Free speech, personal responsibility, respect for others, and general conduct

as a new member am i thrilled by the quality of this MB. yes it could be better here and there...but its the best Ive seen.

I used to STAY THE HELL away from any message boards, because of hte type of people i knew frequented...people looking to build their ego through pathetic 'ive been here for 2000 posts and you are nothing' type of thing. The same goes for dedicated chat rooms.

my friend convinced me to join this other message board at a computer site recently, at first it was kind of entertaining, then turned out to be total shit, maybe it had something to do with the average age (like 16-17) i dunno, but there was no content on there worth reading. to show how much better this MB is i have as many posts after my 3 days since i started posting here, as i had THERE after a month.

just my two cents, dont be so hard on the MB, it really is about the best it gets :D
 
Sorry, but please do grow the hell up and go buy a thicker skin or something. Why do you care so much what if someone online says something "mean" or profane or whatever? And don't give me that crap about the debate being "harmed". On those occasions (rare as they are....hehe) that I post something mindlessly inflammatory or just plain rude/crude, it does not derail the debate at all. Everyone ignores it, for all intents and purposes. Just let it go. Don't like what is said, ignore the person, or return in kind, those are your options. Don't come out whining like some noodle-armed choir boy.
 
*Yells: Adam's a fascist, Adam's a fascist!*

Northie and Congrats, I think you right about hit the nail square on the head.

When one debates emotional subjects, one ends up debating emotional people.

So, guys, don't be alter-boys or risk Catholic priests! Yikes!
 
Originally posted by Northwind
Sorry, but please do grow the hell up and go buy a thicker skin or something... Don't come out whining like some noodle-armed choir boy.
Having manners is not about being tough or weak. It's about being decent. I know that's difficult for some people, but simply giving in to emotional urges and refusing to have any kind of backbone about manners and such seems to me... well, weak.
 
Adam:

On the contrary, it is those who cannot deal with an occasional "fuck off" who need to restrain their emotions.

You say "backbone". But you fail to realize that we have the balls to be rude, not to cringe in fear of the dis-approval of others.

You also seem to assume that your definition of manners is universal. It is not. No definition of manners is.

I wonder, who is the person with more backbone:

Person A, who cries and throws tantrums when people do not act the way they want

or person B, who accepts that different standards of conduct exist and does not let individual differences get under their skin?

Hypocrisy is dishonour.
 
When I say Canadians are generally more polite, this is the kind of thing I mean. If someone you respect would prefer you to be polite you would do so. Simply because it's the courteous, polite and it shows respect.
 
Being polite doesn't automatically mean the person is more pleasant to talk to. You can be a total awesome person without being polite. Most Canadians are polite, but they don't seem that sincere to me. They seem to be just going through the motions. Some hicks are not polite but they are good people........ Also I believe respect is earned. I don't show respect for total strangers. I just treat them indifferently. My respect has to be earned, but earning my respect isn't really not that difficult.
 
Xev

Swearing in general conversation is indeed common, everyone does it now and then. However, that is quite different from digressing from a debate to make personal attacks.

I like this passage provided in an earlier thread:
The True Gentleman

The True Gentleman is the man whose conduct proceeds from good will and an acute sense of propriety, and whose self-control is equal to all emergencies; who does not make the poor man conscious of his poverty, the obscure man of his obscurity, or any man of his inferiority or deformity; who is himself humbled if necessity compels him to humble another; who does not flatter wealth, cringe before power, or boast of his own possessions or achievements; who speaks with frankness but always with sincerity and sympathy; whose deed follows his word; who thinks of the rights and feelings of others, rather than his own; and who appears well in any company, a man with whom honor is sacred and virtue safe.

- John Walter Wayland
I'd like to add a couple of things to that:
Ad Hominem
Appeal To Ridicule
Personal Attack

:p
 
Adam:

And how is some cringing synchophant who thinks of nothing but the way others will percieve them a gentleman?

I suppose I'm too honest to do that. And said fallacies do not apply to my conduct. I dare you to show me where they do.

