Jump to content

Cyrus

Members
  • Content count

    11,666
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cyrus

  • Rank
    Stands to Reason

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. My guess is that Target may be retroactively enforcing order limits. Perhaps multiple orders are being canceled and being thrown back into the pool of available inventory.
  2. On a whim, I decided to check Target for the 27th time (probably realistic). Managed to add it to the cart. (Cool, was able to do that before unsuccessfully placing the order). Asked to verify my security code. (Was able to do that last time too before getting an "out of stock" notice). Hit place order....and.... confirmed. (!) We'll see if it holds up. Got an email order confirmation too. At least this gives me something to hold over Target if they cancel.
  3. Antifa on the March

    "AntiFa, just like the extreme right, but with a moral center."
  4. Put me on your list. Trying to preorder right now. Edit. And local gamestop is sold out.
  5. Jamal, are you legit flipping these? I'm curious as to anyone who might have multiple. Looking to buy one. Had no clue it was going to launch today.
  6. Steve Bannon isn't alt-right

    Control, Alt-Delete.
  7. The confederates were no patriots. Odd how attached the south is to secessionists and traitors.
  8. Don't Be A Sucker

    Hard to make up.
  9. Trump Continues to Commit Political Suicide

    First time for everything I suppose...!
  10. Steve Bannon isn't alt-right

    @Bink I'm saying that it's hard to tell someone they're wrong when you believe that being right or wrong is just a matter of someone's opinion. Speaking truth to power is an impossible feat when moral perspectives can't be functionally "true".
  11. Steve Bannon isn't alt-right

    @Bink Honestly, it's hard for me to understand the gaping disconnect based on my intentions and your interpretation. Please note that I don't mean that as a slight in any way. I may not be communicating well at all. 1) The real problem at the center of these clashes is that we are becoming less religious and more atheist. Not really trying to say this. We are being more "materialist" and "relativist". This makes it difficult because more people fundamentally believe that there is no "truth" anymore outside of the physical/material. Conflict has always existed, but I wonder if we are less equipped to deal with it now because at the core our beliefs, we feel like there is no common set of moral facts. Not only are they not "common", we don't believe they can even exist. MLK could appeal to the higher law as a case for eliminating segregation, even though separate but equal was legal precedent. If the public does not believe there are any higher laws, then it becomes difficult through legal processes to make the argument against some of these more radical elements. The difficulty of legislating this can clearly be seen in corporate America where companies like Facebook and Google are trying to determine where the lines are. We might expect it to be far more difficult for the government to do. 2) Yes, racism and xenophobia are problematic, but atheism is a bigger concern I don't think I believe this, and it was not my intention to communicate anything like that. 3) Atheist worldviews have less value because they don't have a moral high power to back their arguments (implying that America can or should be united under a moral high power)? No! This is a common misconception in these types of moral/philosophical arguments. It's more than possible that Atheists can be more moral and better moral agents than Christians or other religious groups. However, at the core of their beliefs is a disconnect between their espoused beliefs (theoretical) and their practical beliefs. My point is if you took some Atheists practical moral attitudes and practices (as they actually exist and how individuals practice them) it would be totally inconsistent with their materialist belief. Ex. Most atheist progressives frequently fight for human rights. Human rights by their nature, are not relativistic or material. Even further, they often fight for human rights in different countries with different cultures/values. In a relativistic setting, it would be impossible to suggest that women's rights should be the same in Saudi Arabia as they are in the United States. There would be no basis for making such a suggestion, as women's/human rights cannot be morally objective. (only subjective). There can be no "should" or "ought to" in these scenarios, at best a materialist can only suggest that womens rights are more practical or effective towards some goal. (GDP, political stability, etc), not that they are intrinsically good in themselves or that individuals innately "deserve" them. I'm not looking for a conversion, or that God exists. I'm only arguing that if I place myself in a purely materialist perspective, that it's hard to dismiss these groups or deal with these groups because I don't have an objective moral basis for saying otherwise. And using the laws of the land, without any higher laws, there are real limits on how we could deal with these extremist elements.
  12. Steve Bannon isn't alt-right

    @Bink Of course atheists can have values. I'm not disputing that. What I am stating is that within a subjective/materialist/relativist viewpoint, there is no recourse for resolving those issues. Person A and Person B's moral realities only exist to themselves. (There is no moral reality independent of themselves). That's why when two opposing groups clashed this weekend, it was violent. Because they cannot even see a world in which there is a common set of moral facts. (No moral realism). The only thing left is might makes right. Also keep in mind, that the emerging Alt-Right is likely increasingly irreligious. Hitler himself was an enemy of the church and is widely considered an atheist. (and no I'm not equivocating atheism with Hitler). We have two emerging sides who are increasingly materialist. It may become impossible for them to resolve matters outside of violence because neither of them believes that the concept of moral truths exists outside of them. (Also as a note, the religious and many Ancient thinkers/Greeks believed that moral truths exist outside of them. It is inherent to religious belief that they conform to some type of outside truth, rather than believing that moral truths begin with them. We can, in effect though, "discover" truths outside of ourselves - which is an independent action - but we do not create it). It's also a curious position to believe that we are all allowed to find our own truths, but that some truths are better than others. When the fascists tell the anti-fa/liberals that they're hypocrites, they're not necessarily wrong.
  13. Steve Bannon isn't alt-right

    Also, please know that I don't mean to say that atheists are the root cause or any cause at all of this issue. In fact, I think many of them are the best moral agents we have at the moment. Many of them are essentially faithless Christians. They hold many Christian values, and act on them, but have expunged the idea of any moral authority (God or any moral objectivism / metaphysical values). The problem is that it leaves them toothless in any type of philosophical sense. (but not practically).
×