Accountant's Utopia Philosophy

[Accountant]

As I suspected, you do not.

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with first principles. What is fundamentally real. You have expressed numerous (absurd, incoherent) metaphysical beliefs in this thread. So the statement that you don't have metaphysical beliefs isn't correct (nor could it be), your metaphysical beliefs are just inchoate, you haven't thought them through.

Ah, you're doing that think where you think that the fact that we have different definitions of a word makes you correct.

[Accountant]

And this is all inevitable

That is the beauty of it.

[Accountant]

Okay people, my pronoun is clearly stated below my location and avatar. Please keep that in mind.

More relevantly, I wouldn't consider myself a fascist or a communist. Fascists think that a strong, authoritarian leader is the best way to keep the country economically strong and safe from outside harm. I think a strong, authoritarian leader is the best way to set things in order. A "nation" needs a "leader". If there is a "nation" but no "leader", it is a violation of the structured way in which the world should be built. A nation without a dictator may be compared to a baby that is born without a heart, brain, eyes or internal organs, who has skin transparent as glass. Is it still a baby? Maybe in a technical sense, but everything that makes it a baby is gone, replaced by something alien and wrong. It is a disgusting sight, and there is nothing I can do but shudder in revulsion every time I see someone coo over this dead thing and tell me what a fine child they are and how amazing they'll be when they grow up.

Equally I am not a communist. The communist believes that each person should contribute according to their ability and receive according to their need. I believe that each person should receive as much as they want as long as they contribute according to their function. If there is not enough ability to perform this function, it is the responsibility of the person to increase their own ability to perform their function and fulfil their concept. You wouldn't open up a clock and go to each individual gear and say "it's okay if you don't turn, as long as you do your turning to your best of your ability". No. That is the behavior of a madman. You must say, "you are a cog. You

must

turn. To fail to turn is to abandon your identity as a cog. You would essentially be commiting suicide."

[Accountant]

By?

The correct path.

[James3]

As I suspected, you do not.

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with first principles. What is fundamentally real. You have expressed numerous (absurd, incoherent) metaphysical beliefs in this thread. So the statement that you don't have metaphysical beliefs isn't correct (nor could it be), your metaphysical beliefs are just inchoate, you haven't thought them through.

Ah, you're doing that think where you think that the fact that we have different definitions of a word makes you correct.

It's not that we have different definitions. It's that I know what the word means (and has always meant), and you not only don't know but appear to have no interest in knowing what it means.

By?

The correct path.

Which communicated to you how?

[Accountant]

It's not that we have different definitions. It's that I know what the word means (and has always meant), and you not only don't know but appear to have no interest in knowing what it means.

Cease attempting to instruct me on what is inside my mind. This is a classical mistake that people always make when speaking to me. The truth is this: under my meaning of the word, my statements are certainly correct.

[Accountant]

Which communicated to you how?

It did not communicate to me.

[James3]

It's not that we have different definitions. It's that I know what the word means (and has always meant), and you not only don't know but appear to have no interest in knowing what it means.

Cease attempting to instruct me on what is inside my mind. This is a classical mistake that people always make when speaking to me. The truth is this: under my meaning of the word, my statements are certainly correct.

No one cares about your personal idiosyncrasies. If you wish to have a conversation with other people, then use words according to their accepted meaning.

Which communicated to you how?

It did not communicate to me.

Then how did it "tell" you anything?

[Shaziro]

The problem with talking to Accountant, or at least one of the many, is that the moment you point out that Accountant doesn't know something they think they know, they immediately just claim that you're using a different definition. It's a pretty standard way of avoiding losing an argument I've seen online, typically accompanied by the person then demanding that you make clear the exact meanings of everything said that could be vaguely considered to mean something else, so they can attempt to lose you in the weeds of defining things.

[Accountant]

No one cares about your personal idiosyncrasies. If you wish to have a conversation with other people, then use words according to their accepted meaning.

