Is it irrational to hate President Trump?

Happy_Killbot

@Dee In order for something to be rational, it has to follow from reason and logic.

Why don't you go ahead and show us how it's done then?

Prove logically that love of live , family , friends , Art , books , nature etc , etc are reasonable and follow from logic.

Make sure to list all your assumptions and clearly state each step so your conclusion can be logically sound.

ZeusAres42

Dee said:

@ZeusAres42

****No it’s not rational to hate Hitler either. 

Right , I’m surrounded by a site full of Spocks  who on seeing their kids hounded into the gas chamber would admonish their wives for saying “ I hate  Hitler “ by replying “come , come dear that’s not rational “

Not quite lol. Not laughing derivatively by the way; it was rather amusing what you said. You're forgetting I said that it's reasonable as to why one would hate Hitler. As I stated previously there is a difference between rationality and reason. What I am saying is that the emotion discontent is not rationality; it's an emotion. Rationality is acting in accordance with one's own reasoning processes. However, the emotion discontent is also not a reason; it's an emotion; reason denotes cognition whereas emotions denote feelings.

Dee

@Dee 

Dee said:

@Happy_Killbot 

@Happy_Killbot ;

****  I wasn't aware that you knew of every single order, statement, and action taken by the infamous genocidal dictator.

Who was in charge? 

****I also wasn't aware that Wikipedia was considered a reliable source of information.

Why not do your own research .....oh wait you and your brother have done so without Wiki no doubt 

****Consider this: Was Hitler born hating Jews or did he learn it from somewhere?

How could we ever know 

****Also consider this: If Emotions such as Hatred are rational, then why isn't the Nazi's genocide rational?

This was explained to you several times but as usual you ignore everything that doesn’t agree with your narrow minded narrative ......

“ It is rational hatred, aroused by an attack on life, freedom, country, some person or institution we love. Such hatred is necessary for winning a war against aggression. “People must love what they are defending, in order to hate their attackers effectively.” The other kind of hatred, which he calls “character-conditioned”, was made use of by the Nazis in recruiting their party. The bulk of their recruits came from the lower middle class, who had led a starved and frustrated life socially and economically, particularly since 1918, in Germany. This led to tremendous irrational hatred and destructiveness which could only be expressed in small doses before the Nazi party offered an outlet.

Erich Fromm 

No doubt you will use your usual,appeal to authority “out “ again 

****Hmmm...Yes...Very good points I haven't considered.

I know

****Who was in charge?

Begins with a H 

****$and why doesn't my brother use wikipedia?

Becsuse he's special needs ?

***$*Oh, and we couldn't know, could we? Huh. Almost like that was my point.

Try listening to Hitler's speeches you they are in film you know 

****And yes, this is another appeal to authority, and the content of the quote is just begging the question, and an appeal to emotion.

Ah yes so giving you links to Hitler's speeches are "appeals to authority"     

You're an  

Dee

******@Dee In order for something to be rational, it has to follow from reason and logic.

It can follow from emotion as in our charging Rhino I do not need to follow logic and reason to get me running 

*****Why don't you go ahead and show us how it's done then? 

How whats done? 



*****Prove logically that love of live , family , friends , Art , books , nature etc , etc are reasonable and follow from logic.

Why would I have to prove that , what's your point if you have one ?

******Make sure to list all your assumptions and clearly state each step so your conclusion can be logically sound.

Again you're talking nonsense all because you still refuse to answer what your proposed foundation for reasoning is , also you keep refusing to answer why you keep saying " justification " to who do you mean ......,Bet you refuse to answer again , get your brother's help if you wish ..   or maybe not as he's not to hot on History is he?

Happy_Killbot

@Dee You know, I used to think that you were a rational person, but now that you have shown your true colors I don't think I will ever be able to take you seriously again.

I mean, I know this is the internet, but you have to be able to see my sarcasm in that remark, and Wikipedia still isn't a good source of information because it can be edited by anyone. This is like, the first thing the tell you not to use in High school and college. The reliability is highly questionable and inaccuracies and even completely false information is often present.

Hitler's speeches don't mean a whole lot. We know he supported the killing of Jews, that is given on account of he ordered the final solutions, but what isn't apparent is what role he actually played in the coordination of the final solution or for that matter, who first suggested it.

Providing his speeches wouldn't be an appeal to authority, it just wouldn't do anything to attack or support the argument.

