Controversy Corner

Debate topic of the day:
Is it worse to fail at something, or never attempt it in the first place?

I honestly have no idea on this one. Both answers have their merits.

EXNova wrote:

Debate topic of the day:

Are humans mostly virtuous or mostly wicked?

I vote the second: fear of repercussions from the society we live in is the only thing that prevents us all from becoming sociopaths. In the past, when an society endorsed wholesale slaughter as virtuous, everyone who stood to gain from participating did.

I don't want to bring religion into this aspect but, I think it's in human nature to have both of these.

Mainstream wrote:

EXNova wrote:

Debate topic of the day:

Are humans mostly virtuous or mostly wicked?

I vote the second: fear of repercussions from the society we live in is the only thing that prevents us all from becoming sociopaths. In the past, when an society endorsed wholesale slaughter as virtuous, everyone who stood to gain from participating did.

I don't want to bring religion into this aspect but, I think it's in human nature to have both of these.

The question is, which is dominant in the absence of authority?

EXNova wrote:

Mainstream wrote:

EXNova wrote:

Debate topic of the day:

Are humans mostly virtuous or mostly wicked?

I vote the second: fear of repercussions from the society we live in is the only thing that prevents us all from becoming sociopaths. In the past, when an society endorsed wholesale slaughter as virtuous, everyone who stood to gain from participating did.

I don't want to bring religion into this aspect but, I think it's in human nature to have both of these.

The question is, which is dominant in the absence of authority?

Are you a naughty boy when your parents aren't around?

Absolutely.

EXNova wrote:

Absolutely.

There is your answer

When I was a kid and I got home from school, I had about two hours before anyone else got home. I started fires and tortured whatever small creatures I could find. I found out, on my own, that most insects can survive for a year or more.. frozen in a plastic cup in the back of the freezer. I also found out that if you spray Lysol on a lit bulb.. it explodes. I also liked to polish the floor in front of the door with wax based dusting spray, so that whoever came in would fall and hurt their self. I also liked to use those no-kill animal traps and capture rats and then kill each one in a different manner; drowning, burning, piercing injuries, crushing, electricity..

I did all of those things and don't regret them.. and, among all the other humans that I know, I still have a higher standard of morality.. which leads me to believe that all humans are inherently evil.

I also believe that all humans are inherently good. I've born witness to the most depraved individuals having some sense of honor or compassion within them.

These conclusions lead me to the belief that, if there is a source of divine power.. a creator.. some god.. it must be both good and evil. If one being were purely good, everything that it created would be purely good; if it was incapable of evil, by its own hands, it should be incapable of creating evil beings.

Why would a perfect being create imperfect copies of itself? And if perfection exists, who's to say it isn't found in the pursuit of balance?

Oh wow this discussion bring back memory

Grade 11 psychology course nature vs nurture debate, and then there's "Lord of the flies".

According to the results we got from the debate, its the primal instinct that act upon human behavior, aka the instinct to survive. In current society, however, this primal instinct is masked by what's called "morality". So in reality, there isn't really "good" or "evil", but only act in ways that improve one's own chance of survival. If such actions seem beneficial to the public, they would generally be considered (by the public) as "good", and likewise if they seem harmful to the public, they would generally be considered "wicked". Then ofcourse there are huge grey areas like euthanasia, abortion, etc, that you can come to different conclusion from different points of view.

Psst... ever heard of Buddhism??

I practiced Zen Buddhism for a brief period of time.

EXNova wrote:

Why would a perfect being create imperfect copies of itself? And if perfection exists, who's to say it isn't found in the pursuit of balance?

Because I want you fuck tards to be inferior to me if one can over come these natural flaws and become my equal I would gladly kill them before they are born give them my throne.

Uwah Σ（ﾟдﾟlll）

Strike that chuuni on the head pls

Zen Buddhism?? waaaw so high class...then you should know about Mr. Buddha's last words??

how did the wheel became the wheel and why do people do evil and good things

now next let's go make this more complicated by talking about yin and yang shall we?

