341

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 12, 2014, 05:48:49 PM »

Apathy doesn't lead to action. Quite the opposite, actually.

You're right. In this case, ignoring the credit card would have been not taking action. Hence, apathy.

Read the thread again.

You didn't ignore the credit card. You did something about it being lost. You weren't apathetic. You had some feelings associated with the credit card which pushed you into action.

Yes, altruism. Which is, by definition, not selfish.

342

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 12, 2014, 12:29:28 AM »

Apathy doesn't lead to action. Quite the opposite, actually.

You're right. In this case, ignoring the credit card would have been not taking action. Hence, apathy.

343

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 11, 2014, 05:14:23 PM »

And how would you have felt if you had ignored it and just left it laying there?

I'd probably have forgotten about it. I'm an adult, my emotional state isn't tied to the status of a strangers credit card.

That's pretty selfish.

I'd say it's more apathetic than anything.

344

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 11, 2014, 08:46:56 AM »

And how would you have felt if you had ignored it and just left it laying there?

I'd probably have forgotten about it. I'm an adult, my emotional state isn't tied to the status of a strangers credit card.

345

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 11, 2014, 02:28:03 AM »

And how did you feel about doing a nice thing for somebody else?

I felt like it was the proper thing to do, but I hardly got an endorphin rush or any type of "good feelings". If I wanted chemicals in my brain, I'd do drugs or masturbate or sky dive or some shit. If my goal was exclusively, or even primarily, my own pleasure there are a lot easier ways to do it than picking up a piece of plastic.

346

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 11, 2014, 01:36:53 AM »

A belief that people will look out for you if you look out for them sounds like a pretty selfish reason to me. You are suggesting that you did it because you want to promote altruism in society so that everyone will look out for you and/or the people you care about.

I don't believe people will look out for me just because I try and help people. I'd be an idiot if I thought the world worked like that. I didn't do it to try and change society: I just did it because it's a nice thing to do. It's not as though I attached a note to the credit card saying the person who it belonged to "owed" me or anything of the nature.

347

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 11, 2014, 12:25:40 AM »

Why? There has to be a reason for this. You don't just accidentally help people out.

Because I believe in helping other people. People gotta look out for each other. And, for the record, it's very easy to accidentally help other people. I believe altruism is good for the sake of altruism.

You have posted this on an online forum.  By making this public you reveal that you have sought to increase your own positive reputation.

An almost-anonymous forum filled with people I hate. Even if that had any positive contribution on my reputation, that was not my motivation.

Subconsciously you were hoping for good feelings and/or trying to avoid any bad feelings from not doing this.

Nope. If I wanted good feelings, I'd go buy a bag of drugs. It's a lot easier to consume chemicals to feel good feelings than to pick up a piece of plastic for twenty seconds.

348

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: You are selfish.

« on: January 10, 2014, 09:49:34 PM »

Every decision he makes is for his own benefit (or perceived benefit). There are no exceptions.

I was shopping at the grocery store the other day. I saw a credit card on the ground that did not belong to me. I gave it to the woman at the service counter in case the person that lost it went looking for it. I received no award, nor did I receive any "good feelings". I was just trying to help out another person.

Please explain how, by potentially assisting in helping a stranger find their lost credit card, I was motivated by my own benefit.

349

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Taiwanese are weird.

« on: January 05, 2014, 08:09:40 PM »

I want to ride the duck.

350

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: January 05, 2014, 04:56:59 PM »

Both of the games were great yesterday. Colts had an amazing 28-point comeback, and now I just need to find Roundy and laugh at him.

351

Announcements / Re: Parsifal will be less active for a while

« on: January 02, 2014, 07:42:54 AM »

PizzaPlanet will soon disappear to work on his book.

352

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Police body cameras

« on: January 01, 2014, 09:12:43 PM »

Sounds like it makes policing more efficient and reduces the amount of bad policing. I don't really see a reason why not.

because o no freedoms

I know this is sarcasm, but that's not relevant if the cameras are only used when they're working/on the clock.

353

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Police body cameras

« on: December 31, 2013, 08:02:38 PM »

Sounds like it makes policing more efficient and reduces the amount of bad policing. I don't really see a reason why not.

354

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: December 31, 2013, 06:47:12 PM »

AFC Seeds:
1. Denver Broncos
2. New England Patriots
3. Indianapolis Colts
4. Cincinnati Bengals
5. Kansas City Chiefs
6. San Diego Chargers

NFC Seeds:
1. Seattle Seahawks
2. Carolina Panthers
3. Philadelphia
4. Green Bay
5. San Francisco (FTW!)
6. New Orleans Saints

Highlights of Week 17: A possibly intoxicated Franklin telling everyone how much he fucking hates the Packers and how pissed he was that they made the playoffs.

