>Only make selfless choices
>Long term gain is much larger than immediate satisfaction of selfish choices

>humanity is my new god

these new religions are so tiresome

>By the time you get that reward it's useless to you
>The smaller immediate rewards would have been a huge boon at the time you got them

This is me, especially in roleplaying games.

>harvest a little girl for her Atom
>tell Butch to fuck off when he begs you to save his mother
>use Renegade choices to beat the shit out of people to get what you want instead of talking to them

These are all perfect uses of a karma system. Good bait though you got me to reply.

In the long term we are all dead

>They will present you often with exceptionally consistent metaphysics and theories about the world, yet most secular people still see their claims as riddiculous.
Would you kindly give me some examples, please?

Christianity is the best religion we ever had.

Even with flawed individuals at the top, tyrants on the holy seat and fanatics on the long lever this religion paved the road for all the cultural achievements and all the scientific progress we made. It is the basis for our values and our law systems. No other religion allowed for or made this much progress and some downright collapsed back into barbarism.

>Letting an innocent woman die to spite her son for some petty shit
Based but bluepilled

I didn't argue that there are only two sides user.
How do you explain going from neutral to any of the two? You can go from 0 to 100 or from -100 to 0. You don't need the other part of the scale to see the difference. There's no thing in this world that doesn't have an "inert" state when it doesn't feel anything.

>muh advancements
>implying that brings happiness

fuck christians

That fruitbat who made TempleOS

AHEM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

Whic games do the system right I feel like SMT is the only one due to endings being more grey
>inb4 neutral is always the best
It doesn’t fix any the problems of the previous world so there’s a good chance it will happen again or humans will destroy themselves

Attached: DEE44BE3-9D01-46DD-ADE0-5BED85B26E21.jpg (1008x600, 212K)

I hope you at least bombed Megaton after taking the bubblehead

And then they had that nutjob of a self proclaimed prophet and all went to shit.

Life is suffering. Happiness is a lie.

Did you ever think that maybe you'd have more friends if you weren't so selfish, user?

Attached: 1361049602554.png (627x578, 243K)

Demifiend is a fucking maniac in every single path other than neutral. Absolutely fucking unhinged.

>Would you kindly give me some examples, please?
Tao is a remarkably consistent and symmetrical understanding of world, for an example. Konfucianism as well, is predicated by identifying inevitable symmetries between different phenomena's, starting with cosmology and ending with social organization of a single family.
Christianity was also - given the tools that people had at the time, percieved as consistent and symmetrical, though it did get very quickly very... complicated.

It stopped when they ran out of Greek dhimmis and shit they looted from India.

Phenomena is already a plural.

What's the point of having more friends if they're all niggers that don't share my worldview and I don't trust them?

Who do you mean?

What you described isn't friends to begin with.

True. Sorry about that. Not a native speaker, if that is any excuse.

>Can't do "good" deeds in order to be evil down the road
>Can't do "bad" deeds in order to help the greater good
>Have to keep picking the same "good" or "evil" route if you don't want to gimp yourself from getting the rewards

I have plenty of good friends and my friendships are healthy and positive specifically because I'm selfish. I do things with and for my friends when I want to and because I want to, not out of some ridiculous feeling of duty to them or to impress them or anything else.

>a glorified localization team plagiarizing the work of earlier, superior civilizations
>economy held up through middleman parasiting
Yeah. No. Islamic 'golden age' was like watching some ghetto-dweller win the lottery and then immediately commission a movie about himself rapping about how awesome he is.

He who must not be depicted.

>That is a provably false theory too.
If you're referring to low-time preference not being tied to IQ, then you're wrong. Its one of the most well-documented aspects of one's IQ.
If its about the farming and low-time preference, consider it an abstraction of the fact that agriculture is a lot more of a long term activity that almost explicitly requires patience and thinking ahead. Then extrapolate the areas of the world that developed agriculture compared to those that didn't until colonization, and how developed the civilizations in these areas are
By the fact he is purposefully taking all of human progress and civilization and declaring it meaningless by way of reductio ad absurdum

So how do I get friends I would treasure if I hide my own ideology and behave like a lying faggot for attention?

should I read stirner?