Dee

******You know, I used to think that you were a rational person, but now that you have shown your true colors I don't think I will ever be able to take you seriously again

Oh boo hoo I'm going to be ignored by a guy who believes Hitler's character is being taken by Historians , I didn't read the rest of your rant as undoubtedly it's void of implication just like most your posts are 

MayCaesar

Happy_Killbot said:

@MayCaesar Frankly, I don't think values are rational either. Even if you have a perfectly logical set of actions that followed from a given set of values, maximized by your given intelligence, it would still be without a true foundation in reason, and thus is not really rational.

This doesn't mean you shouldn't still do those things based on those values, it just means that what conclusions you reach are only going to follow from those assumptions, and without a basis you can make them whatever you want.

For human level intelligence, this isn't a problem because everyone has more or less the same values and comparable intelligence, but when there is a huge disparity between either of these things (values or intelligence) then it means that power and capability becomes the main determining factor in any decision. When this comes from politics, where they do have power this problem becomes apparent as many people will be forced into the consequences from the governing power in question.

Well, a foundation, by definition, does not have to be absolute. It just has to be solid and consistent, and then you can build a rational system of views on top of that. I would say that it will be rational for as long as you acknowledge that the foundation it rests on is somewhat shaky and, possibly, prone to being reconsidered in the future.

This also makes it clear why rational people sometimes come to mutually contradictory conclusions: their foundations are different. One person after earning their PhD will choose to stay in academia, and another person will move to the industry. It is not that one of them is being rational and another irrational, even considering perfect equality of their circumstances; their choices are dictated by different values, derived from different foundations, and there is no way to distinguish the quality of these foundations from each other. Each person is right in their own right.

When @YeshuaBought asked her title question, I assume what she meant is this: "Is hating Trump consistent with your foundation, or are you hating him because of the outside influence which contradicts your foundation, but which you refuse to process analytically in order to see that it does?" In this interpretation, the question is quite interesting, and one could write entire books answering it.

ZeusAres42

Happy_Killbot said:

@Dee In order for something to be rational, it has to follow from reason and logic.

Why don't you go ahead and show us how it's done then?

@Happy_Killbot in order for someone to act rationally they must act in accordance with their reasoning. I can show how this is done but do remember that I draw a distinction between reason and rationality. These terms are often used interchangeably and have been used in this way several times by several people in this thread. But there is a clear distinction between the two.

Let's say that an adult believes in Santa Claws and believes Santa Claws will give them presents the next day when they wake up providing they are in bed every night at a certain time on Christmas Eve. Thus, they go to bed every night at this time on Christmas Eve because they truly believe this is going to happen. Now while you and I may think this is very unreasonable behavior for an adult they are still acting rationally as their actions conform to their reasoning for why they do those actions.

Anyway, I think the main issue you and I have if any is probably one of semantics. You stated to @Plaffelvohfen before that you don't believe emotions are rational in and of themselves. Well, that is also my position as well.

Plaffelvohfen

@ZeusAres42

I agree, there's a difference between the process (reasoning) and the model/frame (rationality) in which the process take place...

Happy_Killbot

@ZeusAres42 Semantics always get in the way, and arguing semantics never yields and winners.

That quote has to be examined with all parts, because it isn't really 4 separate statements it's really just one question, the point being that @Dee can't come up with any sound rational explanations for any emotions because as you say and I agree, emotions in and of themselves are not rational.

n order for something to be rational, it has to follow from reason and logic.

Why don't you go ahead and show us how it's done then?

Prove logically that love of live , family , friends , Art , books , nature etc , etc are reasonable and follow from logic.

Make sure to list all your assumptions and clearly state each step so your conclusion can be logically sound.

This could all be rephrased to: "Can you prove to everyone that love of live , family , friends , Art , books , nature etc , etc are reasonable and follow from logic, with listed assumptions and clearly stated steps so that the conclusions can be said to be sound?"

He can't because emotions are not logical, but if he could then I would change my mind. Judging by his above comments and unwillingness to cooperate and have civil discourse, I find it very unlikely that he will even try.

TKDB

For the current household named Liberals, it's easy for them to dislike Trump.

Because disliking is easier for them to do, instead of doing their Political jobs, for the American Public as a whole, instead of doing their jobs to self suit their bigoted Liberal opinions, towards the President.

