Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Nostalgia, nostalgia...
Today at 08:49 PM

Qur'anic studies today
Today at 08:41 PM

“Why do you disbelieve in...
Today at 07:04 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
Today at 04:03 PM

Reading Quran And Inquiri...
Today at 02:55 PM

Coronavirus crisis
Today at 01:33 PM

Random Science Posts
Yesterday at 01:47 PM

What music are you listen...
Yesterday at 11:54 AM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
March 27, 2020, 12:20 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
March 26, 2020, 08:37 AM

Excellence and uniqueness
March 24, 2020, 01:34 PM

The means of rumor making...
March 24, 2020, 01:52 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Your philosophical stance?

 (Read 8943 times)
  • 12 3 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Your philosophical stance?
     OP - March 19, 2010, 03:14 PM

    Just wondering where other members think they stand, and also my chance to learn about the different types out there.  

    Please dont just say you are a mixture of everything, I think we all are.  I am more interested in what label suits you the most.  

    I probably put myself in the libertarian-hedonistic-utilitarian-reductionist humanist camp (if there is such a thing)

    How about the rest of you?

    ETA : Anyone know of a good test on the internet that tells you your philosophical stance?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #1 - March 19, 2010, 03:45 PM

    What do you, as a libertarian-utilitarian-reductionist, uphold?
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #2 - March 19, 2010, 03:47 PM

    Is hedonism and laziness a philosophical stance?

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #3 - March 19, 2010, 04:07 PM

    Q-Manism, which is a unified ideology, inclusive of religion, politics, economics, sociology, culture, and philosophy.

    Anyone who wishes to join the Friends of Q-Man and live a better life, please send $50 to Q-Man for an introductory brochure and membership card.

    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #4 - March 19, 2010, 04:08 PM

    How many wives do I get?

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #5 - March 19, 2010, 04:16 PM

    That depends on your service to Q-Man. While I lay sexual claim over all women in my compound, men are allowed to marry them with my permission. Those who are most loyal get the most wives. Women are also allowed multiple husbands-- same deal.

    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #6 - March 19, 2010, 04:28 PM

    Awesome.  Are you going to sign a book deal with God or just going to keep it metaphysical?

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #7 - March 19, 2010, 04:30 PM

    I follow the philosophy of Yeezeevee.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #8 - March 19, 2010, 04:40 PM

    He's one of the early prophets of Q-Manism. However his message was corrupted by the CEMB forum and FFI.

    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #9 - March 19, 2010, 04:41 PM

    That's bidah.   finmad

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #10 - March 19, 2010, 04:43 PM

     Cheesy

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #11 - March 19, 2010, 04:50 PM

    Free-thinking Agnostic with Pantheistic tendencies and Atheistic moments.

    I love the Arabic word for Agnosticism  اللاأدرية  It roughly translates as "I-don't-know-ism"

      Cheesy
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #12 - March 19, 2010, 05:08 PM

    libertarian, miniarchist, anarcho capitalist - somewhere in between there, right now.   

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #13 - March 19, 2010, 05:13 PM

    I'm a minarchist and libertarian as well, but anarcho-capitalism is utopian nonsense that will only result in cartels/conglomerates, trade associations and/or monopolies taking over the role of the state, but with less accountability to the people.

    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #14 - March 19, 2010, 05:19 PM

    Meh, I'm on the fence.  I see lots of good reasons for it, but some strikes against it like externalities.  I'm still working with some ACers to see if they can resolve my questions before I commit.  They have me down to miniarchistism or at least strong libertarianism  though.  I don't buy the argument that all government is immoral on its face.  They haven't convinced me, but I haven't wholly written it out yet.

    Edit: Actually my biggest concern not that business would take over the role of the state, because most AC ideas deal with the state- business interaction and go into a lot of detail how business would be prevented from coercion without the state.  It is that other influencing structures such as religion and community opinion which would limit the "liberty" ACists claim would be maximized under said legal structure.  That is what I'm working out with them.   As far they haven't convinced me I'm sticking with miniarchism.

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #15 - March 19, 2010, 06:34 PM

    Meh. Scepticism.

    "The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves."
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #16 - March 19, 2010, 06:51 PM

    Meh, I'm on the fence.  I see lots of good reasons for it, but some strikes against it like externalities.  I'm still working with some ACers to see if they can resolve my questions before I commit.  They have me down to miniarchistism or at least strong libertarianism  though.  I don't buy the argument that all government is immoral on its face.  They haven't convinced me, but I haven't wholly written it out yet.

    Edit: Actually my biggest concern not that business would take over the role of the state, because most AC ideas deal with the state- business interaction and go into a lot of detail how business would be prevented from coercion without the state.  It is that other influencing structures such as religion and community opinion which would limit the "liberty" ACists claim would be maximized under said legal structure.  That is what I'm working out with them.   As far they haven't convinced me I'm sticking with miniarchism.


