posted April 25, 2019 08:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TuxLuigi:
yeah that kind of mindset is why Western society is in the dumpster it's in now. Just sayin'

---

doubt that, it's far more likely that it's the natural cycle of things to decay and give rise to new things over the course of time once an old system, civilization, or society has outlived its purpose it typically crashes and burns

yes usually in the time period before the morality and views that the society was initially built upon will change and people will feel differently, but that's natural erosion since the ideals upheld by any given civilization or group of people have never been absolute (considering morals have always been subjective and have changed throughout history in various civilizations)

if you're the sort that clings to the civilization you're in you might feel like it's people thinking outside of that or recognizing truths like the lack of objectivity to morality that are causing the decay while failing to realize that it's just a matter of man made creations historically never lasting forever (not quite sure why you'd think this would be the one that would be different somehow)

civilization as we know it doesn't work within the current state of the world and with the reality most people face, because what was once "good" (and i use the term loosely the nature of power in and of itself is corrupt because the reality of power is that once you achieve it through any means necessary you have to keep it through the same means and you're never going to get anywhere or keep anything unless you're willing to do what it takes to have and maintain) loses its luster and then what you have left is a shell of itself that needs to be torn down and rebuilt upon

all just cycles not my view on morality, which is hardly anything new, there have been plenty of people before me who recognized the subjectivity of a lot of things we're taught or have drilled into our heads by the people around us repeating whatever they're told is good (generally a good deal of the things people believe in are helpful to those in power of them when it comes to maintaining power over the masses and order etc and so on and people will work to maintain things long after they've stopped serving their use because generally speaking people are creatures of habit or like comforts or distractions etc) and given ideas of a lifestyle we should live whether or not it actually makes sense or is fulfilling etc and so on

just play a game, be a cog in machine, and pretend that the morality you're told is important is somehow objective nevermind the fact that with views like that if you were born into any given society regardless of baseline morality you'd probably just believe in that because it was what you were taught

but yeah just cycles and **** , the decline of civilization to get somewhere new is just inevitable if not in the near future definitely further down the line it's bound to happen one way or another

that being said, the world is **** , civilization runs on ideas that are often sort of insane when you really think about it, and someone finding a sugar daddy to take care of them is just surviving the way they can no different than someone else making money however they manage to in order to not get eaten alive by the machine

it's not low morality it's just one way of doing it

posted April 25, 2019 09:40 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
doubt that, it's far more likely that it's the natural cycle of things to decay and give rise to new things over the course of time once an old system, civilization, or society has outlived its purpose it typically crashes and burns

yes usually in the time period before the morality and views that the society was initially built upon will change and people will feel differently, but that's natural erosion since the ideals upheld by any given civilization or group of people have never been absolute (considering morals have always been subjective and have changed throughout history in various civilizations)

if you're the sort that clings to the civilization you're in you might feel like it's people thinking outside of that or recognizing truths like the lack of objectivity to morality that are causing the decay while failing to realize that it's just a matter of man made creations historically never lasting forever (not quite sure why you'd think this would be the one that would be different somehow)

civilization as we know it doesn't work within the current state of the world and with the reality most people face, because what was once "good" (and i use the term loosely the nature of power in and of itself is corrupt because the reality of power is that once you achieve it through any means necessary you have to keep it through the same means and you're never going to get anywhere or keep anything unless you're willing to do what it takes to have and maintain) loses its luster and then what you have left is a shell of itself that needs to be torn down and rebuilt upon

all just cycles not my view on morality, which is hardly anything new, there have been plenty of people before me who recognized the subjectivity of a lot of things we're taught or have drilled into our heads by the people around us repeating whatever they're told is good (generally a good deal of the things people believe in are helpful to those in power of them when it comes to maintaining power over the masses and order etc and so on and people will work to maintain things long after they've stopped serving their use because generally speaking people are creatures of habit or like comforts or distractions etc) and given ideas of a lifestyle we should live whether or not it actually makes sense or is fulfilling etc and so on

just play a game, be a cog in machine, and pretend that the morality you're told is important is somehow objective nevermind the fact that with views like that if you were born into any given society regardless of baseline morality you'd probably just believe in that because it was what you were taught

but yeah just cycles and **** , the decline of civilization to get somewhere new is just inevitable if not in the near future definitely further down the line it's bound to happen one way or another

that being said, the world is **** , civilization runs on ideas that are often sort of insane when you really think about it, and someone finding a sugar daddy to take care of them is just surviving the way they can no different than someone else making money however they manage to in order to not get eaten alive by the machine

it's not low morality it's just one way of doing it

---

Normally it's when the civilization crashes and burns is when morals start going down, lol. Morals are more than a belief system they provided a safety net and were intergrated in society, it's more complicated than something just being drilled in the head. U just have the typically post humanist, new age thinking perspective which hasn't done much for Western society as a whole, but especially the U.S tbh.

posted April 25, 2019 10:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TuxLuigi:
Normally it's when the civilization crashes and burns is when morals start going down, lol. Morals are more than a belief system they provided a safety net and were intergrated in society, it's more complicated than something just being drilled in the head. U just have the typically post humanist, new age thinking perspective which hasn't done much for Western society as a whole, but especially the U.S tbh.

---

reread what i said, i acknowledged what you said in response already

"morals" decline when society decays yes, but that's not the sole reason of the decay it's just part of the erosion, part of the cycle

you're lying to yourself if you think it's all just morality changing ("decaying") that causes the fall of any given civilization

bigger pattern at work

morals are a belief system that are also useful in keeping order, i said that as well, did you miss it? if you want order and power you feed people ideas to maintain it this does not make them objectively sound or right or even worthwhile on a larger scale

just within the framework of the society they exist in

the subjectivity of morality isn't a new idea, like i said, do you really think before a certain time period people all thought morals were absolute and completely objective and no one ever said "no that's not true"? i've thought this since i was much younger it's not something i was taught or introduced to through anything other than testing boundaries and being taught morals by others

the us is collapsing the way it is for a myriad of reasons, one of them being all civilizations collapse under their own weight

of course morality and ideas will change as the previous framework erodes though, that's true of every society which should make it all the more clear that the morals any society is based on aren't objective truths

posted April 26, 2019 01:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
reread what i said, i acknowledged what you said in response already

"morals" decline when society decays yes, but that's not the sole reason of the decay it's just part of the erosion, part of the cycle

you're lying to yourself if you think it's all just morality changing ("decaying") that causes the fall of any given civilization

bigger pattern at work

morals are a belief system that are also useful in keeping order, i said that as well, did you miss it? if you want order and power you feed people ideas to maintain it this does not make them objectively sound or right or even worthwhile on a larger scale

just within the framework of the society they exist in

the subjectivity of morality isn't a new idea, like i said, do you really think before a certain time period people all thought morals were absolute and completely objective and no one ever said "no that's not true"? i've thought this since i was much younger it's not something i was taught or introduced to through anything other than testing boundaries and being taught morals by others

the us is collapsing the way it is for a myriad of reasons, one of them being all civilizations collapse under their own weight

of course morality and ideas will change as the previous framework erodes though, that's true of every society which should make it all the more clear that the morals any society is based on aren't objective truths

---

So why does it decline, if it doesn't exist, and it's subjective? Also human morality has been generally the same for centuries, for a long period of time, besides some outliers...

posted April 26, 2019 02:16 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChildofVenus:
This is true I have Venus, Jupiter, Mercury and North Node in my 8th house. I've always been taken care of in regards to money and materials. I'll admit I was spoiled growing up but this isn't something that I am proud of at all. Sometimes I wish I hadn't of been for several reasons. I'm not sure about the partners though as I've only ever been in one longterm relationship. I do know wealthy people though or people who could possibly become wealthy. Personally, I wouldn't mind having a Sugar Daddy [b]BUT I wouldn't solely rely on him for money because a woman shouldn't rely on a man for money. I believe everyone should work and make their own money.[/B]

---

You're lucky, I have Venus, Jupiter and Mars in 2nd H and they don't work at all.. It's suprising to me that Jupiter doesn't work at all in 2nd H. Just makes me extremely thirsty for money. But still I don't care about having millions and expensive things, I want a comfortable everyday life.

Having Saturn in 8th H I am not living around wealthy people let alone get money/materials from others. I think this placement makes my 2nd H worse.

Wish I had Jupiter and Venus in 7th/8th/10th I believe they all brimg money in one way or another.

Consider yourself lucky for having rich people around. You can learn from them how to become one yourself. Theory and reality are very different at least for me..

posted April 26, 2019 06:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TuxLuigi:
So why does it decline, if it doesn't exist, and it's subjective? Also human morality has been generally the same for centuries, for a long period of time, besides some outliers...

