Racism And Metal

[anonymousnick2001]

I doubt that.

I think we've proven to be a little above "pretentious" and "elitist" and are willing to listen and learn from each others' points and ideas.

I recently had an argument with Demiurge in the TSOP thread. He wouldn't back down, wouldn't learn, and was so convinced he was right that he had to lower himself to lowly, pseudo-intellectual isults to try and spite me. I laughed at the child. He's probably off slitting his wrists as we speak.

This thread revitalized my faith in the human race.

*goes off to distribute rep*

 

[CF87]

anonymousnick2001 anyone that would want to learn or take advice from you would have to be ignorant like you. And yes Demiurge is a fucking idiot like you.

 

[Cythraul]

Why not?

If someone is not in control of their actions then how can you reproach them for doing something that you think is wrong. It's not their fault, it's determinism.

Our hypothetical prophet is not external to the universe, correct?

That means that his act of relating his prophecies to their subjects is a part of the causal determinism.

Hence, if he tells someone what he foresees, the prophecy will be based on a causal chain that includes the fact that he told that person what he saw.

I see what you mean. Well, I'm just gonna have to think some more about this whole free will thing. This is a really complex subject and it could go on forever so I'm gonna have to quit considering that I really don't have a whole lot more to say on the subject.

 

[lord667]

If someone is not in control of their actions then how can you reproach them for doing something that you think is wrong. It's not their fault, it's determinism.

It still doesn't mean you want them to be doing it. With the reproach, you generate a negative influence with regard to that action which may cause them and others not to take such an action again.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

anonymousnick2001 anyone that would want to learn or take advice from you would have to be ignorant like you. And yes Demiurge is a fucking idiot like you.

I'm sorry, but who are you?

 

[Robohead]

Everyone is racist. It's a natural defense mechanism.

 

[None_So_Vile]

Non-white kid beats up white kid, normal beating. White kid beats up non-white kid, racist assuault

White kid listens to rap - filthy wigga wannabe, and metal is the racist genre?

I'll happily listen racist, homophobic, satanic bands, i dont care. The band can believe in what they want, doesnt mean im going to follow them, if you do you're fucking weak minded. If the band has lyrics i dont agree with well i dont let that spoil the music unless its completely shoved in my face and i have no choice. If they make good music then fuck it, im up for listening. Edit - Fuck i even have Jon "i killed a gay man and im satanic" Nodtveidt in my sig

Ive never experienced racism of any form at a metal gig and i have nothing against any races listening to metal

I think racism is on the uprise in the UK because of the huge amount of immigrants coming over. I mean look how much our culture has changed, fuck there's more mosques in london than churches (probably isnt, just making a shit point) and they wonder why there's loads of racial hatred? what do you expect when we have to compromise our own fucking culture to make other cultures happy. If you say hello in the wrong tone of voice to a black person in this country you're deemed a racist pig yet when anything is done to white people by non-whites its not racist. Where's the equality? im well aware im starting to sound like some xenophobic racist asshole but im sick of reading and hearing about how this that and the other has been deemed politically incorrect because it might offend some small cult of 5 people who worship wine gums.

Mabye my opinion is just warped because im living in this shithole, ethnic appeasing, political correctness obsessed UK and ive been forced to fear change and outsiders, i dunno, whatever, im not going to apologise for it.

Im done. Need sleep.

 

[Planetary Eulogy]

If someone is not in control of their actions then how can you reproach them for doing something that you think is wrong. It's not their fault, it's determinism.

That's the problem with moralistic thinking, it leads to an irrational concern with peripheral issues like the apportionment of "fault" and "blame." Healthy societies with healthy decision making processes don't waste time dithering about abstract concepts like "justice" or who is to "blame," they respond to concrete offenses with concrete action (i.e. you kill someone, we kill you, the whys and wherefores don't matter). It doesn't matter if actions can truly be consciously controlled, those who cross the boundaries society has set of necessity do so because they are inferior to those who don't, and should be treated accordingly.