They're again, Liberally preaching to their follower choirs, and or constituent fan bases.

If these Trump Impeachment Liberals authentically cared about the country, they would have presented Legitimately Sound evidence, that would have prompted, a bunch of the Conservatives lawmakers, to join their Liberal ranks, to Impeach Trump as a collective group?

So where is that Legitimately Sound evidence at, I guess that the Trump Impeachment Liberals, still haven't managed to indoctrinate enough of the Conservative lawmakers, to get those Conservatives to think, and view Trump, through the same lens, that the Liberals, are using, along with not getting those same Conservatives, to adopt their Liberal preaching skills, as well?

Jeffries, Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Nadler, and the rest of their Liberal collective, are slowly loosing their grasp on how they want the rest of the non Liberal Voters, to view Trump through their Liberal lenses?

CNN, and MSNBC, have been singing the praises of the Trump Impeachment Liberals, for almost 2 days now.

Dee

@ZeusAres42

***** in order for someone to act rationally they must act in accordance with their reasoning. I can show how this is done but do remember that I draw a distinction between reason and rationality. 

Fleeing  from a charging Rhino happens instantly tell me do you and the guys on seeing a charging Rhino sit down light a pipe twirl your beards and weigh up the logical and philosophical pros and cons of fleeing .......

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

***That quote has to be examined with all parts, because it isn't really 4 separate statements it's really just one question, the point being that @Dee can't come up with any sound rational explanations for any emotions because as you say and I agree, emotions in and of themselves are not rational.

But you don’t even know what reason is only your subjective opinion of such,  also you appeal to logic which again makes your whole argument circular because If your starting position is that logic and reason are correct, then applying logic to conclude that logic and reason are correct will always be circular

Again you and the others are incorrect emotions can be considered rational when they fulfill at least one of the three possibly four criteria of rationality. Can you prove otherwise? 

There you go again making stuff up you keep saying I can’t prove something after doing so several times so now instead of addressing me your appealing to the mob , not one of you’s can give me an example of a decision reached without emotion yet I proved no decisions can be made without emotion , which is why you switched to A I and claimed “ AI have thoughts and think” something I’m still waiting of your proof off .....any update on that?

You refuse to answer  what the foundations of reason are which I predicted you wouldn’t answer , you also keep using the “term” justify but cannot answer the why , as in justify to whom .

@Plaffelvohen said ......

*****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved” 

So again hating the taste of excrement cannot be rational ,between you and the guys tell me how so is not rational as not one of you’s can answer  

****"Can you prove to everyone that love of live , family , friends , Art , books , nature etc , etc are reasonable and follow from logic, with listed assumptions and clearly stated steps so that the conclusions can be said to be sound?"

They are reasonable to me as they are subjective, you don’t like people having their subjective likes and dislikes it seems . Can you prove to me using logic your decision making is always right as it follows logic or can you prove your sense of morality is better than mind that is seeing as you base it on logic or would that be your definition of logic you’re referencing?

****He can't because emotions are not logical,

I just have , and I keep doing so fleeing from a rhino out of fear is logical yet an emotional decision 

 ****but if he could then I would change my mind.

You wouldn’t , move your ego aside and you may

 ****Judging by his above comments and unwillingness to cooperate and have civil discourse, 

That’s funny I started out this whole conversation in a spirit of respect but you resorted to firing of insults all because I defended my position now like a coward you incite others to join you , BTW let you and @Plaffelvohfen @ZeusAres42  and others go back to my original opening statement to check the veracity of my words. 

So go ahead get another few to join the mob

*****I find it very unlikely that he will even try.

I keep giving examples and you keep ignoring instead you appeal to the mob to back you up ......

You keep appealing to a foundation for reason yet you cannot say what this is despite being asked 14 times now 

You keep saying one needs to “justify” statements to some authority who or what is this authority?

You said AI have thoughts and think any updates on that position?

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

Sorry buddy you lose again , you love accusing others of your fallacies ...........

When people present an argument, they sometimes refer to the opinion of some authority as evidence for their claim. ... If the expert is relevant, an appeal to authority is sound.

Happy_Killbot

@Dee Every single one of these points I have decried several times, but you just keep repeating them ad nauseam.

I can and have proved that emotions are not always logical, and even gave a reason they exist from evolutionary psychology. At this point you are just dogmatically hanging on to your ideas, calm your ego, it isn't personal.

