The Like/Hate Thread

[Psyren]

Likes that im home from my floridian vacation

Hates that i get home walk into my room and find out that my roomate left used condoms everyhere cuz he decided to use my room for fornication and adulterous acts.

[Kaden]

That's really not cool.

[Psyren]

thanks for telling me about it

[Kami]

LIKE: Chatroulette piano improv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32vpgNiAH60&NR=1

there's also a version of Ben Folds doing it live at a concert. Hillarious.

[Orion]

Like: The man singularly responsible for holding back R18+ ratings for games in Australia, Michael Atkinson, will be stepping down. Hurray!

[Saz]

Jersey Shore just started in the UK.

It is possibly the greatest show ever in the history of television.

That is all.




Actually no it isn't... I also like Archer.

[Celena]

LMAO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOKjGzoFV...playnext=1

[Psyren]

so i confronted my room mate and it went down like this

"Dude...what were you thinking!"

"Dude whats the big deal!"

"You fornicated in my bedroom!!!! On my sheets and blankets i washed before i left!"

"Dude look ok i did it get over it."

".....Nine god dang condoms i had to clean up....."

"Dude look you can bang some chik in my room and ill clean it up.."

"....No...Im moving back in with my parents..."

"No your not you gotta pay your half of the rent!"

"I never signed any documents So ill be outt here by the end of the week."

"..Whatever man it wasent a big deal but you made it one!"

" YOUR DICK EXCRIMENTS WERE ALL OVER MY BED! MY FLOOR! AND ONE OF THEM WAS STUCK TO MY WALL HOW IS THAT NOT A BIG DEAL!"

"Chill man its all good its clean now."

"AHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHH YOUR SO ******* RETARDED!!!!" *PUNCH PUNCH PUNCH PUNCH PUNCH STORMS OUT OF ROOM*

Yeah....I feel better now

[Sage]

Yeah, seriously, man.

I would absolutely lose my shit if something like that happened to me. Like, honestly. I have OCD. It would be a bad scene. XD

I can't imagine how angry you must be right now.

[Vad]

Flame throwers work wonders.

[Psyren]

lol I would have used a flame thrower but i dont wanna get sued

[Celena]

You...just don't have sex on another dudes bed. That's wrong.

[Pinky]

But his sheets were clean and everything. That was your problem. Next time you go somewhere, leave your room a mess and cum right on the middle of your own bedspread. It's a jungle out there so mark your territory, mang.

In less bizarre news, here's a video on Sam Harris lecturing on how science can provide morality.

http://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_scie...right.html

Well, I'm one of those people who think that science has a very limited role. Science is based on human understanding making it prone to human error, which is why it's always in need of objective universal standards and real-world experimentation. A scientific moral code would be ethically dubious at best, where results are anything but conclusive.

It goes on for about 23 minutes, but I stopped after 9:30 minutes in. That's the point when he raises the question of whether or not it's "wrong" to lie and then compares it to the concept of whether or not it's "wrong" to lose one's queen in a chess match. "Sometimes [losing your queen] is the only good thing you can do." He compared the general morality of lying to a boardgame. I watched that part over and over again before continuing with the rest of it. The magnitude of that logical fallacy makes my head swim.

I just kept getting flashbacks of the Southpark skit where atheists take over the earth and warring over religious dogma is replaced by warring over secular dogma.

[Rem-13]

Now I only watched the 9:30 part, so I can't speak to the whole concept of scientific moral codes, but where is the inherent fallacy with the chess analogy? I imagine he was making the point of a higher minded 'greater good' in which the initial moral setback of lying can be justified for the greater moral gain of bringing about something particularly beneficial, much in the way of losing the most versatile piece on the board, individually a bad thing, can bring about an eventual win. Seems perfectly apt to me.