Our concepts of honour seem to differ. You seem to think that one should be honourable as an attempt to control behaviour. I think that such honour is mere hypocrisy. My honour stems from the nature of my soul.

I will not be "kind" in order to gain the approval of others. I will be "kind" because it is in accordance with the nature of my soul. If it is not in accordance, I will not be "kind".

It is my nature to attempt to protect those weaker than me. But it is not my nature to suffer fools gladly, or to cut anyone slack due to gender. It is not my nature to cover my feelings with a veil of lies. I am blunt, I am rude, I am mean and I am offensive. If somone has a problem with that, they can fuck off.

I don't expect you or anyone else to understand this, but I do hope that the people worthy of my respect will make an attempt to do so.

"We immoralists – This world with which we are concerned, in which we have to fear and love, this almost invisible, inaudible world of delicate command and delicate obedience, a world of “almost” in every respect, captious, insidious, sharp and tender – yes, it is well protected from clumsy spectators and familiar curiousity! We are woven into a strong net and garment of duties, and cannot disengage ourselves – precisely here, we are “men of duty”, even we! Occasionally it is true we dance in our chains and betwixt our swords; it is none the less true that more often we gnash our teeth under the circumstances, and are impatient at the secret hardship of our lot. But do what we will, fools and appearences say of us “these are men without duty” - we have always fools and appearences against us!" --Fredrich Nietzsche
 
Last edited:
The first line from that passage I re-posted before: "The True Gentleman is the man whose conduct proceeds from good will and an acute sense of propriety, and whose self-control is equal to all emergencies."

"... Who conduct proceeds from good will and an acute sense of propriety..."

Not from the wish to secure in the eyes of others some form of acceptance.

Remember the saying "Honour is virtue's reward"? I don't expect you or anyone else to understand this, but I do hope that the people worthy of my respect will make an attempt to do so.
 
Adam:

Ah! But I, immoralist, have rejected social labels of what constitutes propriety.

I don't believe I fit this label of gentleman. It is too much a sort of self-control. I am interested in self becoming and self overcoming.

I am not interested in virtue for the sake of honour, or even virtue for the sake of virtue.

I am virtuous if and because it proceeds from the nature of my soul.

--Xevrathrusra ;)

P.S: As Joeman said:

"Most Canadians are polite, but they don't seem that sincere to me. They seem to be just going through the motions"

Politeness should proceed out of the nature of one's soul and out of nothing else.
 
I'd prefer a polite person going through the motions than someone's who rude naturally. Xev, the way you think is fine for you. Fact remains, it shows little to know respect for the rest of people. If Adam asked you (hypothetical situation of course) to be polite to the others on the board would you do it? No? Then you're simply showing complete lack of respect for Adam and his wishes. Perhaps it's just my raising, okay, it is just my raising. But I also felt it was a sign of respect to honour the wishes of another person, and a sign of disrespect to say 'No, I won't do that'.
 
Oh, I agree. Politeness should be rooted in good will, rather than expectations.

But I, immoralist, have rejected social labels of what constitutes propriety.
I make up my own ideas of propriety too. Based partially on my ideas of what humans are, how we survived all these years as social creatures, and how that social behaviour involves things such as manners and co-existence.

It is too much a sort of self-control. I am interested in self becoming and self overcoming.
I find the idea of absolute self-control something your hero Neitschze would have appreciated. Was not the ubermensch idea partially about mastering all primeval urges and controlling the self entirely?

I am virtuous if and because it proceeds from the nature of my soul.
How are you virtuous? And if honesty for the purpose of such self-gratification is at the expense of others, is that truly virtue?
 
Look out WET~~~~~1

Xev is hot on your heels, man!!!!! She's going to run right over ya:D :cool: :D

What was the question????

I aggreeee with that...???

Well what can you expect from hot blooded, gorgeous redheads anyway???
 
Adamski:

Then our disagreements seem to be fading.