I don't need to prove that emotions can "sometimes be rational" because frankly, they never are they are just there. It's like a black swan, you might assume that all swans are white, but then upon finding a black swan, now it seems obvious that color has nothing to do with the quality of being a swan. Emotions are the same way in regards to reason, if you assume the two always trend, then what do you do when you find the example where they don't? (in this case AI) Seems obvious to me, you have to throw out the idea that emotions (color) and reason (swans) have anything to do with each other.

I agree that emotions are subjective, and the fact that they are lends heavily to the idea that they are irrational/arational, because it shows that many conclusions can be reached, some of which are in conflict with each other, i.e, Nazism and Liberalism. There is nothing that says one is more true than the other except the way people feel about it. If we are going to say that either is rational, then we need to prove that the foundation of these ideologies is rational. You quickly run into problems if you try to do so, because there is no way to verify your base assumption, which is that you feel it is correct. This is what I am taking about when I say the foundation, which I thought was straight forward but you still don't comprehend.

Consider this example in math:

I feel that x = 7. 7 is a good number, not to high, not to low, it's just perfect. This means x * 6 = 42, Which is the answer to life, the universe and everything else. Therefore x^x = 823,543

Was x = 7?

The answer is no, this isn't rational thought because the base assumption x=7 (hating Trump) has nothing to prove it, it exists independent of rational thinking, it is an assumption, it just is.

Lets apply this thinking to your infamous rhino example (again)

I want to live and avoid pain. This is my assumption. A rhino is charging me, If it hits me, it will be painful and I might die. Therefore, I must avoid getting hit by the rhino, and the easiest way to do that is to get out of the way.

Was wanting to live and avoid pain rational?

The answer is no, this isn't rational thought because the base assumption wanting to live and avoid pain has nothing to prove it, it exists independent of rational thinking, it is an assumption, it just is.

As for AI thinking, just watch this video, there are quite a few like it. I think it will get the point across nicely that computers can do things that were outside of their creators intentions, indicating that they are capable of performing abstract thought, although that thought is not familiar to human thinking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdTBqBnqhaQ

Happy_Killbot

@Dee

Dee said:

@Happy_Killbot

Sorry buddy you lose again , you love accusing others of your fallacies ...........

When people present an argument, they sometimes refer to the opinion of some authority as evidence for their claim. ... If the expert is relevant, an appeal to authority is sound.

Wow, you must be incredibly insecure if you are going to these lengths to attack my argument, even if I do accept that De. Erich Fromm is an expert on the matter, you would still have no answer to where he begs the question, by not addressing what makes life, liberty and happiness valuable in the first place. It is these assumptions which I attack. De. Erich Fromm doesn't address my argument in the quote you pasted.

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

****/Every single one of these points I have decried several times, but you just keep repeating them ad nauseam.

You haven’t even though I’ve asked you too ad nauseum and you cannot even come close to doing  so thus your avoidance of answering what you’ve refused to answer 23 times now , get help from the guys if you wish 

**** I can and have proved that emotions are not always logical, 

Ha , ha I never said always , but again you’ve just admitted they can be 

****and even gave a reason they exist from evolutionary psychology. At this point you are just dogmatically hanging on to your ideas, calm your ego, it isn't personal.

Actually you know nothing about evolutionary psychology as I had to correct on that also , why are you so annoyed chill ......

***/I don't need to prove that emotions can "sometimes be rational" because frankly, they never are they are just there. 

But yet you and your buddy P said .... *****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved” 

So again hating the taste of excrement cannot be rational ,between you and the guys tell me how so is not rational as not one of you’s can answer  

Beaten again buddy 

*****It's like a black swan, you might assume that all swans are white, but then upon finding a black swan, now it seems obvious that color has nothing to do with the quality of being a swan. Emotions are the same way in regards to reason, if you assume the two always trend, then what do you do when you find the example where they don't? (in this case AI) Seems obvious to me, you have to throw out the idea that emotions (color) and reason (swans) have anything to do with each other.

Nonsense one cannot operate without the other 

****I agree that emotions are subjective, and the fact that they are lends heavily to the idea that they are irrational/arational, because it shows that many conclusions can be reached, some of which are in conflict with each other, i.e, Nazism and Liberalism. There is nothing that says one is more true than the other except the way people feel about it. If we are going to say that either is rational, then we need to prove that the foundation of these ideologies is rational. You quickly run into problems if you try to do so, because there is no way to verify your base assumption, which is that you feel it is correct. This is what I am taking about when I say the foundation, which I thought was straight forward but you still don't comprehend.

