Forums » Off-Topic
Just living is a natural selection.
Aye.
Drivers don't need to use cars, but for the sake of comfort they do. Things come at a price though, and the price for this is the risk of dying. Drivers are responsible for their own deaths, because they knew the risks, and decided to take them. They have a choice, and thus bear responsibility over their actions. By a similar train of thought, you could argue that simply living is taking a risk, and to some degree that is true, as we are always under the risk of being harmed by the things and ones around us. Your analogy about shooting "the next guy" is ironic, considering the title of this thread.
Of course, there are all sorts of different measures to danger. I find it bizarre that people should look down on those who prefer suicide, while contributing to their own deaths by taking risks for nothing more than... comfort. Cigarettes, for example, are comfortable. So are cars. No, killing yourself quickly or slowly doesn't really make much of a difference when one's forced to make the choice eventually anyways. If people wish to contribute to their deaths by putting theirselves in the way of teenage drivers, that is entirely their right. However, noone who's dead can entirely say they were blameless.
Drivers don't need to use cars, but for the sake of comfort they do. Things come at a price though, and the price for this is the risk of dying. Drivers are responsible for their own deaths, because they knew the risks, and decided to take them. They have a choice, and thus bear responsibility over their actions. By a similar train of thought, you could argue that simply living is taking a risk, and to some degree that is true, as we are always under the risk of being harmed by the things and ones around us. Your analogy about shooting "the next guy" is ironic, considering the title of this thread.
Of course, there are all sorts of different measures to danger. I find it bizarre that people should look down on those who prefer suicide, while contributing to their own deaths by taking risks for nothing more than... comfort. Cigarettes, for example, are comfortable. So are cars. No, killing yourself quickly or slowly doesn't really make much of a difference when one's forced to make the choice eventually anyways. If people wish to contribute to their deaths by putting theirselves in the way of teenage drivers, that is entirely their right. However, noone who's dead can entirely say they were blameless.
Too simplistic view of the world. I hate to say this, but your point of view is objectively wrong.
Besides, I never agreed with shooting people for driving, however badly. Instead, they should be used as speed bumps.
Besides, I never agreed with shooting people for driving, however badly. Instead, they should be used as speed bumps.
unrealistic, the ///M3 should have smoked that RS4 :D
Toshiro, that's a too simplistic view of my response. I hate to say this, but your point of view is objectively wrong. Whatever the hell that means.
Okay, I'll spell it out, just for you.
Your view upon the subject, and of the world, as described in your second-to-last post, is too simplistic, because it is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for existing, it is what they do.
Overly simplified: You cannot 'choose' to live. You can choose not to live. Cars (and, actually, taking part in traffic) are nowadays an essential part of most human beings' lives, and saying that they who behave correctly (on the whole, not looking for saints, here) should be at fault when others do not know at all what the word 'limit' means, is not only ridiculous, but pretty stupid, too. That is why I was hoping you were joking. Apparently, you were not.
Of course, you could have ben joing in that last post of yours. I wouldn't know, I'm insensitive to irony.
Your view upon the subject, and of the world, as described in your second-to-last post, is too simplistic, because it is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for existing, it is what they do.
Overly simplified: You cannot 'choose' to live. You can choose not to live. Cars (and, actually, taking part in traffic) are nowadays an essential part of most human beings' lives, and saying that they who behave correctly (on the whole, not looking for saints, here) should be at fault when others do not know at all what the word 'limit' means, is not only ridiculous, but pretty stupid, too. That is why I was hoping you were joking. Apparently, you were not.
Of course, you could have ben joing in that last post of yours. I wouldn't know, I'm insensitive to irony.
What you're arguing, Mynt, seems to be that
i) people who drive cars deserve to die, and that
ii) people who kill others through driving irresponsibly by choice, are absolved of responsibility because of the inherent risks of other people driving cars.
Very confusing for a start, and... no, it's not even specious, it's just a bit daft, really.
i) people who drive cars deserve to die, and that
ii) people who kill others through driving irresponsibly by choice, are absolved of responsibility because of the inherent risks of other people driving cars.
Very confusing for a start, and... no, it's not even specious, it's just a bit daft, really.
No, dude. Don't tell me what I'm arguing.
i) People who drive cars deserve the results that come from driving cars.
ii) People that take risks need to take responsibility over those risks.
Toshiro, I have yet to address the VO public with my view of the world. This is just my view of drivers. Don't tell me it's a simplified view of things in a negative light, while blackadder over there is obviously confused with the complexity of my statement. Bloody hell, which is it?
Here's some examples of ways to break your logic that it's wrong to blame others for acting in ways that are in their nature, though.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for killing eachother, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for indulging in irresponsible, but enjoyable activities, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for pissing on the toilette lid, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault toshiro for coming up with shitty arguments, it is what he does.
But of course, if we lived in a world like that, it would be difficult to promote any sort of moral changes, now wouldn't it? Isn't the point the blaming others specifically in aims of persuading them to do otherwise? In this case, I'm suggesting that those who are too sissy to drive, stay off the damn roads! That sounds kind of logical to me, and yet there are always those who are surprised when somebody gets hurt in a car. Of all things to be hurt in! Gah, what are the odds?
i) People who drive cars deserve the results that come from driving cars.
ii) People that take risks need to take responsibility over those risks.
Toshiro, I have yet to address the VO public with my view of the world. This is just my view of drivers. Don't tell me it's a simplified view of things in a negative light, while blackadder over there is obviously confused with the complexity of my statement. Bloody hell, which is it?
Here's some examples of ways to break your logic that it's wrong to blame others for acting in ways that are in their nature, though.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for killing eachother, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for indulging in irresponsible, but enjoyable activities, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault beings for pissing on the toilette lid, it is what they do.
It is fundamentally wrong to fault toshiro for coming up with shitty arguments, it is what he does.
But of course, if we lived in a world like that, it would be difficult to promote any sort of moral changes, now wouldn't it? Isn't the point the blaming others specifically in aims of persuading them to do otherwise? In this case, I'm suggesting that those who are too sissy to drive, stay off the damn roads! That sounds kind of logical to me, and yet there are always those who are surprised when somebody gets hurt in a car. Of all things to be hurt in! Gah, what are the odds?
Well, for my part, I don't think I could characterise a sillier standpoint, or a better criticism of your point than what you've just posted yourself.
Well done.
Well done.
OMG! You all need to stop or you'll go blind.
Indeed. All that intellectual masturbation will lead to hairy palms or something.
"Steeroke! Steeroke!" *eaten by shark*
Is that natural selection or just the damnedest luck?
Is that natural selection or just the damnedest luck?
xD