How 'Rational Atheists' spread anti Islam pro US military propaganda

[LimpyLoo]

JE, you won't even admit that there are indeed moral dilemmas

Whereby torture is the least horrible of the two options

So I think it's a fair criticism

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[caze]

It's no surprise Robbie is unwilling in engaging in rational debate, he knows he's in the wrong, but he thinks he needs to be wrong for political reasons.

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

Trying to shoehorn real life into simplistic black and white either/or thought experiments is hardly 'rational debate'

[caze]

Trying to shoehorn real life into simplistic black and white either/or thought experiments is hardly 'rational debate'

 

a rational argument is a rational argument, either it makes sense or it doesn't (and sometimes you may not be able to figure out which). matters of public policy (real life) are of course a separate issue (to abstract philosophical questions), and you need to have rational debate about those as well. why can't we have both? and why are people derailing discussions about the latter with invalid references to the former?

[LimpyLoo]

JE, would you torture Peter Scully to try to find his collaborators?

(And if not, does that make you "pro-child snuff")

 

Does his general right not to be tortured outweigh society's need/desire to find a handful of serial child thrill-killers?

 

Or would you say 'we shouldn't torture him because torture is wrong'?

(Thus proving my joke's point)

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[eugene]

Trying to shoehorn real life into simplistic black and white either/or thought experiments is hardly 'rational debate'

kinda like saying that all torture is inherently wrong, isn't it?

 

also what am i agreeing on with JE about? i must have missed that. i think he's incapable of uttering anything remotely sensible.

 

but anyway, STEMfags, if you have trouble with post modernists (oooh, scary anti scientists) and cultural relativism just imagine different cultures as different alien planets. sure humans all look alike more or less, but the "software" can vary very significantly to apply your ideas on how things should be for them.

[caze]

...also, if I'm right about Robbie's stance on these issues, I'm not actually sure it's such a bad position to have (though it might become such if taken too far), it might be good for reasons of political expediency to have Obama or whoever keep on script (i.e. Islam = Religion of Peace), but you need to be careful it doesn't descend into apologia for the worst excesses of this shit - which it's why the voices of Sam Harris and the likes are important, and why it's important to have these types of more abstract debates. But in a battle for hearts and minds you don't want to piss off reasonable people too much, even when they're technically in the wrong.

[LimpyLoo]

Trying to shoehorn real life into simplistic black and white either/or thought experiments is hardly 'rational debate'

Here's a nice case study:

 

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/torture/#CasStuBea

 

 

I challenge anyone who's "anti-torture" to read that

And conclude "we shouldn't have tortured him"

(...and if agreeing with this case makes me "pro-torture"

would that make those who disagree "pro-child death"?)

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LimpyLoo]

pls come back to me limpy ;_;

shhhh

 

*presses finger gently against Blank's plump lips*

 

Daddy's gotta prove that dark people are scary

and should all be locked up and tortured

And then he'll be right in

 

*licks Blank's forehead and then vogues out of the room*

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hugh Mughnus]

 

pls come back to me limpy ;_;

shhhh

 

*presses finger gently against Blank's plump lips*

 

Daddy's gotta prove that dark people are scary

and should all be locked up and tortured

And then he'll be right in

 

*licks Blank's forehead and then vogues out of the room*

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Blank is 17 btw.

 

[caze]

pretty sure that's grounds for torture in limpy's universe.

[autopilot]

 

pls come back to me limpy ;_;

shhhh

 

*presses finger gently against Blank's plump lips*

 

Daddy's gotta prove that dark people are scary

and should all be locked up and tortured

And then he'll be right in

 

*licks Blank's forehead and then vogues out of the room*

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

*mutilates genitals*

[cruising for burgers]

it's consensual guys...

[Hugh Mughnus]

it's consensual guys..

 

 

 

His mouth says no but his eyes say yes

[Candiru]

Don't knock torture until you've tried it. It's like using cheat codes to find your kidnapped daughter!

[LimpyLoo]

*bleaches forehead*

*Tortures Blank*

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[LimpyLoo]

So I'm curious what people think of the case study I posted above

What would you do?

 

Seriously, would the "anti-torture" folks not torture him?

If not, why not?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[azatoth]

The consensus seems to be that torture doesn't work, at least not for getting reliable information.

[goDel]

I'm simply against giving people/authorities a free pass to torture. Even if there's some defined set of circumstances. I think of it kinda like whether or not people can use a certain kind of violence in a situation of self defence. In some circumstances people should be allowed to have some form of self defence, proportional to the danger they are in. A court can decide about the proportionality. (Mind you: i live in a country without laymen juries and without laws which say when it can be ok to shoot people and the second amendment crap/constitution is holy idiocy) imo, it won't help to have a completely specified set of rules put into law saying which levels of violence can be used under which circumstances. I trust the people in courts to make the right calls (because i trust our judicial system). ( or in other words, life's easy in europe)

[goDel]

Too late to edit:

So in the example of the baby, you could argue that the torture could be seen as a form of defence for the baby. Self-defence, by extention (if that makes sense?). Without saying the torture from the example was justified, I'd argue that some level could be justifiable. But only if proportionality is proven. Not proportional=illegal.

The pro of this kind of vague 'law' is that people should be very conscious about whether or not the thing they're about to do -torture- is proportional and would hold in court.

[awepittance]

Fox News taught right wingers and grandmas to be scared of arabs, 24 taught right wingers that torture was good, Sam Harris taught liberals how to be scared of arabs, Homeland taught left wingers drone strikes and the war on terror was moral, (time)post 9-/11 brainwashing is a (flat)shit-circle.

[zlemflolia]

Didn't read OP

 

All religions are retarded

[MadameChaos]

The consensus seems to be that torture doesn't work, at least not for getting reliable information.

 

correct, there's an interesting article about it here http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/13/AR2007121301303.html

 

what is does do is undermine the moral standpoint of the torturers and fuel anti-west sentiment

 

"Simply put, nothing predicts the outcome of one's resistance to pain better than one's own personality. Against some personalities, nothing works; against others, practically anything does."

[LimpyLoo]

Fox News taught right wingers and grandmas to be scared of arabs, 24 taught right wingers that torture was good, Sam Harris taught liberals how to be scared of arabs, Homeland taught left wingers drone strikes and the war on terror was moral, (time)post 9-/11 brainwashing is a (flat)shit-circle.

So what would you do in the case study I posted?

 

Simple question.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[awepittance]

didn't keep track of the discussion in the thread but I would be willing to wager that even most self proclaimed atheists at least have a moral compass strong enough to know that Sam Harris is a bit of a psychopath to endorse torture