[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]

/lounge/ - Lounge

The Wizard's Lounge
Password (For file deletion.)

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1585704385044.jpg (963.74 KB, 1280x768, 5:3, Reki.(haibane.Renmei).full….jpg) ImgOps iqdb


What even is the point of morality?
The most violent, brutish, and cavemen-like men are still the most successful financially, socially, and sexually. The most amoral ppl
are always the CEOs, politicians, gang leaders, and other people in power. Doesn't help that the majority of the population supports or admires those kinds of ppl, and the succubi especially are attracted to them meaning they get to pass on their genes and corrupt ways. Why even have morality if we're still apes dominated by instinct and no one will follow it?


Yup, morality is a joke

I only care about myself and friends the rest can burn


You conflate morality with a specific instance of the concept. Everyone with a normally functioning prefrontal cortex is burdened with symbolic morality whether they like it or not. The specific morality you refer to is the self-sacrificing meekness encouraged by modern society, the point of which is maintenance of social harmony and economic growth. It is a safe default setting for a citizen.
Morality is just your values and goals; how you conduct yourself. Want to get rid of that? Lobotomize.


I smell crab


i know right
only religious god fearing christcuc- er, i mean christians can be wiz…


>meaning they get to pass on their genes and corrupt ways
This isn't entirely true. Europe a thousand years ago for instance was a lot more violent and brutish a thousand years ago, and violent people have been largely weeded out of the white gene pool.



>we live in a society


>animefag is edgiest nigger
Color me surprised.
With it comes civilisation, without it we have africa and other 3rd world shitholes.
Who is that "we", normalfags like you?


to maintain some semblance of stability and keep the peasants from getting too rowdy once they realise how shit their lot in life is


Go to be normalfag somewhere else


Objective, universal morality doesn't exist. What exist is empathy, which is an evolutionary trait we have as social animals, and situational morality, such as a community deciding to not kill each other so they can sleep soundly at night. The point of morality is practical, as a society that helps each other and isn't constantly fighting is likelier to get ahead. Even when it's not practical, we sometimes feel compelled to moral acts for emotional reasons, which grounded on the social instinct I mentioned before and cultural values. Because of the importance of morality in communities, we have tended to hate and punish non-moral people while rewarding the opposite. Of course, this only applies to OUTWARD morality. CEOs and politicians actually have popular supports and are often even philanthropic. When they do harm, it is usually covertly. As for gang leaders, some communities only care when morality is displayed for in-groups, people who are part of their communities. Gang leaders have supports of gang members, to whom they are important. They do manage illegal businesses, which is still businesses nonetheless and generate profits for certain people.

The practicality of morality is situational but they are a real good general rule. They are situations where they are unnecessary but usually, being helpful to others and not making enemies will get you ahead in life.


>What even is the point of morality?

Great question, but terrible image that ruins it

Please delete and reup without the image, there only so much wizcrab i can take


>think morality is a "great question"
>hates anime and makes derailing posts about it
Go back kid. Wizchan is for post-post-ironic weebs who have seen these baby philosophical threads a thousand times and now find it less meaningful then piss stained anime panties


>does this stupid greentext thing to appear like sourced material

You must go back to whence you came


File: 1586423080407.jpg (134.37 KB, 736x963, 736:963, broom.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

>The most violent, brutish, and cavemen-like men are still the most successful financially, socially, and sexually.
This is a meme stemming from crab inferiority complexes. Those people you mentioned most likely either die a violent death or end up in prison for life.
Strong-willed/ambitious doesn't necessarily mean psychopathic. There are many successful people who are where they are now in life because of their hard-work and passion, not because they back-stabbed and manipulated everyone around them. I say this as someone who generally dislikes "successful" people.
Good post.




File: 1587835337142.jpg (909.09 KB, 937x1301, 937:1301, 94656.jpg) ImgOps iqdb

This world makes no sense. Those people are eternally caught in this trap, there's no actual success in them


Can you explain why krishna is laying down while the succubus rampages and kills wantonly?