You’re still totally missing the point which is it’s totally rational to detest Hitler . Emotions can be considered rational when they fulfill at least one of these three criteria of rationality.

Also what you’re getting confused about there emotions can be rational and irrational just like reasoning , which I thought was pretty straightforward but you still don’t comprehend .

*****Consider this example in math:

I feel that x = 7. 7 is a good number, not to high, not to low, it's just perfect. This means x * 6 = 42, Which is the answer to life, the universe and everything else. Therefore x^x = 823,543

Was x = 7?

The answer is no, this isn't rational thought because the base assumption x=7 (hating Trump) has nothing to prove it, it exists independent of rational thinking, it is an assumption, it just is.

What a pile of , consider this Hitler wiped out all my relatives I hate Hitler which is a perfectly rational position 

****Lets apply this thinking to your infamous rhino example (again)

I want to live and avoid pain. This is my assumption. A rhino is charging me, If it hits me, it will be painful and I might die. Therefore, I must avoid getting hit by the rhino, and the easiest way to do that is to get out of the way.

Was wanting to live and avoid pain rational?

Rationality and emotion work in tandem one cannot flee a Rhino without the emotional spur to do so 

***/The answer is no, this isn't rational thought because the base assumption wanting to live and avoid pain has nothing to prove it, it exists independent of rational thinking, it is an assumption, it just is.

Read above , it’s pretty simple 

****As for AI thinking, just watch this video, there are quite a few like it. I think it will get the point across nicely that computers can do things that were outside of their creators intentions, indicating that they are capable of performing abstract thought, although that thought is not familiar to human thinking.

Don’t be an absolute tool computers cannot think , they may mimic such but that’s it 

Appeal to authority rendering it invalid as you ruled out valid citations as such 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdTBqBnqhaQ

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

***** Wow, you must be incredibly insecure if you are going to these lengths to attack my argument,

Says the guy who appeals to a mob to support him Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

**** even if I do accept that De. Erich Fromm is an expert on the matter, you would still have no answer to where he begs the question,

He begged no question you clot 

****by not addressing what makes life, liberty and happiness valuable in the first place.

But we were not talking about such you clot 

***** It is these assumptions which I attack. De. Erich Fromm doesn't address my argument in the quote you pasted.

Maybe sue him? 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee LOL, the authority would be the bots themselves, and you can see what they did in the video and read about it in the paper, that's not an appeal to authority, it's just the truth.

If it is rational to hate Nazi's because they killed so many Jews, then it is rational from the perspective of the Nazi's to have killed the Jews. Both are based on the emotion of fear and hate, and as far as I am concerned, the difference between the two is the power and will to do so.

That is the only conclusion we can draw if we assume that rationality and emotion must work in tandem if we accept that emotions are subjective.

The alternative is that emotions are in and of themselves not rational, in which case neither of these positions is rational, and hating Trump is either irrational or arational, take your pick its semantic.

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

***** LOL, the authority would be the bots themselves, and you can see what they did in the video and read about it in the paper, that's not an appeal to authority, it's just the truth.

Its still an appeal to authority as you and your buddy used the very same rationale on my piece yesterday so stop sulking 

****If it is rational to hate Nazi's because they killed so many Jews, then it is rational from the perspective of the Nazi's to have killed the Jews. Both are based on the emotion of fear and hate, and as far as I am concerned, the difference between the two is the power and will to do so.

Again you stupidly stick to your fallacious arguments , one is a rational emotion the other is irrational .....Capiche? 

****That is the only conclusion we can draw if we assume that rationality and emotion must work in tandem if we accept that emotions are subjective.

Who is we 

*****The alternative is that emotions are in and of themselves not rational, in which case neither of these positions is rational, and hating Trump is either irrational or arational, take your pick its semantic.

Yet not you or your buddy can answer what’s you’s collectively agreed on ......

.... *****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved” 

So again hating the taste of excrement cannot be rational ,between you and the guys tell me how so is not rational as not one of you’s can answer  

Beaten again buddy 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee You haven't even tried to answer the question I am asking...

