Litmus test

[LastPoet]

Pissing match!

[jonb]

Scumbags find me everywhere I go. I'm like a bloody magnet to them.

Then don't play the guitar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rozGElzqD1M

[Rayaan]

@ worldslaziestbusker
What right to not be verbally abused? I do not want it, I have moved on from Kant.


Why do you want to impose your system of logic on me?

From what I gathered so far, he is trying to impose his system of logic onto all atheists mainly because he agrees with Kant's concept of categorical imperative. That is the litmus test he is speaking of.

Laziestbusker outlined it here, but I think he should have mentioned this concept in the OP as well.


A short description:

Since by nature (according to Kant) the moral law is universal and impartial and rational, the categorical is a way of formulating the criteria by which any action can pass the test of universality, impartiality, and rationality. That is its only function.

[...]

The Categorical Imperative is universal and impartial -- universal because all people, in virtue of being rational, would act in precisely the same way, and impartial because their actions are not guided by their own biases, but because they respect the dignity and autonomy of every human being and do not put their own personal ambitions above the respect that others deserve.

Notice that the above is NOT a description of how everybody does behave -- as an ethical theory, it is concerned to describe how people ought to behave.

http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/p...rative.htm

[DoktorZ]

Scumbags find me everywhere I go. I'm like a bloody magnet to them.

Then don't play the guitar

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rozGElzqD1M

Rumbled!

[jonb]

Rayaan, I know what he is trying to cage me into, but Kant's and his definition of what maybe rational does not fit my own. Further it seems that he is insisting his definition is universal, and therefore all the rest of us should have no voice. In my book that is just moving from one church to another.

[Rayaan]

Yeah, he tends to be insisting that his definition is universal and that everyone should follow that (which falls in line with Kant's philosophy).

Then again, it would be unwise of me criticize that since I'm a religious person myself.

I don't want to be hypocritical here.

[jonb]

Yeah, he tends to be insisting that his definition is universal and that everyone should follow that (which falls in line with Kant's philosophy).

Then again, it would be unwise of me criticize that since I'm a religious person myself.

I don't want to be hypocritical here.

Precisely, so to enforce one system of logic from one viewpoint would bias the interaction. As such we have to accept a level of incoherence, if we are to meet equally, and are reliant on good staff to administer the problems of that incoherence. And I think it is being done well.

Have I sucked up to the staff enough now?

[Rayaan]

Have I sucked up to the staff enough now?

Irrelevant question. Let's get back on topic now and I'll leave this thread. I just wanted to say something about the litmus test thingy.

Edit: ^ But thanks.

[jonb]

Have I sucked up to the staff enough now?

Irrelevant question. Let's get back on topic now and I'll leave this thread. I just wanted to say something about the litmus test thingy.

So you were just using me?
I feel so cheep.

[Rayaan]

So you were just using me?
I feel so cheep.

No, don't feel that way jonb. I was simply replying to you, nothing else. You made a compliment about the staff and that was good. Thanks.

Your "Have I sucked up to the staff enough now" question - was a humorous question - so I thought it would be funny to ignore that. Maybe you didn't get the same impression, though. Sorry.

Also, my internet connection was having a weak signal for like the last 45 minutes.
My brother was lagging my connection by playing Counter Strike on a different computer; hence I wasn't able to post this response either.