    Yeah, I've had a lot of discussion with anarcho-cappies. They tend to be sharp and make good points, but none of them have ever convinced me that getting rid of the state solves the problem of defending liberty against abuse of power, or that a institution similar to the state in function wouldn't just reappear with a different structure and name.

    The mistake I think Rothbard and his followers made is conflating the state with aggregation of power to the detriment of individual liberty. I think the latter is completely feasible without the former, and, in certain circumstances is actually more likely to be problematic without the democratic republican state acting as (an albeit not entirely impartial) mediator between parties and making an attempt, no matter how half-assed it may be, to protect the rights of those with no power or wealth, and to have some accountability to the people as a whole.

    The other thing I have a big problem wrapping my head around is why ACs seem to think it is possible to have large disparities of wealth without corresponding large disparities of power, and abuse of that power (to the detriment of the rights and liberties of other people), considering the fact that these two things have always gone hand-in-hand since the beginning of civilization. Control more resources, and you have more power-- way it's always been, and likely the way it always will be.

    Finally, the idea of a completely organically self-regulating economy, with no external controls, manipulation or interference, whether that be a Marxian communist society or a purely free-market capitalist society, I find to be utopian and unrealistic.


    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #17 - March 19, 2010, 06:52 PM

    Yeah, I've had a lot of discussion with anarcho-cappies. They tend to be sharp and make good points, but none of them have ever convinced me that getting rid of the state solves the problem of defending liberty against abuse of power, or that a similar structure to the state wouldn't just reappear with a different structure and name.

    The mistake I think Rothbard and his followers made is conflating the state with aggregation of power to the detriment of individual liberty. I think the latter is completely feasible without the former, and, in certain circumstances is actually more likely to be problematic without the democratic republican state acting as (an albeit not entirely impartial) mediator between parties and making an attempt, no matter how half-assed it may be, to protect the rights of those with no power or wealth, and to have some accountability to the people as a whole.

    The other thing I have a big problem wrapping my head around is why ACs seem to think it is possible to have large disparities of wealth without corresponding large disparities of power, and abuse of that power (to the detriment of the rights and liberties of other people), considering the fact that these two things have always gone hand-in-hand since the beginning of civilization. Control more resources, and you have more power-- way it's always been, and likely the way it always will be.

    Finally, the idea of a completely organically self-regulating economy, with no external controls, manipulation or interference, whether that be a Marxian communist society or a purely free-market capitalist society, I find to be utopian and unrealistic.


    Yeah, I was gonna say that too.

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #18 - March 19, 2010, 06:59 PM

    Being irreligious =  Having to figure shit out on your own Smiley

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #19 - March 19, 2010, 07:19 PM

    What do you, as a libertarian-(hedonisitic) -utilitarian-reductionist, uphold?

    I do solemnly declare that all drugs should be legalised, religion should be removed from schools and we should assign a happiness per £ value, and spend accordingly.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #20 - March 19, 2010, 07:23 PM

    Just wondering where other members think they stand, and also my chance to learn about the different types out there.  

    Please dont just say you are a mixture of everything, I think we all are.  I am more interested in what label suits you the most.  

    I probably put myself in the libertarian-hedonistic-utilitarian-reductionist camp (if there is such a thing)

    How about the rest of you?

    Anyone know of a good test on the internet that tells you your philosophical stance?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #21 - March 19, 2010, 07:24 PM

    Google it.

    "The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves."
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #22 - March 19, 2010, 08:09 PM

    I could, but wouldnt know if it was reliable..

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #23 - March 19, 2010, 08:14 PM


    I have no clue about these definitions.

    I'm just me.

    Feel free to label me.


    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #24 - March 19, 2010, 08:20 PM

    Feel free to label me.


    Okey-doke. You are a Q-Manist. Now empty out your bank account and write a check to the Friends of Q-Man, then come move to my compound, where I will help cleanse the sins of your soul through back-breaking labor.

    fuck you
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #25 - March 19, 2010, 09:00 PM


    Do you take pay-pal  Huh?

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #26 - March 19, 2010, 09:02 PM

    I have no clue about these definitions.

    I'm just me.

    Feel free to label me.




    Same.

    Just one difference..

    I hate Jews.

     thnkyu

    Iblis has mad debaterin' skillz. Best not step up unless you're prepared to recieve da pain.

  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #27 - March 19, 2010, 09:08 PM

    nevermind

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #28 - March 20, 2010, 06:39 AM

    I follow the philosophy of Yeezeevee.


    LOL

    YEEEEZEEEEEEVEEEEEEEEEee!!™
  • Re: Your philosophical stance?
     Reply #29 - March 20, 2010, 08:36 AM

    I know for starters I'm definitely not a materialist but what I am.

    As for my political or economic, I tend to be realpolitik - I find that stuff goes haywire when ideology is preferred over pragmatism.

    "It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up." - Muhammad Ali
  • 12 3 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »