Reading your brain trying to put it all together and reason it out is embarrassing and amusing.
A man that kills the baby is moral…you are confusing yourself…morality = ‘‘principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour’’, also: actions are not exactly identical to your morality…and the big struggle is to distinguish simple utilitarianism from morality, ie. Kant. By saying:
, you are already limiting the discussion to utilitarianism since you meddle reputation and reception and judgment(utilitarian motifs) with moral distinctions(wrong/right, what ought to be done, what not) which then becomes a problem of distinguishing between intentions and outcomes and potential since morality is not the only personal force that impacts the final outcome.
As an example: in the Nazi German camps for the Russian prisoners of war where millions of young Slavic were starved, cannibalism was rare and many chose certain death to cannibalism on the dead corpses…why??? did they need God to decide???did they need ILP and a cable???a time to think it through???some chose to die and not eat, some ate…if morality was a question of utilitarianism only they would all eat…and where in the Bible does it say one should not eat dead whilst starving to death in a concentration camp run by insane Germans loosing their shit over a failing war effort??? would YOU rather eat your dead friend or fall dead without cannibalizing him???
I suspect perhaps that some posters here at ILP might have been punched as babies. In the head, for example. It’s either that or a “condition”.
He said in jest. 
let the poison flow out of you…you are what you are. you make mistakes, like the kook SATIRE or his homosexual buddy KVASIRE does…if you are gonna play the ignore game…the superior indifferent game…make sure you dont make it evident you get mad and heated and barely contain yourself everytime you are reminded of me…otherwise…your facade becomes permanently dismantled…you ignored me for some time…could I be sure you dont give a shit or pretending???or course not…well…now I can be sure because you just proved it you old moron…well done!!!thanks for playing on my side buddy!!! say hi to SATIRE when you have a SPARTAN sleepover again!!!putblugs will be broken, dildos will be broken, AUHHHUUUUUU!!!
Was Wittgenstein Wrong on Ethics?
Author: STUART W. MIRSKY
at the Serious Philosophy website
How about this:
We note a context that most of us here will be familiar with. A set of circumstances in which different individuals espouse a particular ethical philosophy that comes into conflict with the ethical philosophy of others.
And, then, as the discussion unfolds, we focus in on what it means to speak of the boundaries of language. Does it more or less revolve around Wittgenstein’s conjecture that, “whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent”?
Of course given the actual reality of human interactions it makes no difference at all if this is true. After all, try interacting with others such that no one finds it necessary to speak of conflicting goods.
Instead, for me, it revolves more around the quandary of embodying a “fractured and fragmented” “I” in the is/ought world, and having no way in which to make it otherwise.
Here on the other hand it’s not so much about the boundaries or the limitations of language but language used to discuss something in which only language itself is ever really broached. Words defining and defending still more words…as though actual conflicting human interactions over value judgments is something not even worth mentioning. This, in my view, in regard to morality, can quickly become intellectual gibberish of the highest order. The stuff Of Will Durant’s “epistemologists”.
Expressions corresponding or not corresponding to what one actually means about…what?
[size=50]yap yap yap[/size]
Wittgenstein was right in that he was making a giant breakthrough since he was the first(Cambridge or Oxford circles which he joined early but also some continental like the Warsaw-Lviv school who also picked it up) to begin to apply modern mathematical logic(developed by Russel and Frege) to philosophy but Wittgenstein was also an unstable cunt with weak personality so Id not take much of the private stuff he said seriously; Newtonian physics is not naive or simplistic or useless just because of Einstein.
Was Wittgenstein Wrong on Ethics?
Author: STUART W. MIRSKY
at the Serious Philosophy website
And incredibly enough here’s one scientist who tried: amazon.com/Moral-Landscape- … 2115806613
What I wouldn’t give to have Harris here reacting to the arguments that I make. Not to mention the part where he himself seems to reconcile determinism with moral responsibility.
Also, he wrote the book but he might have opted not to?
It’s not for nothing though that most scientists steer completely clear of the is/ought world. After all, for one thing, they’re not philosophers, are they?
And here even the goals and objectives themselves can in large part be rooted subjectively in dasein. Mary’s goal/objective is to rid herself of an unwanted pregnancy. John’s goal/objective is to bring his son or daughter into the world with him. And, of course, had their lives been very different it might have been the other way around.
And the “absolute good” here is…what?
Exactly the point I would raise with Mr. Reasonable. He is good at playing the stock market. But if someone challenges capitalism itself as bad, how does he go about defending it [and himself] as good? Let alone good absolutely.
A good stock market participant is easily measured objectively in dollars and cents. But is it or is it not reasonable to argue that if someone is good at something that makes what he or she is good at good in turn.
you have no clue what you are talking about…just a complete wacko…if I have no goal or objective in some infant being raped and killed, somewhere far by somebody I will never meet, does that mean I wont be outraged by such an action? if somebody murders my brother and then murders my friends brother and then murders a strangers brother, will this mean I will think each case deserves a different kind of punishment and the strangers murder will not bother me at all or will cause petty irritation and anger??? are you autistic by any chance??? what is it with you and the wacko SATIRE and the stubbornness in equating morality with pragmatic goal seeking? IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE this is this Ayn Rand autistic shit…maybe go tell SATIRE to go read some Rand so that he can move his argumentation from Primary school to mid-level high school???