Attached: 1470157030378.png (218x198, 34K)

The idea is to except that your world view is not be-all or end-all, and that, through discourse with friends, you can come closer to a supposed ideal world view.

Are you saying that as a flaw?

Attached: 28185787-1ED2-4571-A29A-EB8FB36993F1.png (1072x863, 39K)

Cope.

So the islamic golden age went to shit... after the islamic prophet came
Alright

*accept

Attached: spookat.png (500x592, 491K)

No
Here's the TL;DR:
>Ayn Rand, except why should even let the state exist to begin with? Also, rights are ultragay

>haze
blessed image

Attached: GIVE WAR A CHANCE.jpg (506x517, 35K)

The Islamic world still hasn't recovered since the Mongols burnt down Baghdad lmao

>If you're referring to low-time preference not being tied to IQ, then you're wrong. Its one of the most well-documented aspects of one's IQ.
Correlation and causation, but that wasn't my main issue. Tying it agriculture is my biggest fucking problem. Because that is straight up provably false. It just does not correlate AT FUCKING ALL. If I do precisely what you suggest, then I'd find Lybians and New Guineans to be at the fucking bottom of the IQ charts despite having highly advanced agriculture for far longer than most caucasian societies. Ignoring again the problem of causality vs. correlation.

This really is a scientifically provably dead end reasoning. IQ has fuck all to do with subsistence strategies, there are virtually no correlations, much less reasons to believe in causation.
I will tell you what IQ has a LOT to do with: Accessibility of health care.

>tfw she will never exist

Friendly reminder that Stirner was a literal cuck.

Attached: communism.jpg (720x707, 66K)

>taking all of human progress and civilization and declaring it meaningless
Oh yeah, or giant blue pack of ant colonies matters very much and we're very important. Individual contributions of singular human beings to a giant pile of cultural and technological achievements doesn't make an argument for "Humanity". Most of us would rather see everybody else dead.

>New Guineans
>advanced agriculture
Redpill me on this, user

>Shmorkytoss

Attached: 1544752958259.png (321x213, 91K)

>rights are ultragay
Rights are given out by the state for the benefits of the state, and limited by it, they don't belong to you and can be taken from you if it benefits the party in power.

Begome Orthodox.

This is why all corporations need to distribute partial ownership and rights to part of its income to all employees equal to their overall contribution to its success.

>Game has a morality system
>Game tries to recommend what I ought to do purely based on what is true

Attached: 131908-004-A3DFC9A4.jpg (384x450, 34K)

This cartoon is pretty but not really how things are working. It's more like the reverse where employees are doing the labor and wealthy investors who typically have little to do with the original vision are asking why the employees aren't just slaves. Every startup tree cutting retail, construction etc. With a caring boss pays pretty fairly. It's the huge faceless conglomerates who don't give a fuck that are the problem.

They are actually one of the few cultures that developed agriculture on their own. Archeological evidence from the Waghi Valley in the highlands proves very complex agriculture, the highlands alone hosted a population of well over 50k people which given the fucking size of it and the terrain was an INSANELY dense population, that first gotten into contact with other people only around year 1904. It's fascinating stuff.

They are idiots. New Guineans, I mean. Routinely score on average ratings lower than the poorest regions of Africa.

>evil routes in almost every game is just kicking puppies or some shit
>never any able to do truly pragmatic evil where your character can do some truly callous things but it's usually to benefit him or his goals

I just want games that let me be pragmatically evil, like manipulate, betray people, do ammoral things, but it isn't out of sadism or anything, its to get things done faster.

I read some of it and it got a couple of chuckles out of me

>this religion paved the road for all the cultural achievements and all the scientific progress we made
Right

Attached: 1559581672139.png (1624x2536, 3.73M)

so what's the answer to the boy's question?
it's a bunch of rhetoric followed by a subtle version of "I AM SILLY!" but no punchline or satisfying conclusion...

It's a jab at communism.

Sure thing faggot

Attached: 1559581716357.png (1524x2736, 3.69M)

This is one spooky thread tbqh

Purity is gay

holy shit you are stupid
you know why the "dark age" is called that way you fucking mutt?

The answer is that the boy is actually selling his labor to make things for the factory owner for the amount on his paycheck. If he makes an unreasonable demand like "I want the paycheck and the teacups I make" then the factory owner can just buy labor from someone else.