 

[SADUDE]

That's the problem with moralistic thinking, it leads to an irrational concern with peripheral issues like the apportionment of "fault" and "blame." Healthy societies with healthy decision making processes don't waste time dithering about abstract concepts like "justice" or who is to "blame," they respond to concrete offenses with concrete action (i.e. you kill someone, we kill you, the whys and wherefores don't matter). It doesn't matter if actions can truly be consciously controlled, those who cross the boundaries society has set of necessity do so because they are inferior to those who don't, and should be treated accordingly.

I agree for the most part. What about murder as self-defense? Surely the why's do matter to some extent. What about those who cross the boundaries to take up arms against an unfavorable(evading the term unjust) government? Revolution surely does not make one inferior. Your thinking would be very appealing if you did not offer concrete unalterable solutions. That exposes the false and limits of laws and morals. Every situation has unique circumstances that must be considered.

 

[epicous]

I think there is some kind of information trasmited by the genes (ethnicity) that influence 20% of the behavior of an individual, and maybe 70% is based on automatisms created by experience. ¿What do you think of this, Lord 667?

 

[no country for old wainds]

But the way you react to those experiences is often very much genetic, particularly when you're first born and experience is barely a factor.

 

[lord667]

I think there is some kind of information trasmited by the genes (ethnicity) that influence 20% of the behavior of an individual, and maybe 70% is based on automatisms created by experience. ¿What do you think of this, Lord 667?

I'm not going to go so far as to put numbers on it, but I would tend to agree that experience outweighs genetics a little bit in most teenagers and adults. If I had to give a firm answer, I would say that a newborn baby is controlled by 90-95 percent genetics, and then there is a gradually shallowing curve towards the domination of experience. That's because experience builds over time, but genetic influences don't seem to.

 

[Planetary Eulogy]

What about murder as self-defense?

Healthy societies do make distinctions between murder and self-defense, I'm not intending to imply a totally uncritical or knee-jerk response is the course of social health. Just that healthy societies don't waste time delving into motives and creating wholly abstract, moral distinctions based upon a hyperindividualized notion of responsiblity.

 

[Cythraul]

That's the problem with moralistic thinking, it leads to an irrational concern with peripheral issues like the apportionment of "fault" and "blame." Healthy societies with healthy decision making processes don't waste time dithering about abstract concepts like "justice" or who is to "blame," they respond to concrete offenses with concrete action (i.e. you kill someone, we kill you, the whys and wherefores don't matter). It doesn't matter if actions can truly be consciously controlled, those who cross the boundaries society has set of necessity do so because they are inferior to those who don't, and should be treated accordingly.

Sure, I agree. That's what healthy societies do but I am merely discussing a philosophical concept. I don't think it should apply to everyone. From my standpoint and if I'm reasoning correctly, it is in fact hypocritical to punish someone for their actions if you believe that actions are pre-determined. Of course it's a natural reaction to punish accordingly but don't you think that in order for a society to function properly it has to do away with at least some amount of reason. And what makes you think that those who cross the boundaries are inferior to those who follow the rules? That is a value judgment that requires some justification.

 

[Profanity]

I agree too.

 

[speed]

I suppose if i come from a family of criminals, I would be predetermined to be a criminal as well 80% of it is in my genes, and growing up with criminals gives me that 20% experience rate- and thus well hell since my life is totally preconceived for me to be a criminal I guess I am one- i must commit a serious crime sometime in my life- its my fate. And if this is the case, well I suppose a healthy dose of Eugenics must be proscribed. You know guys, this debate has been going on for the last 100 years, The Nazis and racists boys from Virginia also thought life was predetermined by genetics and experience, and they had an excellent solution- abort or kill every baby from genetically inferior parents. Or in the Nazis case, if the baby comes from genetically sound parents, but poor living conditions and environment, the nazis take the baby and raise it in a proper nazi environment.