I find the idea of absolute self-control something your hero Neitschze would have appreciated. Was not the ubermensch idea partially about mastering all primeval urges and controlling the self entirely?

Partially. But this is where Nietzsche and I disagree. I believe that first one must discover the self. THEN master it. Neitzsche was more about self-mastery.

I am not Nietzsche's bitch.

Basically, an ubermensch would not need a code of ethics to control themselves. They could control themselves through their innate goodness....their better nature restraining and destroying their bestial nature - and yet they accept and embrace their bestial nature.

Make sense? No. Good, it shouldn't. :p

How are you virtuous? And if honesty for the purpose of such self-gratification is at the expense of others, is that truly virtue?

I said "if". I do not like to brag or esteem myself as virtuous. I have a lot to learn and master.

As for the expense of others, I fail to see how my acting as I am harms anyone. I'm sorry, but if you can't deal with a smart-arsed, overeducated teen insulting you on the internet, you have problems.

Tyler:

If somone I respect asks me to alter my behaviour, I will consider altering my behaviour. Usually I will, because I accept their advice as rational and usefull.

As for lack of respect, oh well.
 
Damn Xev, Rock-On ! ! !

Good writes......rock on!!!:cool: :cool: :cool:

<b>Thru the Zen of Dharma maestros, spirits of kind nature, collide at infrequent times......not always in sync....</b>
 
Last edited:
A brief peep inside Adam's head...

All my life I've been interested in what people do, what we can do, and why we do and don't do such things. In the navy I learnt more about what I could do, and why. It was actually on the rifle range at HMAS Cerberus (kind of appropriate that it was at a base with such a name) that I realised precisely how easy it is to kill. I had a moment of revelation, you might say. I considered security procedures, rifle ranges, close work with pistols and knives, bombs, the works. And I considered all the important people in the world, and how stupid they are to make themselves so vulnerable. I realised then that there was not one single person in the world beyond my reach. It really is a shock, to grow up as I did, then realise one day that not only was the navy training me to be able to do such things, but that I was naturally good at it. (The very first magazine I ever fired, from an L1A1, I scored over 80% accuracy at all ranges.) While in the navy I continued to think about it, and after the navy I spent several years doing very little else but thinking about such things. As I've mentioned before, it seemed to me that we can, with a very simple act, reduce everyone to absolute equality. And that all politics, religion, sexual preference debates, abortion debates, and every other thing you can think of like that, were all basically luxuries those stupid people out there (at such times I considered everyone "them", as opposed to me and others like me) squabbled over as though they mattered, when in fact such things didn't matter at all because I could end all such debates, dreams, and hopes for anyone at any time, with absolute equality, reducing all of it to one thing. To be honest that scared the hell out of me. I did not like the idea, the realisation. Even now, when I see/hear people arguing and debating, I do feel somewhat separate from it all, and participation is somewhat going through the motions. Not just participation in discussions, but participation in general human activity. This is what the military helped do to me, and I'm not at all happy about it.

I stewed in that mess for several years, trying to figure things out. I held, and still hold, a deep resentment toward the military. Even so, for years I've felt that life would be so much easier and simpler if someone would just recall me to active service and tell me to go shoot people or blow things up. It's so easy. There's no politics. You just find a legitimate target and destroy it. And I'm good at it.

Eventually I realised the solution to all this. Everyone is absolutely equal in death. So what makes anyone special at all? What's the point to any of us? Those very opinions whch could be reduced to nothing. The politics, ethics, morals, dreams, hopes, fears, all those things which could so easily mean nothing, they were the very things which made anyone and everyone worth something. Any person on this planet could be reponsible for the birth, in a thousand years or moe, of someone who might give us faster-than-light travel, global piece and wisdom, free energy, another Hitler, or something else. Any death prior to procreation alters that possibility. I realise I've digressed a bit here into some of my reasons why I dislike killing.

Anyway, so I figured out why we are all special, and why killing isn't necessarily so good even if it's easy. Destroying people and objects really is easy work. Living, however, is difficult in comparison. Realising what we are, or what we can be, and mastering it or at least learning to live with it, is a real bitch in comparison to simply being what we can be.