>hurr durr I saw a picture with text on Yea Forums once I am smart

You are right, all science and all human curiosity just came to a staggering an imminent halt as soon as Lord Gonzo declared "we are now in the middle ages" and nobody did anything but physical labor and cattle herding

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_science_in_the_Middle_Ages

Because Protestants and Enlightenment thinkers decided to call it that as a way of snubbing the Catholic church and lamenting the collapse of the WRE?
You do realize that there was massive amounts of technological advancement post-Charlemagne onwards?

>this level of damage control
seething

>accepting the game's definition of you and letting it keep you from making the choices you want to

Attached: spooky.gif (273x322, 671K)

Ever played Planescape Torment?

>mfw

Attached: image.jpg (620x349, 41K)

Of course.

>mfw

Attached: omega-doom-lg.jpg (600x392, 36K)

>Come to village
>Two factions at war
>Play one
>Collect swords
>Ruin the village
>Come to the vilage
>Play the second
>Collect swords
>Ruin the village
>Come to village
>...

Hope you know the series

I'd agree, but not while Discordianism exists.

WotS

They are one and the same.

I think you mean Islam, friend

You should have said that you collected said swords using your feet.

>some of the money
No more like they are entitled to billions of dollars while their employees live paycheck to paycheck because they were trust fund college kids who got a small loan of a million dollars. God I hate right wing bootlickers so much.

Stirner was a pseudointellectual. Selflessness is the foundation of human civilization. Without selfless behavior, we would be in caves still, clubbing each other with wood in fights over carrion.

The very idea of selflessness is a spook.

mmm!
authentic boot flavor!

Attached: income distribution.jpg (908x483, 68K)

but us Stirner chads would have the biggest caves out of all the other grugs

Are you trying to be funny? Or to make an argument? I keep thinking it must be one, concluding that it's such a failure that there's no way you intended it, and vacillating toward the other, in a cycle

>

Attached: stirner38.jpg (1280x720, 222K)

>t. hasn't read Stirner

>when confronting my spooks I enter into a cycle of cognitive dissonance
You don’t say.

Actually any of you retards who spend your time on pseudointellectual imitation would have smaller caves than:

1) "warrior morphology" humans with low cranial capacity and high musculoskeletal development
2) actual intellectuals, who would have better weapons than you

That's not what cognitive dissonance is. Don't use terms you don't understand against arguments you can't grasp.

So basically they would be the primitive versions of Yea Forums users. Who stay in their small caves all day while the smarter caveman make fire and bronze weapons eventually and all the cave-chads bang the cave-staceys to pass on their genes?

That’s exactly what cognitive dissonance is, your sense of irony is struggling against your self righteousness.

>Selflessness is the foundation of human civilization
Actually, it's cooperation. Wether or not the that cooperation is selfish or selfless in nature is relevant.

Keep paying your taxes.

Your sense of retardation is struggling against your pseudointellectualism and it's concluding in you having no idea what basic English words mean. Promptly kill yourself.

Which is most of the population.

>game is based off a book but shoehorns two endings and a morality system
>publisher is rushing the small dev team to finish the game
>developers are rushing the book writer to hurry up and finish the book so they can just make their game already

Attached: 1531359012886.jpg (500x500, 81K)

this fucking pseud right here lmao

you shoulda took the L bro

>when confronted wish his spooks, the ardent ghost whisperer will become violent

Stirner is kind of overrated, anybody now with a computer and a rudimentary understanding of economics and psychology can be a better philosopher than Stirner. He is only remembered because he's some edgy meme people post over and over without actually reading him. Kind of why Yea Forums hates Karl Marx even though not reading Das Kapital except the opposite direction. Because they are right wing bootlickers here.

>and then they pick the bad ending as canon because barely anybody got the good ending

KAIN IS DEIFIED

This pleases stirner.

Keep having your labour exploited by uncaring corporations and capitalists stirner cuck.

This

>

Attached: Stirner2.png (1920x1080, 211K)

Keep idealizing your labor being exploited by a monolithic state, Marxist dog.