---

western civilization and its foundations are centuries old, i fail to see how that makes morality objective especially when you look at the difference between what people do and what those who lead them do (very rarely do leaders and those on top follow the same moral code that your average person does)

you haven't actually provided a reason as to why morality is somehow "objective" as if theyre factual rather than beliefs at all, and i don't expect you to

when i say "decline" i'm not using the word to express my opinion of the morality that people believe in, i use the term loosely to discuss how old morals give way to new thought, evolve, and change which to people who uphold the older beliefs is considered a decline

is that actually the same as being "lesser than" though? no, because it's all a matter of opinion

the fact is society's morality has its foundations (to an extent) on what makes people the easiest to rule over, each civilization has borrowed from past civilizations rather than scrapping those foundations altogether, naturally the morals become similar

but that's like saying that ancient ideas and words etc are still around today, are these ideas and words objective facts in the same way things we understand through science are? no

the reality is morality is only about what exists in one person's head and goes through a filter for everyone, very few people don't have their own perspective of morality

any slight deviation from the doctrine a society is built on is a change, makes it subjective, and takes it away from the realm of "objectivity" there doesn't have to be major deviation to prove that something like morality isn't an "objective fact"

if there are outliers that demonstrates that morality isn't universal or objective, and the reality is if it was deviation from morality would matter on a different level aside from "dont get caught by the wrong person"

even something like murder when discussed on a larger scale you'll find variation not only on what counts as murder but also on the severity of the crime (you'll also find those in power have less qualms about it overall than those who follow their lead) if views on murder were an objective fact this wouldn't be the case

you can like the current morality system, you can feel traditions should be upheld (and in some cases this istrue, in others tradition is just a matter of something being old rather than useful... btw deviation from tradition being considered "decline" doesnt mean traditions were good, that just means people break away from them) and you can believe in the morality of the society you're in wholeheartedly it still boils down to opinion and perspective though

and most of it is useless sentiment

crime is more about the observer effect and the ways it can be framed by those with power, and those with power can and do commit crimes that people without power are punished more harshly for, if morality was objective some people wouldnt be rewarded where others are crushed for the same crimes

morality is useful, people who think morality is objective are also useful in the sense that they're easier to subjagate because they won't deviate outside what they're told believing it's all somehow useful without considering their own perspective on the framework of the world theyre living in (whether or not it actually works) and instead working to uphold a position where someone else holds power over them without being as critical of those in charge as they are of people on their own level

no matter how many times you respond you have yet to explain what makes morals objective, only that they can be useful (which i said in my first post) and that they're old (which i also acknowledged) by putting me on the defensive without actually providing any examples as to why you think you're right that actually argue your point you're only forcing me to display my perspective without actually backing yours on any level

have you noticed that yet? i have, and i'm not seeing how any of what you say actually backs your point of view only that you dislike mine and are hung up on definitions of words without context ("decline" which can also just be used to indicate "less followers" by definition)

edit: btw with any given moral code all someone has to do is appear to agree with most of it (regardless of whether or not they actually follow it and regardless of whether or not they do agree) in order to appease people who have that view (useful if you're outnumbered), but that doesn't make it fact that just means it's easier to hold or appear to hold popular opinions because people are naturally inclined to view others agreeing with them as positive due to chemical reactions it causes in their brains

this doesn't make popular or old opinions "right" or true, it just means people are ,generally speaking, creatures of habit who adhere to tradition as default (this is why religious conditioning exists even among atheists who were raised in a faith for example) and like being agreed with

the natural human tendency towards conformity is easily exploited for power through that same logic but popular opinion holds no factual weight and can be changed ultimately

also i'm not sure what you mean by your first question entirely since ideas and beliefs can experience a decline in popularity and are subjective not objective, the fact that they can experience a decline doesn't make them objective truths

something being able to fall out of favor means it wasn't objective to begin with

posted April 26, 2019 08:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dumuzi:
western civilization and its foundations are centuries old, i fail to see how that makes morality objective especially when you look at the difference between what people do and what those who lead them do (very rarely do leaders and those on top follow the same moral code that your average person does)

you haven't actually provided a reason as to why morality is somehow "objective" as if theyre factual rather than beliefs at all, and i don't expect you to