Looks like a fetish thing


Cope. Sociopathic backstabbing chads and normalgroids run this shitty world.


File: 1588215572625.jpg (18.57 KB, 400x263, 400:263, a898cda16fc83a69774407ce90….jpg) ImgOps iqdb

Do you want to be successful? Do you want financial, social, and sexual success? Do you want to pass on your genes and become a leader?
For me, the answers for these questions are "no", except perhaps financial success as that makes everything easier. But frankly I just need enough to take care of myself.

Point is, these things you've listed aren't inherently good to me.
Your premise is "Morality is pointless because immoral people get good things". The issue with this premise is that I (nor any other proper Wizard) do not consider these things "good", and so it's incorrect to assume people are being "rewarded" for acting immoral.
Your premise is flawed unless you're looking through a normie lens and consider those things desirable. Only then does your premise make any sense.

To be clear; I'm not arguing whether morality has a point or not. I have my personal opinions about morality that I have not expressed, because they're totally irrelevant to the point I'm making. What I'm saying is your argument doesn't make sense from a wizard's point of view and >>240968 is probably correct. This sounds like crab talk.


ding ding ding


No, it's a famous depiction in Hinduism of Krishna being trampled, and i never understood it, even though internet searching
That's cope though, if most people define success as x,y,z, that is how we take it's definition. Words are defined by their majority use.


No, trying to paint others collectively as villains just because they are better than you at something you care about is the real cope. You are probably trying to justify your failure by assigning people into two categories: successful - amoral and loser - moral. You desperately want to appear as a victim here, you only lose at their game because you are actually a good guy so good guys always have to be losers, right?
Being a CEO or a famous politician doesn't require you to be a psychopath. It can help, sure, in certain cases but can cause the downfall too if you don't want to play by the rules.

I'm assuming you are the same guy.
Success really is subjective. Ask people what they think success is and who is a successful person. You will get various replies. If someone is interested in cars and wants to be a pro-racer then why should he consider someone who is a CEO as successful? People have different desires and dreams. Also, the majority doesn't hold any mystical powers that sets things in stone and if you disagree you are still thinking with the mind of the normal.


modddddssss, hey faggot, it says in the rules to report something rather than posting "moooooodddss"


Couldn't agree more with this person.
It seems like you feel sad for being a loser, and blame others by calling them immoral. That's crab mentality at it's finest, the point of wizardry is to help yourself, not bring you down. Do whatcha gotta do to be successful but if you're to lazy to try don't blame others. Just sulk in it and be happy with whatcha got.


I think Krishna symbolizes pacifism, the choice to lie down and accept matriarchal sadism only allows the cycle of death to continue


Apparently the story is that kali was sent to slay a demon, and having completed her task went into a frenzy and continued killing. To stop her shiva played dead among the bodies until kali stepped on him. The shock of her finding her husband among the bodies snapped her out of her frenzy.


That's pretty good actually.


Love are evil


That's not Krishna, the snakes and leopard skin and trident are attributes to Shiva.
>Krishna symbolizes pacifism
What? One of the most central stories in Hinduism is about Krishna being a war charioteer and telling Arjuna his duty to go to war is part of dharma.


Yeah sorry i meant Shiva, often get those boyos confused!
Ok, but that Hindu tale is not explaining the meaning behind the allagory, so i still don't get it.
Essentially you have an out of control succubus that is destroying everything, so that means her husband must lay down at her feet to calm her down? Wtf?
Also, you will find it interesting where the idea of 'Kali' a black-skinned blood drinker actually comes from in ancient india


Why would it be written like this though?
It seems more like the 'patriarchy' called the dark feminine to help them in a battle they couldn't win, the succubus energy become lustful after the blood of men and went on a rampage, then man had to lay down at the feet of succubus.
It seems almost too horryfiying to even type out.
Oh BTW, the idea of the out-of-control succubus energy is one reason for how the wizlamists veil there womens, not in fact the juvenile male horniness, but a dampering of succubus will to destroy


> so that means her husband must lay down at her feet to calm her down? Wtf?
He wasn't calming her down. He was pretending to be dead. She had thought that in her rampage she'd killed her own husband, which snapped her out of it.


Yes, i realise that, what i am asking is what is the meaning behind it?
Please dont bait and just say 'its a story bro' for that shall rustle my jimmies considerably


I didn't make up the story nor am I indian or hindu. My perspective is that the only way to quell this kind of "female energy" is through emotion as succubi are the more emotional sex. It likely also has some relaton to dharma, as most indian folktale has themes about obeying dharma and what the correct path is. In this way maybe shiva avoided some violation of dharma such as harming his wife.


I smell a succubus


Kali went on rampage to destroy her enemies, yet she loses herself in her own frenzy, therefore Shiva decides to lay down so Kali may step at him without slashing him. After watching him being stepped over by her feet, the shame would make her come back to her senses… or so I read once.


>What even is the point of morality?
it's just herd-survival strategy, different herd = different morals

unless you're a christstain, in which case you believe your particular stench of horseshit is universal truth that everyone should practice or else


> unless you're a christstain, in which case you believe your particular stench of horseshit is universal truth that everyone should practice or else
That’s literally every religion/ideology.


Ok thanks, that makes a lot more sense than what the other's said
It's the blind rage of a succubus


So, aren't the psycopaths best suited to rise quickly?
Because the herd to not want to be disturbed, so in amoral person can quickly take advantage and move on to higher positions while the herd just try to act like nothing is happening while they are being crushed under the boot of madmen superiors



I don't think it's just loser talk. If moral values exist because they gave groups an advantage over other groups, then those morals wouldn't simply disappear over night. What you have now are people who still hold old time moralities in a world that has moved on. Back in the days of tribes or even villages screwing and getting 5 succubi pregnant would mean getting killed or exiled for sure by their families, and I doubt that the 5 kids would be able to survive to reproductive age without a fathers support (ie noone would feed them). Now? Government will take care of them no problem, and they have basically a guaranteed chance of surviving and having kids of their own, further propagating your genes. Running scummy businesses or money lending? I don't think that the 100 people in your village would put up with you for long for doing that, but now it's basically celebrated if you can cheat people out of their money without working yourself. Morals were practical values in the past, but now the world has changed so much that they stopped being practical.


That's exactly was i was saying. The modern world was created by those who could cooperate, but now it is ripe for exploitation by those you don't play by the same rules.


The whole point of morality is to corral the masses into doing what the oligarchy wants and it has almost always been that way. A moral is not simply feeling whether something is right or wrong, it is a code of ethical conduct either by the church, government, or some other authority. No morality = no control.


Are you saying you don't have any personal morality at all? Back to pol pls


>personal morality
There is no such thing. Morality is nothing more than a contraption made by the elite to control people. Whether you personally feel bad or good about something (outside of a moral institution) is not a morality.
>muh pol


not a *moral


>Morality is nothing more than a contraption made by the elite to control people
Do you actually have independently verifiable evidence of that or is that just something you heard somewhere that just "feels right" to you?


>2,000 years of christian tyranny didnt happen
Here's your (You) retard.


not him, but how the fuck isnt it??? seriously, christianity teaches people not to kill people but at the same time christian majority countries have constantly went to war with other christian countries over interpreting the tanakh slightly differently than each other. and who profitted the most? the money lending crooks. to say that morality is not an institutionalized concept is fucking horseshit and contrary to occams razor. why else do so many people think its bad to have more than one sexual partner?


Because it works.

[Go to top] [Catalog] [Return][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ Home ] [ wiz / dep / hob / lounge / jp / meta / games / music ] [ all ] [  Rules ] [  FAQ ] [  Search /  History ] [  Textboard ] [  Wiki ]