I was talking about the third game, actually. The dev team is so small, I'm shocked that there's a game at all, honestly.

wasn't stirner just a rich kid who paid people to publicize his pseudointellectual scrawlings?

>Marxist
>monolithic state
????????????

Yes. He was the original forced meme

Marx was also a rich kid who was subsidized by his also rich friend. Near everyone we remember in history was rich or became rich.

>Actually, it's cooperation.
While that is true, the very idea of higher level cooperation is predicated on the capacity for agent-neutral-perception, which is essentially, selflessness. To even begin learning how to cooperate for your own benefit, you first have to be able to abandon the notion of self, be able to fully emulate interests of others, and thus develop anticipations and behaviors conductive to such cooperation.

So neither of you are wrong.

That's most philosophers in general. I mean, regular people are too busy working to write a bunch of navel gazing.

When you are low level you should get a bonus to Int for selfish choices and a bonus to luck for selfless. When you are high level you should get a bonus to int for selfish and a bonus to luck or wisdom for selfless.

>believe me that transition to anarchy will happen, the boot will eventually be lifted from my throat when the state realizes that it is no longer necessary

All the more impressive that he campaigned for the dissolution of personal wealth, then.

Good job backflipping up your own anus.

>Actually, it's cooperation. Whether or not the that cooperation is selfish or selfless in nature is relevant.
Yeah, this. People don't cooperate out of altruism, they cooperate because it's often beneficial to both parties.

my philosophy is to try and do what people don't want me to do, it's like eternal teenage rebellion, except girls don't think it's very cool.

this reminds of the Singularity ending in which you kill first the general and then the doctor

Not An Argument
Please try again

>All the more impressive that he campaigned for the dissolution of personal wealth, then.
If absolute authority over all, even the most private elements of life of everyone else has to be paid by pretense of abandonding personal wealth, then it's not exactly a difficult trade.

All of Marxism exists solemly and exclusively to justify the absolute intellectual authority of Marx, and absolute devotion to his teaching. That is the actual message of Marxism: "Worship me!"

And given that he knew all to well he'll never REALLY be faced with taking any kind of pragmatic sacrifices, I don't really see anything impressive about it.

Pointing out how you retreated into aggrandizement when your double standard was pointed out is actually an argument, I just also called you a fag at the same time.

I'm sure plenty of brick workers have written important philosophy that will never be seen because it was written by a brick worker and not a rich man's son, also.

>leader of the second faction praises you anyway for continuing his world view

based
/thread

This, too, is Not An Argument
Please try again

I doubt it, it is the availability of time that allows philosophers to persue their craft is such a way. A laborer’s mind is filled with labor, a philosopher’s mind is filled with nothing and thusnis ready to be filled with nonsense.

And when called out for aggrandizement, you often shut down just like that, yeah.

human nature is dogshit we need to get rid of through education

Imagine slamming a philosopher for being shit with one of the most basic fallacies

I would sincerely doubt that. If you had any philosophical education, you would know that the absolute fundament of philosophical inquiry is always building upon works of earlier authors. It's a cummulative process.
So unless those brickworkers had access to philosophical libraries, sufficient basic education to even begin understanding them, I'd say:
No.

OK, to all of you in this thread saying I am a pseudointellectual; what proof have you? That I watch Destiny, is that all the veracity you have for that statement which you have made to me? No; it mustn't be; for there is no way someone could say I am pseudointellectual when in fact they are themselves rather much more? I believe this is what is known as the court resting its case. Take your judgement; and weep; like jesus.

Attached: destiny the big boy 2.png (575x768, 621K)

An observation and argument are not the same things. If you want to throw around your actually non-existent knowledge of informal logic, you probably should first learn the difference between a statement and an argument. That is actually a fairly fucking basic thing to get right.

We can’t, abandon ideation of humanity and join the technocrats.

I think you need to build upon the prior work of a dictionary and learn to spell before you start Redditting out on people, my little guy.

Everyone in this thread besides me is a pseudointellectual.

Listen, I am sorry you had to find out this way. Don't take it too hard.

Attached: 1439682958293.jpg (764x551, 263K)

Ever considered the option that not everyone here is a native speaker? Or are you just that desperate to draw attantion way from what I actually did say, and you had no problem of understanding: you merely do not have any way to reply?