Again you stupidity stick to your fallacious arguments , one is a rational emotion the other is irrational .....Capiche? 

WHY?

What is it that makes one rational and the other irrational? Just because the Jews were a threat to the economic viability of the Nazi war machine doesn't mean they were justified in killing the Jews out of fear and hate.

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

******You haven't even tried to answer the question I am asking...

WHY?

What is it that makes one rational and the other irrational?

Treating others as you want to be treated works for me it’s called the golden rule did you ever hear of it?

 *****Just because the Jews were a threat to the economic viability of the Nazi war machine doesn't mean they were justified in killing the Jews out of fear and hate.

I agree they were not justified as they ignored the golden rule it works like magic

You haven't even tried to answer the question I am asking...

WHY?

 *****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved” 

So again hating the taste of excrement cannot be rational ,between you and the guys tell me how so is not rational as not one of you’s can answer  

Happy_Killbot

@Dee Ok, so it's the golden rule then.

Why is the golden rule rational?

Plaffelvohfen

@Dee

Ok, I'm very probably wasting my time but I'll try one last time.

To your question, yes it is irrational to hate the taste of feces, it's irrational but normal...

It's a normal reaction that the vast majority (but not all) of humans do experience. But babies don't have our prejudices, many toddlers will eat the content of their diapers without disgust and we will teach them this disgust and to not do that, but fundamentally nothing prevents humans from eating their own feces, it's minimally toxic (emphasis on the our own, eating another human or animal feces is a lot more risky)... Rabbits, dogs, chimps and many more animals do because there is still undigested nutrients (not much in human poop mind you) that would otherwise be wasted...

So there are very good reasons to not eat feces, but all those reasons have nothing to do with taste...

The fundamental point I'm trying to convey to you is this though: Emotions are just subjective impulses, they are not the result of a cognitive process... Now that said, ACTING on those impulse is, most of the time, rational... The acting is (usually) rational, the impulse never is... 

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

****** Why is the golden rule rational?

Its self evident in the statement itself

So tell me why would it be irrational? 

Dee

@Plaffelvohfen

Ok, I'm very probably wasting my time but I'll try one last time.

I’m probably wasting my time back but I will humor you .......

*****To your question, yes it is irrational to hate the taste of feces, it's irrational but normal... 

It's a normal reaction that the vast majority (but not all) of humans do experience. But babies don't have our prejudices, many toddlers will eat the content of their diapers without disgust and we will teach them this disgust and to not do that, but fundamentally nothing prevents humans from eating their own feces, it's minimally toxic (emphasis on the our own, eating another human or animal feces is a lot more risky)... Rabbits, dogs, chimps and many more animals do because there is still undigested nutrients (not much in human poop mind you) that would otherwise be wasted...

So there are very good reasons  to not eat feces, but all those reasons have nothing to do with taste...

****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved”

There you go ..... but all those reasons.... thought you said no reasoning whatsoever takes place?

*****The fundamental point I'm trying to convey to you is this though: Emotions are just subjective impulses, they are not the result of a cognitive process... 

... The acting is (usually) rational, the impulse never is... 

.Now that said, ACTING on those impulse is, most of the time, rational

My original question on this post was and remains .......If one  believes Trump is a racist , a sexist and a bully based on what they’ve heard in the media how is not “reasonable” to dislike him intensely?

At the start of the topic I’ve stated that emotions and reasoning work in tandem , I stated it was and is rational to detest Tump , if I read or hear a media report about Trump that’s disgusting  and that leads to an emotion of Hate that’s perfectly rational 

So you’ve just agreed my original statement was and is correct

Plaffelvohfen

@Dee

I see you've decided to be disingenuous about this, just like a Trump supporter...  

You wrote :  ...thought you said no reasoning whatsoever takes place?

Do you have reading problems or cognitive limitations?? Try again, here's what I wrote, and please take your time to make sure you understand:
"There are very good reasons to not eat feces, but all those reasons have nothing to do with taste...".

Care to try and prove me wrong? Hint, you won't be able to... 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee

Dee said:

@Happy_Killbot

****** Why is the golden rule rational?

Its self evident in the statement itself

So tell me why would it be irrational? 

Just saying something is self evident is not a valid logical justification. This is begging the question.

The deeply religious make the same argument about god, gods, and other mythical beings. They assert they are real without proof or evidence.