Its time someone on this board starts doing a little thinking about the consequences of thier random unsusbstantiated theorizing. Im sure Planetery has no problem with Eugenics however. And this is would be the result of Lord 667 theory, eugenics would become morally acceptable.

 

[Planetary Eulogy]

Why worry about the "moral" at all? It's an entirely artificial distinction anyway.

And eugenics fucking rule.

 

[lord667]

I suppose if i come from a family of criminals, I would be predetermined to be a criminal as well 80% of it is in my genes, and growing up with criminals gives me that 20% experience rate-

Your numbers, not mine. I suspect the balance is in the opposite direction.

and thus well hell since my life is totally preconceived for me to be a criminal I guess I am one- i must commit a serious crime sometime in my life- its my fate.

How can you possibly know that? You have no idea how your experiences will mould you. Nobody knows that about anybody.

And if this is the case, well I suppose a healthy dose of Eugenics must be proscribed.

This is not the case.

You know guys, this debate has been going on for the last 100 years, The Nazis and racists boys from Virginia also thought life was predetermined by genetics and experience, and they had an excellent solution- abort or kill every baby from genetically inferior parents. Or in the Nazis case, if the baby comes from genetically sound parents, but poor living conditions and environment, the nazis take the baby and raise it in a proper nazi environment.

The Nazis got it wrong. They placed far too much emphasis on genetics and ethnicity, for one thing. They also had an overly simple view of determinism, that a child of X race from Y class would always turn out like Z.

Its time someone on this board starts doing a little thinking about the consequences of thier random unsusbstantiated theorizing. Im sure Planetery has no problem with Eugenics however. And this is would be the result of Lord 667 theory, eugenics would become morally acceptable.

Eugenics isn't an automatic consequence of my theory. If you take my theory, emphasise the genetic aspect, and severely simplify the experiential side, then maybe eugenics could look like a good idea. You can't start confidently killing babies until you're able to predict their path, and there's simply no way you could do that if I'm right (unless you're the prophet that me and Welkin were discussing earlier).

 

[speed]

It really doesnt matter if your right Lord 667? I dont care if i am right, its pointless, as you should know. If you are totally correct in you theorizing, then humankind has some serious reevalution of society, morality, and the concept of indiviiduality- as things life eugenics, genetic engineering etc would be in a way easier to swallow. You must accept that your theory has some holes in it when one looks at the big picture of human life- you cannot explain away the infinite number of varibles and choices and experiences etc. that just one person has in the context of their life, nor can yo explain the effects this theory would have on human kind. The primary problem i have is that you are still acting as if you are the "prophet" of this made up theory of yours. People ask questions about it, and you state i suspect it would be closest to this number, because i say so.

The 80% figure ws your own- you said 80% genetics 20% experience

 

[lord667]

It really doesnt matter if your right Lord 667? I dont care if i am right, its pointless, as you should know. If you are totally correct in you theorizing, then humankind has some serious reevalution of society, morality, and the concept of indiviiduality- as things life eugenics, genetic engineering etc would be in a way easier to swallow. You must accept that your theory has some holes in it when one looks at the big picture of human life- you cannot explain away the infinite number of varibles and choices and experiences etc.

I don't need to explain them away. They fit into what I'm saying just fine. I'm talking about how choices are made and how experience (and, of course, genetics) affects them.

that just one person has in the context of their life, nor can yo explain the effects this theory would have on human kind.

And nobody ever can until it's put into practice.

The primary problem i have is that you are still acting as if you are the "prophet" of this made up theory of yours.

I know.

People ask questions about it, and you state i suspect it would be closest to this number, because i say so.

Forget the numbers. I don't want to put numbers on it. I hereby disown any and all numerical values that I may have applied to this debate, ever.

The 80% figure ws your own- you said 80% genetics 20% experience

epicous said 70% experience and 20% genetics, and I replied that I wasn't going to put numbers on it, but he was probably right that experience outweighs genetics. I don't know where you got the 80/20 from, but it wasn't from me, unless I posted it much earlier. If I did, forget it, I don't believe that ratio any more.