[Pinky]

if you have to lie to get what you want, you don't deserve it.

he gave zero real-world scenarios, i'm sure more because there are none worth mentioning rather than simple laziness on his part, so i'll have to. let's say that you discover that a disaster is coming decades from now, but you can't prove it so nobody cares. you exaggerate your findings, disregard contrary evidence, and vilify the opposition who point out the gaping holes in your claim. is this for the "greater good"? only if your original findings are accurate, perhaps. but, if you're willing to go to these lengths then how much credit can be put into the original claim that your foreseen disaster is real? and what does it say about a society that can be so manipulated?

keep in mind that the source of all wrong in civilization is the human element. religions try to supersede human error by appealing to a higher authority, but the institutions are ultimately operated by people who enforce the rules where they can and conform to popular opinion when they have to. secular humanism under the guise of objective science doesn't do anything about that, so when i hear people trying to push policy or drive social issues on secular humanist grounds what i hear is the drumbeat of theocracy by another name.

harris' presentation was layered with politics, which is a huge turnoff for me when we're supposed to be discussing morality. there was a part about 1/3 the way through his presentation where he derided corporal punishment in elementary schools as being "wrong" for teaching kids' "well-being" and showed a map of the states that still use it: generally central US and the deep south, aka the red states. it got a mild laugh out of his audience, so i'm sure he was just playing up to the leftwing crowd, but there was no mention of even a token measuring stick... just the implication that obviously the wrong people do it

he ended with a background image of "god hates fags" posters on the left, euro jihadists on the right, and a protest sign of "obama = antichrist" in the center. no mention of the "bush = antichrist" crowd, or the deranged groups who literally pray to obama using political talking points as a mantra. again, this smacks of a political rally rather than an honest discussion.

i'm sure if i talked to sam harris he'd think that killing da gays would be a definite "wrong", especially with the type of content in his lecture. but, it'd be just as easy to make the point from a secular humanist perspective that (according to popular left-think) gay people may be genetically inclined towards that lifestyle, their sexual preference barring them from procreating, thus taking up valuable space in civilized society. so, for the greater good they should be restricted to second-class citizenship, then later cast out when the mood is right, and eventually killed outright, so that the human race can achieve a balanced well-being. ;|

[Ashe]

You...just don't have sex on another dudes bed. That's wrong.

I've done it.

Of course, the circumstances were different and permission was given. It was hilarious, because Erin and I look up as they kept sneaking in and out to place up candles and a boombox playing Boys 2 Men. Hard to explain, and I'm not going to explain more (OH THANK GOD) but I wasn't exactly throwing soggy condoms all over the walls either.

[Jack]

9 condoms? Holy shit. This motherfucker is obviously putting your bed to much better use than you. Stop hatin'.

Real answer: That's fucked up.

[Rem-13]

if you have to lie to get what you want, you don't deserve it.

he gave zero real-world scenarios, i'm sure more because there are none worth mentioning rather than simple laziness on his part, so i'll have to. let's say that you discover that a disaster is coming decades from now, but you can't prove it so nobody cares. you exaggerate your findings, disregard contrary evidence, and vilify the opposition who point out the gaping holes in your claim. is this for the "greater good"? only if your original findings are accurate, perhaps. but, if you're willing to go to these lengths then how much credit can be put into the original claim that your foreseen disaster is real?

I know what you're talking about, and no I'm not getting into a global warming/cooling/climate change/derpaderp argument, but taking that subtext out:

If your lies save the earth from, say, cracking in half, then yes its justified. You even say so yourself "if your findings are accurate".

Of course you then say 'if you're willing to go to these lengths then how much credit can be put into the original claim that your foreseen disaster is real?' but your are now changing the scenario into a more specific one in which the lies hurt his cause more than help.

We are speaking towards a general concept of whether or not the ends justify the means, through a scenario where the 'ends' are subverting natural disaster and the 'means' are falsified evidence. You can't in the middle of the argument change the 'ends' to failing to subvert the natural disaster.

[Celena]

9 condoms? Holy shit. This motherfucker is obviously putting your bed to much better use than you. Stop hatin'.

lmao!

And Ashe, why do 9/10 couples listen to boys2men when they're having sex?

Edit: 'I'll Make Love to You' is the most typical song.

It's a cliche.

[Ashe]

lmao!

And Ashe, why do 9/10 couples listen to boys2men when they're having sex?

Edit: 'I'll Make Love to You' is the most typical song.

It's a cliche.

I have no idea. Listening to that was kinda their thing, not ours. He was just being hilarious. Once while in the shower he put the radio in there without us knowing it and suddenly "I'm gonna fuck you" by Tenacious D started playing, my first time hearing it. Ah memories.

I think after we pointed out the Boys2Men thing, he swapped it with Slipknot. That was quite interesting. Or better, the Pogo song that System of a Down did. I was told never again.