Why should we assume this statement is true just because you want it to be?

Plaffelvohfen

@Dee

Maybe sue him? 

??? Are you the D in TKDB???  That is straight out of his playbook....

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

***** Just saying something is self evident is not a valid logical justification. 

Justification to who? You still cannot answer this why’s this?  The statement itself is the epitome of logic but of course it’s lost on you 

****This is begging the question.

Its not , you really should attempt to learn what fallacies mean instead of running to your jumbo book of such and misunderstanding what they actually say 

***The deeply religious make the same argument about god, gods, and other mythical beings. They assert they are real without proof or evidence.

Another ridiculous analogy , if you cannot understand that I treat others the way I wish to be treated you really need help.

Also you are the one who keeps asking why my moral code is rational using the exact same “logic “ as the religious nuts

****Why should we assume this statement is true just because you want it to be?

I never asked you to assume such , do as you will I care not no more than I care about a Muslim who believes beheading gays is fine because he’s appealing to a divine authority.......You’re doing the exact same dance 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee I think I have backed you into a corner and now you are just struggling.

The justification doesn't have to be to any person place or thing, it just has to be logically sound.

If you claim things are true, then what makes it true?

Right now, you are claiming that emotions can be logical, but then when I ask what makes them logical you just say it's ridiculous to think otherwise.

This is textbook dogma.

Plaffelvohfen

The golden rule states : “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”

Say I happened to be a fan of BDSM, say I like it when people whip, spank and humiliate me, then according to you, using the golden rule it would be rational for me to whip, spank and humiliate everyone...

Happy_Killbot

@Plaffelvohfen Yeah, the golden rule is trash anyways. That's why I prefer "informed consent" as the quantum of morality.

Dee

@Plaffelvohfen

***I  see you've decided to be disingenuous about this, just like a Trump supporter...  

I see you’ve decided to sulk about this , just like a Trump supporter 

You wrote :  ...thought you said no reasoning whatsoever takes place?

Do you have reading problems or cognitive limitations?? 

Funny I was just about to ask are you special needs? 

*****Loving or hating the taste of something cannot be "rational", as no reasoning whatsoever is involved”

There you go ..... but all those reasons.... thought you said no reasoning whatsoever takes place?

“There are very good reasons to not eat feces, but all those reasons have nothing to do with taste...".

There you go again buddy “all those reasons” after saying no reasoning takes place .....

****Care to try and prove me wrong? Hint, you won't be able to... 

You’re proven wrong .....again 

All this because you’re a coward who knows what I said from the off is right but through sheer cowardice jumps to defend an who claimed Hitler was a psychopath yet I’m incorrect in saying.........

.”If one  believes Trump is a racist , a sexist and a bully based on what they’ve heard in the media how is it not “reasonable” to dislike him intensely?”

I dislike clowns  like you who jump to defend people even when wrong just to get a pat on the back 

At the start of the topic I’ve stated that emotions and reasoning work in tandem , I stated it was and is rational to detest Tump , if I read or hear a media report about Trump that’s disgusting  and that leads to an emotion of Hate that’s perfectly rational 

So you’ve just agreed my original statement was and is correct 

Care to try and prove me wrong? Hint, you won't be able to..

Dee

@Plaffelvohfen

***** ??? Are you the D in TKDB???  

Are you the P in pat on the back ???? As in your buddy K will give you for this “witticism “? 

****That is straight out of his playbook

Don’t worry your pat on the back is coming you’re probably getting yourself wet in excitement .........

Dee

@Plaffelvohfen

****Say I happened to be a fan of BDSM, say I like it when people whip, spank and humiliate me, then according to you, using the golden rule it would be rational for me to whip, spank and humiliate everyone... 

Treat others as you wish to be treated, if they have  consented to be treated this way go for it 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee ;Dee said:

@Plaffelvohfen

****Say I happened to be a fan of BDSM, say I like it when people whip, spank and humiliate me, then according to you, using the golden rule it would be rational for me to whip, spank and humiliate everyone... 

Treat others as you wish to be treated, if they have  consented to be treated this way go for it 

I think the point @Plaffelvohfen was making went right over your head...

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

***** I think the point @Plaffelvohfen was making went right over your head

Yeah funny that B S goes right over my head ......Like your B S where you claim I’m irrational for disliking Trump yet you’re rational for calling him a psychopath bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha..........Don’t worry P will give you the “thumbs up “ something you’re fairly familiar with at this stage ........