[size=50]yap yap yap[/size]
Or, sure:
YAP! YAP! YAP!
A poll perhaps?
Wait, I thought of a third option:
CRAP! CRAP!! CRAP!!!
lol at least you are not pretentious like SATIRE…but you are also not too well in the head…you fear me…afraid to take me up seriously because you know how it would end…full of shit to the brims…
Speaking of σάτυρος…
For almost a month he absented himself from KT. Then over the past 24 hours 15 — count them 15! – new posts.
Of course I’m thinking the obvious: that he took all that time away to reflect on why my own frame of mind is so much more rational than his own.
But, nope, he’s back with the same old way, way, way, up in the intellectual contraption clouds that revolve entirely around his own dogmatic, authoritarian political prejudices. The same old fulminating fanatic objectivist.
So: Please explain that to me. Only this time as though your life itself depended on you not playing polishyouth, that buffoonish caricature of SATIRE if there ever was one.
the kooks SATIRE private life is none of my fucking business and i dont spread gossips and innuendos based on thin air about people and I am not insane enough to dismiss people I disagree with or dont like personally as this or that or claim I know strangers better than they know themselves without ever having met them…maybe he is bipolar and has periods of intensification of manias and depressions, maybe he was busy with something for a month, maybe he decided to take a break from using technology…who, without knowing him privately, can really tell??? I never made a single thing up about anybody here, on SHITTHYSELF or anywhere else and the things I’ve used to ridicule SATIRE or my opposition are solely things they themselves admitted or claimed about themselves or clearly implied are true…like, for example, arguing that autism is an advantage not a mental disability and only autistics can tell the truth and everybody else is a liar…nobody sane who isnt autistic would even think to come up with such ridiculous bullshit…only autistic boys with no friends and wives would claim such shit.
to be fair to them…I am young…life ahead of me…so I can soothe myself with optimism and I am not so desperate to fall back on bullshit to not go insane…if I was 40, with my finger up my ass, I’d definitely think differently…the autistic kooks on SHITTHYSELF are entering the worst and hardest period of their lives…it is what it is…nothing fun or amusing.
Sorry, but I was under the assumption that you were SATIRE. So, I figured no one could possibly offer me better insights into his, uh, fulminating fanatic objectivist mind than you slipping in and out of the polishyouth persona.
My bad as they say.
you really think we are the same person??? 
the reason SHITTHYSELF flies leave me alone whilst they are known to love to come and bully people here(and are on the record of having spent significant amounts of time ‘arguing’ people here) is not because I am SATIRE but because they, like you, know how it would end…they are weak and effeminate, submissive to authority and totally subdued to an ideology…whats there to say??? I spoke my mind openly and called bullshit when I saw it on knowthyself and they ganged up on me eventually…first I went after AUTSIDER and spanked his ass and told them all that Curt Dolittle is an autistic charlatan that is dangerous and his Propertianism is a heap of shit(turned out to be true) and I spanked Autsider and his autistic terrorist fantasies, then I went after the bitch Anfang and the bitch Impulso, then I disagreed with SATIRE…I began to openly say I am a Republican Democrat…the SHITTHYSELF flies want to claim I was needy and got mad when they rejected me…I was going my way a long time before that and was the only one on that circlejerk that was calling its members out and calling bullshit when he saw it and spoke his opinions even if they differed from the neo-nazi norm there…as is documented on that shitty forum…and I tried to bring that forum down not because I was mad at being rejected but because they cunt SATIRE locked me out of threads on which I posted private and confidential info, based on ‘trust’ and the autistic cunts gave me no chance to delete it but simply demoted me overnight, after the homosexual KVASIR began to gossip and stir shit against me, after sensing the whole forum had enough of me and he could manipulate them to get rid of me…
I dont pick my words…if some autstic nutter wants to claim being a violent and unstable terrorist or a ruthless soldier with no regard for his life or others lives and cant provide any arguments outside the emotive and fantasy sentimentalism…i will tell him he is an autistic twit full of shit and is bat shit crazy…BECAUSE HE IS…
It never fails to fascinate me what I can bring out in the fulminating fanatics.
Over and again I give them every opportunity not to make a fool out of themselves. By, among other things, going off the deep end. But some are either driven to it by experiences I can’t even begin to imagine or by a “condition” that short-circuits any possibility of an intelligent exchange.
Let alone a civil exchange. 
you are bluffing all the way coward…start a thread and lets discuss DASEIN there…between me and you…do it or shut the fuck up you coward kook.
Proving my point as it were. =D>
Note to The Last Stooge Standing:
Did you put him up to this?
And, hey, even if you didn’t, he’ll make a good tag team partner.
what are you even talking about you old coward lol take your meds granpa