Moral Relativism vs. Natural Law and how does AI interfere

"When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass


A word is just a label. I cannot 'mislabel" anything because words and their meanings are entirely arbitrary. I can tell you what I mean by a term, and you can elaborate on what you mean by one. Then we negotiate alternate terms if we can't agree on the usage of a word. Or at least that is a common civilized approach.

I note that those who think the word denotes reality, and is there for "right" are typically confusing the territory with the map. I further note that most do so because they are trying to hamper communication, not establish it. It is an act of bad faith.

Did you note that you simply disagreed and failed to even engage the point on agency?

Where do you rate your response on this chart?

[imgur] [link to imgur.com (secure)]

"When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass


A word is just a label. I cannot 'mislabel" anything because words and their meanings are entirely arbitrary. I can tell you what I mean by a term, and you can elaborate on what you mean by one. Then we negotiate alternate terms if we can't agree on the usage of a word. Or at least that is a common civilized approach.

I note that those who think the word denotes reality, and is there for "right" are typically confusing the territory with the map. I further note that most do so because they are trying to hamper communication, not establish it. It is an act of bad faith.

Did you note that you simply disagreed and failed to even engage the point on agency?

Where do you rate your response on this chart?

[imgur] [link to imgur.com (secure)]

"When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass


A word is just a label. I cannot 'mislabel" anything because words and their meanings are entirely arbitrary. I can tell you what I mean by a term, and you can elaborate on what you mean by one. Then we negotiate alternate terms if we can't agree on the usage of a word. Or at least that is a common civilized approach.

I note that those who think the word denotes reality, and is there for "right" are typically confusing the territory with the map. I further note that most do so because they are trying to hamper communication, not establish it. It is an act of bad faith.

Did you note that you simply disagreed and failed to even engage the point on agency?

Where do you rate your response on this chart?

[imgur] [link to imgur.com (secure)]

The above highlights a fairy routine attempt in academia to thwart any opposing truth by making the idiotic claim that words have no meaning and are therefore null to all discussion while showcasing the idiotic inferiority complex of said poster and displaying a sever schizophrenic insecurity with simply being unequivocally wrong in all facets of the discussion.

The above highlights a fairy routine attempt in academia to thwart any opposing truth by making the idiotic claim that words have no meaning and are therefore null to all discussion while showcasing the idiotic inferiority complex of said poster and displaying a sever schizophrenic insecurity with simply being unequivocally wrong in all facets of the discussion.

The above highlights a fairy routine attempt in academia to thwart any opposing truth by making the idiotic claim that words have no meaning and are therefore null to all discussion while showcasing the idiotic inferiority complex of said poster and displaying a sever schizophrenic insecurity with simply being unequivocally wrong in all facets of the discussion.

Rule.303 is, was and will be in effect from now until well into the foreseeable future.

For those who don't know rule.303 it essentially means those with the guns make the rules. Anyone who wants to challenge that? Well. We know how that plays out.

But what happens when I have a gun and you have a gun and we don't agree on the rules, retard?

Rule.303 is, was and will be in effect from now until well into the foreseeable future.

For those who don't know rule.303 it essentially means those with the guns make the rules. Anyone who wants to challenge that? Well. We know how that plays out.

One thing is is crucial to understand is that not only is religious dogma NOT natural law, it is a man made perversion of it.


Religion can and has been used to motivate people to do obviously extremely morally "wrong" things, and claimed it pleased "god".


Religion must NEVER be used to determine what we consider to be right or wrong.

One thing is is crucial to understand is that not only is religious dogma NOT natural law, it is a man made perversion of it.


Religion can and has been used to motivate people to do obviously extremely morally "wrong" things, and claimed it pleased "god".


Religion must NEVER be used to determine what we consider to be right or wrong.

If you can beat the status quo then you make the rules. Retard.