|
| Thread: What Moral Philosopher Are You? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Lol, Ash! I've always known you hated women somewhere deep inside, ironic, but "all we do we do to have sex" ? That was new. 
What are you talking about? Those damn questions weren't precise
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Left-authoritan. Ever read the book death?
No I didn't think you're talking about a book
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:38 PM |
|
|
JoonasTo:
Quote:
At least you're starting to stray farther from Ayn-Rand, slowly but surely.
Nah. First time I took the test, I got Ayn Rand 100%, but that was three years ago. Then, the second time, I got Ayn Rand 67%, though I don't really know why it was that low. But now it's up to 95%. I still agree with the majority of her views, though I see a few flaws.
Asheera:
Why is Nietzsche so high? Otherwise, though, our results aren't so different, except on mine Rand is a lot higher and Aristotle and Aquinas are a lot lower.
Doomforge:
Rand last and Nietzsche second? Emotionalist looter!
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Rand last and Nietzsche second? Emotionalist looter!
Better than a materialist looter 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Why is Nietzsche so high?
No clue, don't ask me
I know almost nothing about these philosophers anyway (yeah, I'm not really interested in philosophy)
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:45 PM |
|
|
Maybe Asheera likes being a strong individual 
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:47 PM |
|
|
I retook the test and got this:
1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Aristotle (83%)
3. Jeremy Bentham (79%)
4. Ayn Rand (66%)
5. Jean-Paul Sartre (64%)
6. Aquinas (56%)
7. Cynics (54%)
8. David Hume (51%)
9. Plato (50%)
10. Epicureans (49%)
11. Nietzsche (49%)
12. Stoics (47%)
13. Prescriptivism (45%)
14. John Stuart Mill (44%)
15. Nel Noddings (43%)
16. Kant (39%)
17. Spinoza (26%)
18. Ockham (15%)
19. St. Augustine (15%)
____________
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Maybe Asheera likes being a strong individual
I don't know what "strong" means (well, I hope it's not physical power), but yeah I don't like "soft" people
____________
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:48 PM |
|
|
so do I. Seems that's why we both have similar top 2 and Nietzsche high 
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't know what "strong" means (well, I hope it's not physical power), but yeah I don't like "soft" people
Strong as in the "Jungle rules" you know. For me that kind of thinking is pretty barbaric since cavemen and animals use it, but anyway. (Survival of the Fittest)
of course "fittest" doesn't necessarily mean physically strongest. But people that employ that scheme and don't like "weak" people are tyrants because they think they're over the weak ones. I wouldn't be surprised to see them enslave them, like tyrants do, well not "physically" or literally but metaphorically.
so yeah for me that thinking completely
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:52 PM |
|
|
The disregard towards weak feelings can be beneficial, mate.
If a "soft" person sees a heavily wounded child, he will faint/puke/scream/run or lose his touch.
If a "tough" person sees a heavily wounded child, it won't blur his reason. He will not be taken out of action because of the shock. He will know how to help.
Being a tough guy is imho better in such situations. Well, that's how I see toughness.
People with too much compassion are kinda useless. They can't think straight when a bigger tragedy happens.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:55 PM |
|
|
Exactly. I hate it when (in movies) people just grieve over the others who died instead of figuring out how to be saved (let's say a monster is attacking them)
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:55 PM |
|
|
So? Of course if everyone is a "tyrant" it's obviously "better" to be one. But I disagree completely with the compassion thing. But why hate the weak? That's like being "macho" if you want a crude comparison with less fortunate (ugly) ones.
In my book, the strong need to protect and understand and love the weak (and vice versa, but sometimes the weak are not able to tho, like a few animals), because that way they show they do not use their powers only for tyrantship.
Well they need to do so if they don't want to be called tyrants
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 07:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But why hate the weak?
Wow wow.... hate the weak? I think you've gone too far (if you don't agree with the weak, doesn't mean you hate them)
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:00 PM |
|
|
TheDeath:
Quote:
Better than a materialist looter
I suppose so. Materialist looters loot more efficiently.
And being strong doesn't mean hating the weak. But I'd rather be strong than weak, and I'd rather be around the strong than around the weak. See, that means that I'm not a tyrant, since a tyrant would like to be a fox in the henhouse. I wouldn't.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Wow wow.... hate the weak? I think you've gone too far (if you don't agree with the weak, doesn't mean you hate them)
Quote:
but yeah I don't like "soft" people
They can say the same. Or someone can say "I don't like chinese people" or "I don't like jews".
Who is right? The one with might?
bleh
Might makes right is a horrible primitive principle. Of course, not helping the weak makes you a "neutral" oriented person. Helping them makes you "good" because you are the opposite of tyrant (and I hope you do call tyrants "evil").
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:02 PM |
|
|
I don't hate the weak. Hatred is stupid.
I just think that certain actions bring better good than others, even if they seem "cold" or "heartless".
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:05 PM |
|
|
Are you sure you get my point, Death?
I don't like them in the sense that I wouldn't want to be like them, not that I would want to kill them d'oh.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:08 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't like them in the sense that I wouldn't want to be like them, not that I would want to kill them d'oh.
Well for me that's like saying "I wouldn't want to be a jew" which is well, dunno, kinda weird.
ok anyway I think I've gone a bit too off topic.
so my view is:
Strong protect the Weak (if they're good)
Strong ignore the Weak's problems (because they're weaker) (if they're neutral)
Strong use the advantage over the Weak (if they're "evil" or tyrants)
well something like that. You don't have to argue
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 27, 2008 08:11 PM |
|
|
But if the strong protect the weak, that creates an adverse incentive for there to be more weak people.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
|
|