when i say "decline" i'm not using the word to express my opinion of the morality that people believe in, i use the term loosely to discuss how old morals give way to new thought, evolve, and change which to people who uphold the older beliefs is considered a decline

is that actually the same as being "lesser than" though? no, because it's all a matter of opinion

the fact is society's morality has its foundations (to an extent) on what makes people the easiest to rule over, each civilization has borrowed from past civilizations rather than scrapping those foundations altogether, naturally the morals become similar

but that's like saying that ancient ideas and words etc are still around today, are these ideas and words objective facts in the same way things we understand through science are? no

the reality is morality is only about what exists in one person's head and goes through a filter for everyone, very few people don't have their own perspective of morality

any slight deviation from the doctrine a society is built on is a change, makes it subjective, and takes it away from the realm of "objectivity" there doesn't have to be major deviation to prove that something like morality isn't an "objective fact"

if there are outliers that demonstrates that morality isn't universal or objective, and the reality is if it was deviation from morality would matter on a different level aside from "dont get caught by the wrong person"

even something like murder when discussed on a larger scale you'll find variation not only on what counts as murder but also on the severity of the crime (you'll also find those in power have less qualms about it overall than those who follow their lead) if views on murder were an objective fact this wouldn't be the case

you can like the current morality system, you can feel traditions should be upheld (and in some cases this istrue, in others tradition is just a matter of something being old rather than useful... btw deviation from tradition being considered "decline" doesnt mean traditions were good, that just means people break away from them) and you can believe in the morality of the society you're in wholeheartedly it still boils down to opinion and perspective though

and most of it is useless sentiment

crime is more about the observer effect and the ways it can be framed by those with power, and those with power can and do commit crimes that people without power are punished more harshly for, if morality was objective some people wouldnt be rewarded where others are crushed for the same crimes

morality is useful, people who think morality is objective are also useful in the sense that they're easier to subjagate because they won't deviate outside what they're told believing it's all somehow useful without considering their own perspective on the framework of the world theyre living in (whether or not it actually works) and instead working to uphold a position where someone else holds power over them without being as critical of those in charge as they are of people on their own level

no matter how many times you respond you have yet to explain what makes morals objective, only that they can be useful (which i said in my first post) and that they're old (which i also acknowledged) by putting me on the defensive without actually providing any examples as to why you think you're right that actually argue your point you're only forcing me to display my perspective without actually backing yours on any level

have you noticed that yet? i have, and i'm not seeing how any of what you say actually backs your point of view only that you dislike mine and are hung up on definitions of words without context ("decline" which can also just be used to indicate "less followers" by definition)

edit: btw with any given moral code all someone has to do is appear to agree with most of it (regardless of whether or not they actually follow it and regardless of whether or not they do agree) in order to appease people who have that view (useful if you're outnumbered), but that doesn't make it fact that just means it's easier to hold or appear to hold popular opinions because people are naturally inclined to view others agreeing with them as positive due to chemical reactions it causes in their brains

this doesn't make popular or old opinions "right" or true, it just means people are ,generally speaking, creatures of habit who adhere to tradition as default (this is why religious conditioning exists even among atheists who were raised in a faith for example) and like being agreed with

the natural human tendency towards conformity is easily exploited for power through that same logic but popular opinion holds no factual weight and can be changed ultimately

also i'm not sure what you mean by your first question entirely since ideas and beliefs can experience a decline in popularity and are subjective not objective, the fact that they can experience a decline doesn't make them objective truths

something being able to fall out of favor means it wasn't objective to begin with

moral decline isn't about "bad morals" replacing "good ones" it's about society's morals changing and old morality falling out of favor

---

posted April 26, 2019 09:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TuxLuigi:
I'll go out right and say I don't enjoy having long discussions about things I give my opinion to on this forum. It would be nice if you stopped trying to do that with me.

---

posted April 09, 2024 05:50 PM            

My only chart that stands out is a guy 2years older but from old money. He was more interested in me but certain qualities turned me off. He was generous towards me. We remained friends over a decade.

posted April 09, 2024 08:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by TuxLuigi:
Daddy issues + low morals

---

Nope.

If you're still out there, and you see this: you can direct that energy to those creating things like deep fake porn, using the images of famous women (or victims of revenge porn). Someone in the comments mentioned that "non-consensual" is one of the higher sections viewed on pornhub, too. So, you need to go after those men.