Re: How It Works: ed senter's Might Makes Right philosophy

On Jul 8, 3:41 pm, nat <esen...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
JackneySn...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

How else is "right" determined?
Logic, ed. And logic dictates Argumentum ad Baculum is a fallacy.
--Jackney Sneeb
When, pray tell, has human behavior ever conformed to the dictates of
logic?

Every time you drive down the street and 99.99999999% of the drivers
in oncoming traffic AVOID running head-on into you. There are
zillions of examples. There are just as many examples of humans using
SUPERSTITION to guide their thinking, too. Which method is more
likely to be consistent with objective reality, in your view?

Logic is the non-contradictory integration of subjective concepts
about objective reality. Are people always logical? No. Is logic
preferable to superstition? That's a matter of opinion, too, isn't
it. I say it is. Changing your mind about right and wrong by
IGNORING logic and just accepting what someone ELSE tells you (just
because you view him as a person with "authority"), is SUPERSTITION.

We keep getting into this "My judgment should determine right and
wrong," then "But my judgment isn't as good as those who wield power"
contradiction you cling to, so I'll post this again:

Here is the glaring contradiction in any belief in “authority”: If you
believe “A” is “authority” (whether “A” is a religion, state, etc.),
then you used your own judgment to decide that. If, therefore, “A”
says something that conflicts with your judgment, what happens? All
of its supposed legitimacy came from you judging it to be so. It
cannot therefore overrule your judgment, since your judgment is the
only reason you think it’s worth crap to begin with. It looks
something like this:

“It’s good to obey the law,” which means . . .
“I think I should obey the commands of politicians,” which
means. . .
“I judge it to be good to obey politicians,” which means . . .
“I judge that I should follow the judgment of politicians,”
which means . . .
“I judge that my own judgment is less important than
politicians’,” which means . . .
“I judge that my actions shouldn’t be based on my
judgment,” which means . . .
“I judge that I should not judge.”

Behold, “authority,” in all its insane, antihuman bogusness.
--Jackney Sneeb
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: My response to Mr. Adams
    ... you gotta take em all as they come on usenet. ... people here have suggested it to both bill and Ohlooney. ... I am not saying you judge people. ... You decided you disagreed with my judgment that bill was by far ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Non-judgement in the face of injustice?!?!
    ... If we don't judge murder to be murder, ... IS NON-JUDGMENT NOT REALLY THE RIGHT TERM? ... of Buddhism as I understand them. ... I believe judgment is ...
    (talk.religion.buddhism)
  • Re: Non-judgement in the face of injustice?!?!
    ... "believes" in much of Buddhism and practices meditation who is also ... of Buddhism as I understand them. ... CHILD) IF WE DON'T FIRST JUDGE THEM, ... I believe judgment is ...
    (talk.religion.buddhism)
  • Re: LSJ - How can this be right
    ... example judge was the correct one. ... Damnans, using his judgment, assessed the game state and Antonio's ... assessment may be. ...
    (rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad)
  • Re: Which writers in other genres are popular with SF fans?
    ... crack the secret message hidden within Mr Justice Peter Smith's ... judgment on the Da Vinci Code case, ... Three weeks ago, while reading the judgment, I noticed something ... I did not seriously consider that the judge could have implanted ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)