Dee

@Happy_Killbot ;

Informed consent ....Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

Happy_Killbot

@Dee Sounds like you are Jealous. Having a bad day or something?

Do you need someone to talk to about your rational emotions?

Should a masochist treat people the way they want to be treated?

I say no. "informed consent" is just so much better a philosophy. It's still irrational, but I think it is more useful for society than the golden rule is.

Dee

@Happy_Killbot

*****  Sounds like you are Jealous. Having a bad day or something?

No seriously buddy you can keep P and his “thumbs up “ all for yourself

****Do you need someone to talk to about your rational emotions?

No , I need you to explain how you conclude that you saying Trump was a psychopath and thus admit you’re irrational using your criteria and the deny it? 

****Should a masochist treat people the way they want to be treated?

Sure ,if they want to be treated that way see that it’s magic it’s called consent 

****I say no. "informed consent" is just so much better a philosophy. 

How so? I can pick and choose from either 

****It's still irrational, but I think it is more useful for society than the golden rule is.

How so ? How can you compare and evaluate?

ZeusAres42

Are the sun and moon rational? I'm struggling to work this out. What about chocolate cakes? Are they rational too?

Plaffelvohfen

@Happy_Killbot

At this point, he's just being as much of an immature a-hole as TK, RickyD and such... I guess not everyone gets to the age of reason eh? 

ZeusAres42

In all seriousness, this debate started off with some good posts which were food for a good civil discussion. However, since it's now degenerated to basically "My di*ck is bigger than yours" I feel I would be wasting my time commenting on it any further. Shame some have to spoil it for others.

Happy_Killbot

@Dee

Dee said:

****Should a masochist treat people the way they want to be treated?

Sure ,if they want to be treated that way see that it’s magic it’s called consent 

Now my point about masochists went right over your head...

It's like you are unable to predict and comprehend what other people's actions might be...

Let me break this down for you real simple:

A Masochist is someone who likes pain. It gets them off, sometimes sexually. A masochist, therefore wants people to harm him either emotionally or physically. If one such person adopted the philosophy: "Treat others how you want to be treated" this individual would go around hurting people.

Get it?

Happy_Killbot

@ZeusAres42 Ever since Trump has been in office this is how every conversation involving him goes.

Either you are to enraged to think rationally.

Or you are too enamored to think rationally.

Dee

@Plaffelvohfen  


**** "Treat others how you want to be treated" this individual would go around hurting people. 

.......So you don’t ask people first if they would like to be treated this way as in being the you are you assume this means you approach complete strangers and treat them this way ........you’re a simpleton .....get it?

YeshuaBought

Happy_Killbot said:

@ZeusAres42 Ever since Trump has been in office this is how every conversation involving him goes.

Either you are to enraged to think rationally.

Or you are too enamored to think rationally.

That is a good point. i am a centrist, so while I agree with some of Trump's policies, i disagree with others. i think, while being American myself, that some Americans act like spoiled petulant children, over politics. Everyone has the right to their opinions, but not their own facts, and logic and evidence, should decide what a fact, is.

YeshuaBought

ZeusAres42 said:

In all seriousness, this debate started off with some good posts which were food for a good civil discussion. However, since it's now degenerated to basically "My di*ck is bigger than yours" I feel I would be wasting my time commenting on it any further. Shame some have to spoil it for others.

I agree. if I am part of that problem, i apologize. i am honestly so ****ing done with politics.

YeshuaBought

Dee said:

@Happy_Killbot

*****  Sounds like you are Jealous. Having a bad day or something?

No seriously buddy you can keep P and his “thumbs up “ all for yourself

****Do you need someone to talk to about your rational emotions?

No , I need you to explain how you conclude that you saying Trump was a psychopath and thus admit you’re irrational using your criteria and the deny it? 

****Should a masochist treat people the way they want to be treated?

Sure ,if they want to be treated that way see that it’s magic it’s called consent 

****I say no. "informed consent" is just so much better a philosophy. 

How so? I can pick and choose from either 

****It's still irrational, but I think it is more useful for society than the golden rule is.

How so ? How can you compare and evaluate?

Why are you, so angry? Do you have bipolar disorder? You were really cool, when i agreed with some of your positions, but logically fallacious, the moment, I disagreed with others.