Philosophical Quandry: Piracy

Fyron · #1 July 12th, 2003, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

Bah. It was not my intention to "win", but to hold a debate.

Erax · #2 July 12th, 2003, 12:20 AM

Fyron, this time I actually followed you all the way through the argument. One of us is getting better at this.

So now I'm curious, what ARE your views ? I knew you were playing devil's advocate back there with the 15000 copies post, but what is YOUR opinion ?

Thermodyne · #3 July 12th, 2003, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:
Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

Bah. It was not my intention to "win", but to hold a debate.

LOL, heck Kazz, I'm in a mood tonight. What side of this do you want me to take.

Phoenix-D · #4 July 12th, 2003, 01:24 AM

"There are probably thousands of possible alternate economic systems available to open-minded people, and economics is not my favorite subject. However my personal proposal would be that there would be a tax levied which would be somewhat less than the estimated average expenditure on the media which would be made free, based on the person's disposable income. Taxpayers could then voluntarily indicate which content creators they appreciated the most, and these creators would get compensated accordingly."

PvK, you've got to be kidding me. What you're proposing here is essentially taxing everyone so Joe Schmoe #41445 can watch his porn collection without having to pay for it first. I'll pass; we don't need yet ANOTHER level of government intervention (and there would be abuse of this system on that level as well)

The person who does nothing because he doesn't enjoy that kind of game, or whatever, shouldn't have to pay for those who do..

Slynky · #5 July 12th, 2003, 01:39 AM

Perhaps the thread title should be changed (

)

geoschmo · #6 July 12th, 2003, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Also, there is nothing wrong with the tone of that sentence. I guess if you see something wrong with it that is from your particular view on ettiquite which, like morality, is entirely relative.

Correction, ettiquite unlike morality is entirely relative.

You are free to believe how you wish. That may suprise you is one of the most important beliefs in my moral system. But just because you believe something does not change what is right and wrong. I said it before and I will repeat it because it is fundamental. Moraltiy is absolute. Morality has to be absolute by definition in order to be morality. Otherwise it is merely opinion and it is useless.

As a man of science I am sure you understand the need to have absolute points of referance in order to make any sort of measurments. Without them all your measurments are useless.

Geoschmo

[ July 12, 2003, 01:05: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

minipol · #7 July 12th, 2003, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by geoschmo:
Moraltiy is absolute. Morality has to be absolute by definition in order to be morality. Otherwise it is merely opinion and it is useless.

So by your definition morality is unaffected by upbringing and culture? I'm not sure i agree with you although i'm trying to understand what you are saying.

For example, in some cultures a man is allowed to have several wifes. It's not considered immoral. Here it is. So how can morality be absolute then?
I'm just trying to see your point of view here.