About Virtue And Options
Hey there. How are you?
This is a very touchy subject.Virtue. Morality. Is it subjective, is it just a facade of the weak to excuse their cowardice? I believe that morality should serve a purpose and it's not autogenous or based on principles, roughly speaking. Regardless what you believe or what you claim to believe, the majority of people abide by certain rules.
And this is generally a good thing, as long as it doesn't serve as a medium to broadcast superiority.
A Man Without Options Doesn't Know If He's Virtuous
Would you cheat on your wife?
Would you fuck your best friend's girlfriend?
Would you steal money, if you didn't have to suffer the consequences?
I want you to stop for a moment and really think your answers here. I expect most of you to say "No! I would never do those things".
Let's use the first question as an example. You say you would never cheat on your wife or girlfriend, but this is hypothetical.
You tell yourself that you're a good person, but in reality, even if you WANTED to cheat on her, you don't have the options! This thing really bothers me, when I see a man signalling how faithful he is and how men who cheat are scumbags.
Motherfucker, you are in this relationships because you're afraid you will never have sex in your life once you break up.
You don't cheat, because you can't get laid.
Obviously, I don't have any intention to make you feel guilty for something you haven't done. There's merit in having a moral code, even if you never have to test it.
What's problematic, at least from my point of view, is when the low-life, uptight, pretentious corner of social media, belitles human beings for being "immoral". That's especially prominent with celebrities.
"Oh look at him. He cheated on her. What a scumbag, I would never do that, I have morals (ie I am superior than him), please give me attention!"
Idiot. Like you have 100 supermodels per day dming you to fuck their brains out. Like you know what it means to have options.
Or "What a slut/douche. I am a nice guy/girl, I would never behave that way, please fuck ME instead!
Claiming You Are "Moral", Is Virtue Signalling, Psychological Projection
If you really want to call yourself "Moral", then don't call yourself that. Humans aren't perfect. The sooner we realize that, the better. We all have a darker side and as I said over and over again, we better talk with that side, before it takes us over.
A real virtuous mans, realizes that. He understands that he can't always be a saint. He will fuck up from time to time. That's why he doesn't call himself "virtuous".
And look, even me writing this. I don't call myself a virtuous man nor I claim to be one. And I don't even believe there's a certain set of moral rules that can be applied universally. No one should be the gatekeeper of morality.
But that doesn't mean I don't get to call you out when you pretend to be some kind of Jesus Christ, reincarnated in the body of a disgusting weeb :)
-Thatredbeardguy
P.S- This is philosophy for the layman. We can go a lot deeper here, but it would defeat the purpose. So, whenever some cuck tries to virtue signal, while you know he's full of shit, just smack him in the face and tell him to put some RESPEK ON YO NAME
"And I don't even believe there's a certain set of moral rules that can be applied universally"
I think that avoiding causing suffering would be a universal moral law that applies at any time in any culture and not only for interactions with humans, but with beings with a nervous system capable of processing pain as well. I'm thinking about Maslow's pyramid of needs as the hierarchy of "what not to fuck around with". Don't mess up what's on the bottom and don't deprive someone of a more basic need in order for you to satisfy a need that's closer to the top.
Yes, my English is horrible, but I think you get the point
Also, good article. Make philosophy great again!
I can agree to a certain extent, but you can't have such moral "law" as de facto in every case. Yes, we should avoid causing unnecessary suffering. But if we look back, A LOT of what we enjoy today was built upon blood, violence and... human suffering.
We could argue that from now on, we should strive to change that. Well, that's morality in hindsight and while it has validitity, it makes the notion of a universal set of rules obsolete, as we've reached the position to realize our past behaviour is immoral, BECAUSE of said immoral behaviour.
Yea, calling it a law is a bit exaggerated. It would be more like a basic guideline
It won't suddenly solve all of humanity's problems, but it might help if more people would take that hierarchy into consideration.
The truth has been spoken. No use on that but still :))).
Yep, and there's another category of people. Those without a pair, even they have the options, takes some balls to get on them ;). Btw, you seem to have a lot of time to spend on social media. How some people get that much time for this beats me for sure.
Hope we will find some time for chit chat someday, you surely are an interesting person to talk with :).
Haha, well it takes me roughly 1 hour per 700 words, so it's not that hard to pump out content, especially when you've been writing for years.
I think that public image is overrated. Being virtuous in the eyes of the masses is pointless. People are like ants. Far too many of them for me to ever meet them all. Even if I would be foolish enough to try. I will be (un?)lucky enough to meet only tiny portion of humanity. I will only exchange a few words with vast majority of those who I will meet. I will not remember their faces or their names. I will forget even their very existence. And they will do the same. Some people will go along with me. How far? till the next bus stop? Will these few steps truly matter to either of us? Perhaps. But I am a bit skeptical about that. So during my life only the rarest specimen of of humanity will travel far enough for me to impact their lives. Or for them to impact mine. If we will bear each other for that long surely we will know each other very well. Enough to value each other for who we are. So do I really need to concern myself with opinions of people who will be insignificant in my life? Does it really matter what society thinks about me? In their eyes I could be a monster or the saint. Neither image is relevant enough because it comes from an insignificant source. It is nothing more than a few pieces of dust on the top of the chess board. Important people of my life might have varying value in my eyes. Some of them are just pawns. Some mean more to me. And in time some pawns might grow to something more precious. Something special. But why should I care about tiny dust on the board? It will not affect the game in any way.
They say your reputation worths more than your life. We are tribalistic by nature, never forget that. Hide in your ivory tower and you will lose your edge. Mingle for too long with the rapturous, but uninterested masses and you will be assimilated.