Because someone has a different value, no values exist.
K: and if they have different values, how do we choose between
those differing values? The question is not about the fact that
everyone has different values, the question becomes a question of
which values should we engage with and which ones we shouldn’t
AND why? Why should we have chosen one set of values
but not another? What is the standard for choosing values,
and in choosing those values and not other values?
So someone says, America is the greatest country on Earth,
so, how do we know that is correct? What values do Americans
have that are so different from other countries that it makes us
the greatest country on Earth?
It isn’t about the values per se but how do we choose those values
over other values? What standard are we going to use?
K: and if they have different values, how do we choose between
those differing values? The question is not about the fact that
everyone has different values, the question becomes a question of
which values should we engage with and which ones we shouldn’t
AND why? Why should we have chosen one set of values
but not another? What is the standard for choosing values,
and in choosing those values and not other values?
So someone says, America is the greatest country on Earth,
so, how do we know that is correct? What values do Americans
have that are so different from other countries that it makes us
the greatest country on Earth?
It isn’t about the values per se but how do we choose those values
over other values? What standard are we going to use?
EM: “The values everyone agrees upon…
Who violates the least consent and makes the most dreams come true.
Sometimes, unfortunately, this takes life experience to accomplish or understand.
But it is unambiguous nonetheless”
K: and missing my point… Name one, ONE value everyone agrees upon…
its ok, I’ll wait…and while I wait, we know what I think about your, ummmm,
idea about consent violation and dreams, my dreams? your dreams, whose
dreams are we tying to achieve? Because as with everything, ask 1000 people
what dreams they want to come true, and you will get about 1500 answers…
K: ummm, doctors, scientist, virologist (those who actually have studied Viruses)
and they know that Vaccines have saved, literally millions of lives, and to get into
school, at least here in America, you have to have dozens of vaccines to get into
grade school, perhaps because of your ignorance, you might want to look up
pictures of polio victims, in the 1952 outbreak, there were 57,628 cases,
3,145 died and 21,269 were left with mild to disabling paralysis including
an uncle of mine…
You’re talking too much. I was looking for a very simple answer. And that answer is: the left. It is the left that wants to force vaccines onto everyone. That’s a limit on freedom right there. And a very severe one considering that they want to vaccinate literally everyone (they are currently blaming the ineffectiveness of vaccines on the unvaccinated) and that they are ready to use all kinds of measures to achieve that end.
The point is that both political sides want to limit freedom, it’s just that they disagree on what should be limited, how much, when and how. And both sides are claiming, if not genuinely believing, that such restrictions are for the good of all of us.
Thus, if you want to say anything substantial, you have to go beyond “the right is against freedom because they want to make homosexuality illegal”. You’d have to claim, and then present an argument, that banning homosexuality has worse consequences than not banning it. You haven’t done such a thing.
And we’re not talking about vaccines in general, we’re talking specifically about Covid vaccines. Even if it’s true that back in 1952 vaccines have saved millions of lives, it does not follow that Covid vaccines will have the same effect. Certainly, it does not follow that they won’t be used as a means to eradicate most of the population and enslave a small part of it.
And who are these doctors, scientists and virologists you are speaking of? Why do you trust them? On what basis? How did they arrive at their conclusions? Do you think if someone is a doctor that they automatically know everything about medicine? You don’t consider the possibility that these guys tend to be specialists who know little to nothing about other areas of study and who thus have little to no access to the big picture making them not much different from your average peons? And even if they do know what’s happening around them, what makes you think they will tell you anything about it? What if they think they should keep their mouths shut – for whatever reason?
And what if I show you a list of doctors, chemists, virologists, nurses and so on who don’t agree with you? What are you going to say? That they are crazy? That they cannot be trusted? On what basis? How do you know they are crazy? How do you know they cannot be trusted?
No one is forcing vaccines on anyone.
The only example I can think of is right wing Austria, which is led by a Catholic anti-socialist part, and is about to introduce a vaccine mandate on 1st February.
The only other place is Quebec which has defied the left wing federal government of Justin Tudeau and is about to do the same. It is led by Coalition Avenir Québec, which is a nationistic, conservative party.
Seriously mate, you must be watching too much Fox(fake)News.
Enlightenment overcomes the enlightenment associated with the enlightenment following the dark ages. That sort of enlightenment is an extrensic reaction to oppression
The oppressed reacted to the oppression the last 500 years, progressing that effort with an increasing rate of change.
The internal enlightement is far simpler, it is overcoming obstacles that prevent mankind to egoism, lust, greed, while experiencing a diminished sense of the fear of change, from and through birth and death.
Medical personnel have to be vaccinated. That started with Trump.
I see no contradiction. I do not want to go into hospital and get covid because some cunt refuses to wear a mask.
But the point is that you say “The Left” is doing this. Biden is right wing, and so are the examples I gave you that you have ignored.
This is based on a number of premises. First, you think that there’s such a thing as COVID-19 i.e. a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. I can tell that many people are getting sick – some of them even dying – but I’m not sure these things are caused by a virus. Second, you think that masks work. Third, you think that vaccinations are safe and that they work.
It’s news to me that Biden is right wing. So I suppose I don’t have to mention that Biden wants to force all businesses with more than 100 employees to have their employees vaccinated or tested on a weekly basis (with tests to be paid by those who are getting them.) I’d have to look into that “Biden is right wing” thing.
Whether or not he is left or right, he is making the right choice.
And comparing his attitude to Quebec and Austria that would make him right wing in this matter,
For example the “assumptions” that masks and vaccines work, are not assumptions.
You can hardly expect me to tak you seriously.
Just look at the data. The moment the vaccines were introduced, death rates plummeted, never to rise again in the same way. Despite covidiots ignoring their duty to get jabbed there were enough smart people to make it work.
To be open-minded means to be willing to entertain the possibility that the other person is right and that you’re wrong regardless of what they’re claiming i.e. even if they’re claiming that the Earth is flat.
But I didn’t use the word “assumption”.
Take a look:
And even if I did, how does that justify your response?
That is based on the premise that the data you’re looking at is reliable i.e. that there is noone manipulating it.
When you call people morons and covidiots, you’re telling everyone that you’re not interested in convincing other people using reason.
I was simply correcting your poor use of English.
I was not making a logical argument but an empirical one, thus my statements were not based on premises but asumptions.
And the difference between the notion that you might be able to unpack a course of action which relies on premises, and the same notion using the word assumption is ZERO, in practical terms.
As for the rest of your effort…
There is a differnence between skepticism and out right ignorant stupidity, and you fall the wrong side of that line.
The data concerning the effectivneness of the vaccine comes from thousands of people the world over, many traditional enemies and economic competitors.
Are you trying to pretend that there is some sort of collusion to fake the numbers?
And when I call people covidiots it is because they only deserve ridicule. And no - there is absolutely no need to entertain flat earthers.