You're being disingenuous if you're saying you weren't trying to argue that hes shit. This is rhetoric.

Obviously you weren’t attempting to imply anything, fellow enlightened philosopher. You merely made an observation for no reason. Our wandering minds, eh?

If you're not a native speaker, you should keep to simple sentences and words that parse correctly instead of trying to write outside your depth in an attempt to sound smart. You just come off like a posing retard.

Again. Statement and argument. Pretty major difference. Don't tell me you are one of those retards who things insult is an ad hominem?

Seriously, telling you faggots about this whole "logical fallacy" shit was a mistake.

Sorry pseud, I was the only real intellectual in this thread.

In my experience it is known; oh, rather quite well, I must add; that the frequency of semicolons within the writings of a man reflect his intelligence. It cannot be helped; it is how things are.

I don't give two flying fucks how insecure do I make you feel and how desperate are you to rationalize that anger, to be completely honest.

That sure was a timely and coincidentally relevant statement, huh?

Please don't start projecting your spic inferiority complex onto me. I'm better than you and everyone else in this thread in essentially every way. If any of you have girlfriends, they would leave you for me. If you have dogs, they would lick my hand over yours.

No, the factual content of that statement: The simple and very easily verifiable fact that he isn't taken seriously, is very much related to the subject.
Do you people really not know the most fucking basic principles of theory of communication? How fucking retarded are you?

>If you have dogs, they would lick my hand over yours.
nooo stop
don't cuckold my dog away from me

Attached: 1445810990325.png (216x233, 10K)

Enough to know implication and intent aren't so easily disregarded, unlike you. You're trying to exploit a loophole that doesn't exist and just seem dumber for it.

Did anyone in this thread actually read Max Stirner or is it just kids regurgitating the
>[x] is a spook! [stirnerface.png]
format without understanding?

I actually hope nobody here wasted their time reading him and it's all pretend

It’s just weird that you decided to state this with no other motive in a thread that could be seen as discussing such things, but I won’t question your infallable whimsy.

>t. Ghost chaser

>game has a pause button
>pressing the button sends the game into x4 mode
Fucking Russian devs

Attached: 1560053519264.jpg (811x854, 138K)

i became selfish irl like 5 years ago and i had no idea how the fuck i was never self centered

life is way better this way.

You were memed into religiosity by christistani keks on /pol/.

i haven't spent more than 30 seconds on /pol/ because i don't want to catch hair loss.

But not enough to understand that argument is not a matter of intent, but of structure and context.

Which means: NOT. ENOUGH.

For fuck sake: if somebody asked if a game was good and somebody else said "it was a complete bomb", would you start screeching "Ad populum, ad populum!!!"

Again. If you do not understand basic theory of communication, do not try to apply higer level stuff like informal logic.

I understand that you are insanely insecure and that my statement made you angry, because your fragile ego can't stand someone not talking with respect about someone you are immature enough to worship, but this is beyond pathetic.

You mean chin retraction

it's definitely not mutually exclusive over there.

correct. It is divine, and from the divine, all morality springs

rent free ^

Which would be correct. If you were talking to someone who said a game you just said you liked bombed, obviously to inflame you, they would be arguing with you and their argument would be based on public perception.

I literally never read Stirner so I have no stakes in this. I'm just genuinely perplexed how you can claim in honesty that you're not attempting to convince people that hes shit.

>WROOOOOOOOONG ANSWERRRR
Literally not what happens.

>Game makes you follow the categorical imperative.

wrong person eh

Yeah my bad. That's the second time in one thread.

based Land poster

Attached: sss.jpg (314x161, 13K)

Dear god, you are literally conflating the meaning of a notions of "having an argument" (as in having an exchange of views) and "making an argument" (as in providing a structured chain of reasoning as part of verification of contested statement).
That is how fucking retarded you are. Why are we having this conversation?

>The term “humanity” is used by progressive globalists to justify the erasure of nation-states, their borders, ethnic and racial homogeneity, etc

>Literally following an idology created by Peace of Westphalia in 1648

plebian tier philosophy

Just to make things clear: Are you absolutely, 100% sure you aren't on the autism spectrum?

no one has actually read stirner except for like marx because he spent all his time getting mad at things he didn't like and writing about it

That's what i'm asking about you. In what world where people are talking about something can you burst in, say
>EVERYONE THINKS THAT THING IS RETARDED
and not have it be considered combative and argumentative?

