Banned toxic players cry about server staff. Silent majority thanks GMs

[Yinein]

Originally Posted by Viscere [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seek help Ramen.

Sorry you dont either, hows it feel to finally get to raid 5 years into velious. Glad you get to finally see the content.

[Nexii]

Originally Posted by Yinein [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sorry you dont either, hows it feel to finally get to raid 5 years into velious. Glad you get to finally see the content.

Maybe in 5 more years he'll learn to be useful at a raid.

[GRMurphy]

Beginning to get the impression that this guy isn't sorry at all that people don't have warder loot

[-TK-]

Originally Posted by Ravager [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In a nutshell, good things are preferred outcomes. Bad things are un-preferred outcomes.

Morality is 100% arbitrary by this definition. Observation would not be the final arbiter here as you stated, frame of reference would be. Which side of the 'preferred outcome' you are on would make quite the difference. I think I see where you are trying to go by defining your individual sense or morality, but you can't use this example on a larger culturally diverse scale and have it applied to a functioning society without some authority source defining the lines. Maybe you can on the small scale on a co-op'd commune, but it quickly breaks down as it scales up. There's too many grey areas.

Also know that while you choose not to accept the formal teachings of religion or divinity in the formation of your existing sense of morality, I can wager that you were raised in a western society (or developed eastern) that has taught you that killing someone, stealing from them, or otherwise causing them 'harm' is bad because of the sense of value those societies have placed on life and happiness. So, it's not like you came to your current sense of morality one day spontaneously out of your own original thought or senses with no conditioning. You have been conditioned by societies that for as long as we know have been predominately influenced by a religious or divine (your words, magical) frame of reference and have already set the moral parameters that you are choosing to adopt. Tweaking a few of their ideas here and there to work with your own opinions doesn't change that. This is not a 'gotchya' moment or anything like that. I'm simply stating that if you ignore the heavy influence of religion and divinity on morality throughout history and how it's manifested today, then you're probably ignoring a whole lot of other stuff in the formation of your concept of morality.

It's seems that you view morality as something that is already out there waiting to be discovered like a law of nature and all you have to do is be a 'healthy' person to discover it. As someone stated in another post, nature has no sense of good or bad. I have to agree that morality is a fluid human construct that has to be defined by an authority in order for societies to function within moral boundaries on a large scale.

[Nocht]

Hey baby do you wanna see my Primal Velium Brawl Stick?

[kaev]

Originally Posted by GRMurphy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Beginning to get the impression that this guy isn't sorry at all that people don't have warder loot

it's a low-grade bot, an "expert" system that resembles barely passing grade student work from the mid-80's, there is no intelligence behind those shitposts

[Yinein]

Originally Posted by kaev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it's a low-grade bot, an "expert" system that resembles barely passing grade student work from the mid-80's, there is no intelligence behind those shitposts

Intelligence and RNF, lol. Hope that helps.

Ps: sorry you dont got warder loot

[Ravager]

Originally Posted by -TK- [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Morality is 100% arbitrary by this definition. Observation would not be the final arbiter here as you stated, frame of reference would be. Which side of the 'preferred outcome' you are on would make quite the difference. I think I see where you are trying to go by defining your individual sense or morality, but you can't use this example on a larger culturally diverse scale and have it applied to a functioning society without some authority source defining the lines. Maybe you can on the small scale on a co-op'd commune, but it quickly breaks down as it scales up. There's too many grey areas.

Also know that while you choose not to accept the formal teachings of religion or divinity in the formation of your existing sense of morality, I can wager that you were raised in a western society (or developed eastern) that has taught you that killing someone, stealing from them, or otherwise causing them 'harm' is bad because of the sense of value those societies have placed on life and happiness. So, it's not like you came to your current sense of morality one day spontaneously out of your own original thought or senses with no conditioning. You have been conditioned by societies that for as long as we know have been predominately influenced by a religious or divine (your words, magical) frame of reference and have already set the moral parameters that you are choosing to adopt. Tweaking a few of their ideas here and there to work with your own opinions doesn't change that. This is not a 'gotchya' moment or anything like that. I'm simply stating that if you ignore the heavy influence of religion and divinity on morality throughout history and how it's manifested today, then you're probably ignoring a whole lot of other stuff in the formation of your concept of morality.

It's seems that you view morality as something that is already out there waiting to be discovered like a law of nature and all you have to do is be a 'healthy' person to discover it. As someone stated in another post, nature has no sense of good or bad. I have to agree that morality is a fluid human construct that has to be defined by an authority in order for societies to function within moral boundaries on a large scale.

Morality is not arbitrary. At all. You'd prefer things to be a certain way. I know this, because you are a person with preferences, just like me. It's a funny quirk of biology that we all have similar brains and can see ourselves as the other person. Empathy is baked in. Before you say it's god that did it, maybe study a little evolutionary psychology that doesn't require magical thinking to work.


What you prefer is your moral compass. Full stop. When reality slaps you in the face and says things aren't that way, well, then, either you or reality can change. Here's a hint. Only one of you two can, and it ain't reality. You can face facts and change your mind about shit, then reincorporate the new information and adjust your moral compass, or you can fight reality and lose. Those are your options. Choose wisely.


I was "blessed" (to borrow a phrase ironically) to be raised by two catholic parents who were disillusioned by the church and gave me the room to grow up to believe whatever I felt was right. I never went to church, so I was never indoctrinated into that idiocy. I was lucky. Most people are raised believing whatever nonsense their parents raised them to believe whether it's Jesus (pronounced yay-shue for anyone who actually cares about history... and psst *he wasn't white!*), Buddha, Shiva or whatever. That right there is enough to tell you there's bullshit afoot when all it takes to get a son or daughter of any given faith is to have them spew forth screaming from the vaginal canal of someone of the same faith.


That said, my parents were upstanding people who raised me to be upstanding. But it didn't take divine teachings for them to do that. I can't say for certain that I'd be as moral as I am without them or without any guidance at all, because we all have one life to live, but there's overwhelming evidence in evolutionary psychology that people on the whole are good because it helped people on the whole adapt and reproduce. Cause and effect. Water flowing downhill. That is physics, that is reality.


Food for thought: whatever faith you believe in is not history. Virtually every story in whatever book you believe in was derived from folklores and legends of dead religions past. Yayshue wasn't the first Yayshue.


"Is God willing to stop evil, but unable?
Then He is not powerful.
Is He able, but unwilling?
Then He is not good.
Is He both able and willing?
Then how can there be evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him 'God'?"
~Epicurus


There were so many faithful over so many centuries that died and suffered, many for decades and without relief when all it took was the magic of a benevolent force to stop it. How many suffer with Alzheimer's today? A disease no human can cause or cure, so by your own magical thinking is purely an Act of God. It's a disease distributed at random, to the faithful and not. You're Divine Authority would give it to a faithful follower as readily as anyone else. Someone, right now, raised believing in the divine, worshiping the divine even loving the divine unconditionally has Alzheimer's. They are forced to leave the home they've known their entire life. They are stripped of their memories of their grandkids and their children. They spend their days in confusion, fear and uncertainty. I can think of no worse hell to put someone in yet this is what the gods do. If I had the power to cure Alzheimer's, I'd do it without a thought. If I had the power to give Alzheimer's I'd never dream of it. So, how do you reconcile that?

[Nexii]

“Some would ask, how could a perfect God create a universe filled with so much that is evil. They have missed a greater conundrum: why would a perfect God create a universe at all?”

[Cassawary]

Forgive the theothanatolgists, for they know not what they do.