So I am in control. Even if I still sometimes watch the news and wait for the presenter to say "We are at war", and maybe wait for a phone call, and I wonder if I can still shoot as well as I used to, I do not at all crave these things. These things are the abyss of which Neitzche spoke.

You might say I have an absolute, black-and-white reason for requiring of myself, at least, civilised behaviour. There is an entire world of difference between civilisation and that abyss. It still scares the hell out of me. (You may recall in a thread about fear, I refused to name the one thing that scares me. Well, this is it.)

So, I well understand the notions of the inner animal and controlling it or co-existing with it, or the animal and human sides becoming one.

PS: Yes, I saw a shrink, and the shrink didn't get it. The only people who have ever truly understood were a couple of other military people who felt the exact same things.
 
Adam:

You're talking about the power of creation vs. the power of destruction a bit here.

Thanks for posting that.

Now I'll explain how I came to this conclusion.

My parents divorced when I was very young, and my mother was granted sole custody. She was the product of an extremely abusive childhood, that left its marks in her penchant for marrying abusive men and abusing various illegal and prescription drugs. This affected, of course, her ability to find work.

As such, I was forced to protect her - and yet she hated me for not being able to save her. Or for some reason. Whatever her antipathy towards me was, I never experienced maternal love in the traditional sense of the word. To go on would be to descend into bathos, and I desire only to explain my conduct to you, Adam.

I tried other routes to finding acceptance. I became desperatly eager to please my schoolmates. I was so easy to use - and yet I knew that I was better than those I tried to destroy my personality in order to please.

Discretion fought with nature. I swung between the extremes of not caring what anyone thought to being absolutely dependent on the approval of others

This is the root of my hatred of hypocrisy, of changing one's true nature.

When I was about 9 my best friend's sister was raped, impregnated and forced to carry the child to term. She was 13.

You can likely have no idea what it is like to see someone being harmed, and yet be unable to help them.

I knew powerlessness from an early age. I knew what weak humans are capable of doing to those weaker than themselves.

The truely evil are weak. I do not intend on letting them get away with harming those even weaker than they are.

At least as little as I can. This rather "explains" my fascination with power.

I believe that the truely powerfull will not be cruel or evil - they may seem so to what Nietzsche termed the "slaves" - but that the ubermensch is fundamentally ethical.

Am I an ubermensch? I doubt that anyone who reads Neitzsche can avoid asking the question. But I doubt it.

I do feel myself farther across his bridge and - god help me! - I feel that contempt for the "dwarve", for the truely weak.

So yes, I hate the truely weak. They cause such suffering to decent humans. This, of course, proves me not to be an ubermensch.

I do believe that the truely weak person is truely evil. I think that evil - real evil - is the result of weakness. They are not strong enough to either have a good "beast" or to effectively restrain that beast.

That is why I cannot change the nature of this beast for you, or in the interests of civility. Because I know that she is fundamentally decent. And I cannot allow her to be corrupted.

"Of all evil I deem you capable: therefore I want the good from you. Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws. "

I suppose that I know what I am capable of.

GeraldoRivera:

Thank you.

P.S: And yes, I have seen shrinks. And none understood.
 
Last edited:
Interesting

Xev, so you crave power to an extent. Powerlessness is a sorry state of affairs everyone tries to avoid.

Evil people are actually weak and yet powerful in a sense because they prey on the weak.

I don't want to optimize my power, I want to maxmize it, continually seeking improvement, for the better, you probably had a rough life, many people probably did.

But it is what you do with those experiences that make you a great person, some great people are born from bad and horrible childhoods, it is where they learn and look at it in a perspective of becoming better and creating their own destinies.

The weak blame their unsuccessfulness in life on their childhood, like the many criminals, it all depends on the individual's perspective(s), they either are for improvement, power, and success, or for complaining, laziness, and failure.
 
Back
Top