Are there must have mods for Kotor 2?

>I'm better than you and everyone else in this thread in essentially every way. If any of you have girlfriends, they would leave you for me. If you have dogs, they would lick my hand over yours.
*tips fedora*

Except a worker designed the cup
Except a worker did the market research
Except a worker did the machine

I don't own any fedoras, but if you lent me yours I would wear it better than you.

Actually, the man designed the cup, an algorythm didnthe market research which WAS made by the worker but that worker is also a high ranking management official in a different corporation, and the machine was made by other machines which were made by workers a couple of decades ago.

No one of you even read Stirner, its too high IQ

>and not have it be considered combative and argumentative?
See: This is something that a person without a development disorder SHOULD NOT have a problem differenciate. I'm dead fucking serious here.
Just like saying "that guy is an asshole" and making an ad hominem argument are two WIDELY different things. Somebody saying "wow, nobody takes him seriously" is not commiting a logical fallacy. He just expresses his experience and feeling on the subject, you god damn idiot. It's not structured or presented as a informal argument.
An informal argument follows an EXPLICIT deductive reasoning. A is true because of B.

In fact, it would not be ad populum even if it was presented as an argument, because the authority of academic body isn't inherently irrelevant to validity of this statement. The purpose of academia is, after all, explicitly to judge validity of academic works. It would be at best a weak argument, but not a fallacious one.

And that is if it was an argument, and not a mere statement. Jesus Christ why am I even wasting my time with you. You are fucking mentally deficient.

>small loan of a million dollars
unironically that is the right amount for a small business loan. never understood why people got so upset about that

Based.

Because it's more money than most workers will ever see in their entire lifetime.

Everything that exists is made by work. The capitalist doesnt even design the cup

Reminder that nihilism is for fags

Attached: 1446434851768.png (500x667, 503K)

I suppose in the physical sense you are correct but how would I go about compensating the laws of physics? I find them a much more consistant and valuable worker.

It would at BEST, sure, fine. That's not really the point anymore.
>Somebody saying "wow, nobody takes him seriously" is not commiting a logical fallacy. He just expresses his experience and feeling on the subject,
But that only works when you strip out the context of the environment completely. Obviously he or you or whomever was arguing with what he viewed as implied or explicit praise of Stirner in the thread. This isn't a problem in verbal communication but it is here.
>A is true because of B.
Right, he's shit because these academics said so. That's the obvious implication. To claim otherwise is disingenuous. I don't know what handbook you're following but nowhere is it said that such a small, simple and obvious leap is invalid to classify something correctly as argumentative, even within that definition.

Damn, fags are cool

Sorry fag, only cucks felch their philosopher’s nonsensical worldview from the cunt of aoxiety.

Nietzsche never actually provided any argument for why things have meaning, he just constantly swirled around the vortex of wishing he could doublethink that it did.

philosophy is for faggots

just sounds exhausting to me.

Attached: the-big-lebowski.jpg (1568x877, 160K)

>not masturbating while playing vidya
Do you even multi task?

Based retard
>Nietzsche never actually provided any argument for why things have meaning
That's because he never advocated for objective meaning, rather for meaning that you discover for yourself

>egoism is nihlism

nigger

>Arguing against something I never said
Damn, stirnerfags really can't read.

Trolling Marxists is always commendable

Meaning is meaningless, and Nietzsche is the pinnacle of “Just don’t think about it” as he died insane.

>meaning is meaningless
Only if you think it is, read Zarathustra

In what thread you think you are fag

Based Tom Campbell póster

no such thing as evil, only faggots who have subjective morality values

Attached: 1521918426585.jpg (700x703, 46K)

What does that have to do with Max Stirner?

Wow, Nietsche discovered subjective experience, the wuthering heights of high school philosophy are finally in my grasp.

>labour exploited
imagine actually being dumb enough to believe in marx's exploitation theory

it's really easy to be edgy. you can do the same with Rand, but that usually incurs counter-memeing against her.

>reduce taxes in a settlement from 100% to 50%
>income from taxes decreases