Who's to say that your idea of perfection isn't an unholy abomination to someone else? Who decides what's right, and who decides what's morally bankrupt? The real question here is this:

How do you define virtuous and wicked?

WiFi wrote:

Strike that chuuni on the head pls

Zen Buddhism?? waaaw so high class...then you should know about Mr. Buddha's last words??

how did the wheel became the wheel and why do people do evil and good things

now next let's go make this more complicated by talking about yin and yang shall we?

I don't like it when people assume that there was only one noteworthy Buddha, and that the only Buddha who matters was Siddhartha. If you're going to refer to enlightened beings, please be a little bit more specific. It's both incorrect and insulting to do otherwise. In any event, cyclical metaphors are very common in buddhism; even only taking into account Siddhartha's teachings, a wheel could be referring to Samsara, Bhavacakra, or even Dharmacakra.

WiFi wrote:

Strike that chuuni on the head pls

Bitch please I was being Titan LLLOOONNNGG before that show. No really if anything I should sue the fucks who made that show for clearly basing it off my very existence and just changing the gender of the lead.

And to strike titan= death.

EXNova wrote:

Who's to say that your idea of perfection isn't an unholy abomination to someone else? Who decides what's right, and who decides what's morally bankrupt? The real question here is this:

How do you define virtuous and wicked?

WiFi wrote:

Strike that chuuni on the head pls

Zen Buddhism?? waaaw so high class...then you should know about Mr. Buddha's last words??

how did the wheel became the wheel and why do people do evil and good things

now next let's go make this more complicated by talking about yin and yang shall we?

I don't like it when people assume that there was only one noteworthy Buddha, and that the only Buddha who matters was Siddhartha. If you're going to refer to enlightened beings, please be a little bit more specific. It's both incorrect and insulting to do otherwise. In any event, cyclical metaphors are very common in buddhism; even only taking into account Siddhartha's teachings, a wheel could be referring to Samsara, Bhavacakra, or even Dharmacakra.

IT IS I AND ONLY I WHO DECIDES WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG. I made this world I give you life therefor it is I who am right.

You should be old enough to realise that the way you're acting is counter productive, and frankly if your doing it for a joke its not funny in the slightest.

I'm sure looking at the Stanford prison experiment could add some insight to whats being talked about, I can't really think of much to add to the subject.

boytitan2 wrote:

IT IS I AND ONLY I WHO DECIDES WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG. I made this world I give you life therefor it is I who am right.

Bitch please.

EXNova wrote:

Are humans mostly virtuous or mostly wicked?

What's there to be debated about? Choosing either would be baseless generalization. It's more of a "throw your baseless opinions here" rather than a debate.

I'm not looking for a definite answer, just trying to promote discussion.

beccadmgirl's post covered just about everything there is to be said about the matter: "virtuous" and "wicked", or the simpler version, "good" and "evil", are extremely abstract concepts. It's essentially selflessness vs harmful selfishness, or, the willingness to contribute to the well-being of others versus the willingness to harm others for personal gains, which are, in the end, dictated by moral principles, something that vary heavily from person to person based on culture and many other factors.

reVelske wrote:

beccadmgirl's post covered just about everything there is to be said about the matter: "virtuous" and "wicked", or the simpler version, "good" and "evil", are extremely abstract concepts. It's essentially selflessness vs harmful selfishness, which in the end are dictated by moral principles, something that vary heavily from person to person based on culture and many other factors.

Which is precisely what makes this topic so fascinating. Please continue.

Except that is all there is to the matter unless you actually see possibilities of any arguments against that particular stance. Unless you want to talk about morals which is a whole different subject entirely.

Maybe a different controversy might prove a better start for a discussion, although I currently do not know what.

Good idea. I'll update the original post.

The real controversial aspect of this subject, as Rev has said, are focused case by case. How much gain would 1 need to see from a certain action to deem the cost of performing such action justified by moral code.

Here's an example:
In a simple scenario, you have the power to save 1 single person, or a group of 1000 people, what would you do.

Same scenario, but given the condition that the 1 single person holds the key to finding the cure for a currently deadly, contagious, and incurable plague affecting millions world wide, what would you do.