Seriously, fuck the Packers. And fuck the Lions too, for failing to win such a fucking easy division. And while we're at it, Fuck the Bears too.

But, as for my playoff predictions:
Saturday, Jan. 4
4:35 p.m. ET -- Kansas City Chiefs at Indianapolis Colts (NBC)
This is an interesting game, because the Chiefs strike me as a team built to win the Superbowl. A pass-rushing defense, a good running game, and a QB that doesn't fuck up. However, the Colts and their neckbeard savior Andrew Luck have shown they can beat any team in the NFL, and lose to any team in the NFL. Ultimately, without the stability that is Wayne, I think they'll struggle to make plays against the Chiefs scary D.
8:10 p.m. ET -- New Orleans Saints at Philadelphia Eagles (NBC)
Brees and Sean Payton have been in the playoffs before, and I think their experience will give them the edge over Foles and Chip Kelly. It'll be a lot closer than most people expect, because the Saints have looked like shit on the road in the final stretch of the season (they lost to the Rams, for fucks sake)
1:05 p.m. ET -- San Diego Chargers at Cincinnati Bengals (CBS)
Maybe I just like the narrative of the Bengals being one-and-done every year, or maybe I believe that Rivers is a very, very good QB that just needs his defense to keep the other team down. Regardless, I'm feeling the Charger's could surprise a lot of people if their defense can get hot enough to let their offense win games.
4:40 p.m. ET -- San Francisco 49ers at Green Bay Packers (FOX)
Fuck the Packers. Harbaugh dusts off the read-option playbook, and Kaep runs for 300 yards while Gore runs for 500. Aaron Rodgers throws 19 picks to Kaep's 21 TDs. San Francisco wins this blow-out, 289-2, as the 49'ers give a mercy safety to end the game.

355

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: December 26, 2013, 02:18:21 AM »

Except for the Minnesota game the Eagles haven't let anyone score more than 21 points on them in ages.

They also haven't faced any playoff caliber offenses in ages, outside of the Bears.

We just beat Arizona too.  True, they may not make the playoffs, but if they miss it will be by only a hair.  And a lot of those really heavy-hitting offenses out there don't have the best defenses.

Eh, they're nothing special on offense, but their defense is sexy. I could be wrong on the Eagles, but I see a one and done. I'm rooting for them, however, because I really like Chip Kelly and watching his teams, so I'm rooting for them.

356

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: December 25, 2013, 06:20:03 AM »

Except for the Minnesota game the Eagles haven't let anyone score more than 21 points on them in ages.

They also haven't faced any playoff caliber offenses in ages, outside of the Bears. I'd also argue that, based on talent, the Eagles defense has been overachieving lately. Shit, I think they've overachieved (relative to their talent) all year, and that's probably due in no small part to Kelly.

The Eagles are, AFAIK, healthy and playing hot at the right time, but I think they'll fall to any of the elite QBs. Which, outside of the Saints, it appears the NFC playoff picture lacks any quality veteran QBs (barring a playoff return of Good-Cutler or Rodgers).

I just don't see the Eagles as any more than a one-and-done in the playoffs, but they have a bright future with Foles appearing to be a franchise QB, and Kelly having some surprising success adapting his schemes to the NFL.

357

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: December 25, 2013, 12:19:23 AM »

No, the fact that the Eagles defense is complete shit is what unveiled them. The Vikings run outdated schemes, and had no business winning that game. Seriously, I'm still not sure what the fuck happened. I just don't see the Eagles D having the talent to stop any team with decent receivers (49'ers with Crabtree back, Seahawks with Harvin back, Broncos with Welker back, etc)

However, the Bears have an incredible WR duo and the Eagles shit on them. I didn't watch the game, so hey, maybe I'm totally wrong.

358

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread

« on: December 24, 2013, 11:13:33 PM »

The Cowboys are fucked without Romo. The Eagles will not make it to the Conference Championship, and the Panthers are winning the Superbowl over the Broncos. I'm sorry everyone, but that's how it's happening.

359

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Drugs should be legal.

« on: December 22, 2013, 03:10:08 AM »

I have a feeling it's from car accidents where the driver was high.

360

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Drugs should be legal.

« on: December 21, 2013, 09:36:57 PM »

I'm curious of the 23 cannabis deaths. Short of trying to eat a bunch of weed and choking on it, I'm skeptical it's possible to die from weed.