The thread is entitled "Accountant's Utopia Philosophy", not "Have a nice chat according to the social norms of others about philosophy where Accountant coincidentally is the main focus". To chastise me for using a bad definition is as weird as going up to Kant and telling him "nobody cares about your personal idosyncrasies and made-up terms like 'categorical imperative'. Use words according to their accepted meaning."

[Accountant]

Then how did it "tell" you anything?

It is self-evident.

[Not_Mafia]

Your mum is self-evident

[Accountant]

The problem with talking to Accountant, or at least one of the many, is that the moment you point out that Accountant doesn't know something they think they know, they immediately just claim that you're using a different definition. It's a pretty standard way of avoiding losing an argument I've seen online, typically accompanied by the person then demanding that you make clear the exact meanings of everything said that could be vaguely considered to mean something else, so they can attempt to lose you in the weeds of defining things.

Luckily, I'm not a standard online arguer.

[CooLDoG]

accountant can I get your tldr version again?

[Accountant]

accountant can I get your tldr version again?

Do good things.

[Shaziro]

The problem with talking to Accountant, or at least one of the many, is that the moment you point out that Accountant doesn't know something they think they know, they immediately just claim that you're using a different definition. It's a pretty standard way of avoiding losing an argument I've seen online, typically accompanied by the person then demanding that you make clear the exact meanings of everything said that could be vaguely considered to mean something else, so they can attempt to lose you in the weeds of defining things.

Luckily, I'm not a standard online arguer.

No, it isn't lucky, because you're crazy.

[Accountant]

I suppose righteousness must seem crazy to many, given how rare it is in the world.

[Shaziro]

You're not righteous in any way other than self-righteous. You're just crazy.

[Accountant]

I think that when I claim I am righteous it was implied that the righteousness was possessed by myself. Hence, I am self-righteous.

But I am certainly not crazy. In fact, I think that I may be one of the few people in the world who see the truth. That would make me the only person who isn't crazy.

[TheRealGin-N-Tonic]

But I am certainly not crazy. In fact, I think that I may be one of the few people in the world who see the truth. That would make me the only person who isn't crazy.

I was going to make the joke "I'm not crazy, you're crazy!" but you actually said it

[Sesq]

I think that when I claim I am righteous it was implied that the righteousness was possessed by myself. Hence, I am self-righteous.

But I am certainly not crazy. In fact, I think that I may be one of the few people in the world who see the truth. That would make me the only person who isn't crazy.

in order to be the truth it needs verifiable evidence which it doesnt have

your entire worldview is wrong

[Accountant]

in order to be the truth it needs verifiable evidence which it doesnt have

This statement is incorrect.

[Sesq]

in order to be the truth it needs verifiable evidence which it doesnt have

This statement is incorrect.

evidence

[James3]

The problem with talking to Accountant, or at least one of the many, is that the moment you point out that Accountant doesn't know something they think they know, they immediately just claim that you're using a different definition. It's a pretty standard way of avoiding losing an argument I've seen online, typically accompanied by the person then demanding that you make clear the exact meanings of everything said that could be vaguely considered to mean something else, so they can attempt to lose you in the weeds of defining things.

Basically. What seems to make Accountant unique is that he more or less admits to the tactics that generic bad arguers try to hide.

No one cares about your personal idiosyncrasies. If you wish to have a conversation with other people, then use words according to their accepted meaning.

The thread is entitled "Accountant's Utopia Philosophy", not "Have a nice chat according to the social norms of others about philosophy where Accountant coincidentally is the main focus". To chastise me for using a bad definition is as weird as going up to Kant and telling him "nobody cares about your personal idosyncrasies and made-up terms like 'categorical imperative'. Use words according to their accepted meaning."

You're allowed to define a term that you yourself coin. There's no parity between that and using metaphysics as a synonym for magic.

[CooLDoG]

accountant can I get your tldr version again?

Do good things.

I always do good things. But why can't I drink and "smoke" in the privacy of my own place of residence when it effects no one but me?

Granted, there are times when I have acted wrongly, but I

have always

made up for my wrongs... (I have no depts, period)

Why should I be restricted by the bacon?