Page 1 of 1
Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:21 pm
by DoomYoshi
What about your preferences for continued existence, or of objectivity?
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:26 pm
by Army of GOD
Why did you capitalize "objectively"?
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:41 pm
by DoomYoshi
Just to piss you off, which I prefer.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:42 pm
by Army of GOD
f*ck you you assmongrel
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:43 pm
by mrswdk
Why would I need to defend my preferences? 'I like humping' is not something that can be rebutted.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:00 am
by BigBallinStalin
This thread is stupid.
/therrad
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Tue Aug 26, 2014 8:08 am
by warmonger1981
Im undecided and that's final.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:12 am
by tzor
Yes, I can!
I prefer sequential games over freestyle. I don't think the notion of forming a dog pile to get your move in before everyone else does encourages fun and enjoyable play. It promotes chaos and ill will on the part of everyone concerned and we already have the dice to promote that so we don't need anything else.
Although, mind you, if they implemented a "snake" sequential turn system (1,2,3,4,4,3,2,1,1,2,3,4 ...) I might try that on occasion.
You mean those weren't the preferences you were talking about? Never mind then.

Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:55 am
by stahrgazer
I usually prefer sour to sweet.
I can objectively defend that preference in that, sour usually contains little to no sugar and will not necessarily contain fats.
Examples:
- a sour dill pickle has vinegar and spices but no sugar, whereas sweet pickles have sugar, sugar is less healthy than vinegar
- mustard has vinegar, spices, and frequently a little oil of some time, but nothing compared to mayonnaise which has a ton of oils, fats and typically sugar
- I prefer a flavored vinegar such as raspberry or balsamic vinegar to dressings like thousand island which are loaded with fats and, again, sugars
Products with less fats and sugars are typically healthier than those with fats and sugars. While my preference is based on subjective taste, it is also objectively the healthier choice.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:25 am
by BoganGod
mrswdk wrote:Why would I need to defend my preferences? 'I like humping' is not something that can be rebutted.
Actually do you really like anything? Or do you just think you like something because you have been told to like it.
You hump
Other people hump
Other people say they like humping
You say you like humping
baaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
you sir are a sheep
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:49 am
by mrswdk
BoganGod wrote:mrswdk wrote:Why would I need to defend my preferences? 'I like humping' is not something that can be rebutted.
Actually do you really like anything? Or do you just think you like something because you have been told to like it.
You hump
Other people hump
Other people say they like humping
You say you like humping
baaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
you
sir miss are a sheep
Yeah, but at least I don't live on a rock covered in poisonous insects.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:45 pm
by oVo
No, but it's inconsequential, unnecessary
and a moot point.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:00 pm
by crispybits
It depends
Do you think that we can accurately measure mental (emotional) states by measuring brain activity and hormonal responses?
If so (and I do believe that) then I would say the answer is yes. But we also have to be careful about ow the question is phrased:
"Do you like kittens more than wasps?" is a poorly formed question if we're talking objectively, because it is a subjectively phrased question.
"Does the human being known here by the CC forum identity "crispybits" get more pleasure from being exposed to kittens than wasps?" would be an objective question if you could also measure my brain states and the levels of hormones such as seratonin, oxytocin, adrenaline and cortisol being released into my system while I am exposed to these things.
That doesn't mean that kittens are objectively in any way better than wasps, just that I like kittens and I don't like wasps. It doesn't affect the objective qualities of either, only my own preferences, but it does ground my preferences in objective phenomena.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:12 pm
by BoganGod
crispybits wrote:It depends
Do you think that we can accurately measure mental (emotional) states by measuring brain activity and hormonal responses?
If so (and I do believe that) then I would say the answer is yes. But we also have to be careful about ow the question is phrased:
"Do you like kittens more than wasps?" is a poorly formed question if we're talking objectively, because it is a subjectively phrased question.
"Does the human being known here by the CC forum identity "crispybits" get more pleasure from being exposed to kittens than wasps?" would be an objective question if you could also measure my brain states and the levels of hormones such as seratonin, oxytocin, adrenaline and cortisol being released into my system while I am exposed to these things.
That doesn't mean that kittens are objectively in any way better than wasps, just that I like kittens and I don't like wasps. It doesn't affect the objective qualities of either, only my own preferences, but it does ground my preferences in objective phenomena.
If kittens could sting, would you rather watch kittens sting wasps, or wasps sting kittens? I love paper wasps such useful creatures.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:18 pm
by crispybits
Kittens can scratch and bite and that can hurt more than a wasp sting depending how vicious the scratch/bite is.
I actually have a phobia of wasps, I run out of the room whenever I see one and unless I exert a tremendous effort of will I can't physically stop myself doing that.
But to answer your question, I'd rather watch a kitten sting a wasp than the other way round.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:48 pm
by Serbia
Never felt a need.
Bollocks.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sun Aug 31, 2014 4:50 pm
by natty dread
Yes I can, but I prefer not to.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:57 am
by BoganGod
I know it is racist, but I do have a rather strong loathing for wasps.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:25 am
by tzor
BoganGod wrote:I know it is racist, but I do have a rather strong loathing for wasps.
It's speciesist, unless you are taking about humans and then, since it is a combination of race and religious identity as opposed to the race itself (since White Anglo Saxon Catholics are excluded) calling it racist would be an over simplification.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Thu Sep 04, 2014 9:29 am
by BoganGod
tzor wrote:BoganGod wrote:I know it is racist, but I do have a rather strong loathing for wasps.
It's speciesist, unless you are taking about humans and then, since it is a combination of race and religious identity as opposed to the race itself (since White Anglo Saxon Catholics are excluded) calling it racist would be an over simplification.
You mean my christian scientist religious studies teachers were wrong when they told me(twas a fundamentalist protestant school) catholics had an extra chromosome. A chromosome with a prependency for drinking, rampant rutting, idol worship, and kissing disease riddled relics.
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:53 pm
by jonesthecurl
BoganGod wrote:mrswdk wrote:Why would I need to defend my preferences? 'I like humping' is not something that can be rebutted.
Actually do you really like anything? Or do you just think you like something because you have been told to like it.
You hump
Other people hump
Other people say they like humping
You say you like humping
baaaaaaaaaa baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
you sir are a sheep
Why do you like humping sheep?
Oh sorry, punctuation DOES matter.
I meant, "Why do you like humping, sheep?"
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:15 pm
by DoomYoshi
Rampant rutting... How scandalous!
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:33 pm
by jonesthecurl
You wear Ram Pants?
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:04 pm
by owenshooter
DoomYoshi wrote:Rampant rutting... How scandalous!
jonesthecurl wrote:You wear Ram Pants?
they block venereal disease...-Jésus noir
Re: Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

Posted:
Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:10 pm
by jonesthecurl
owenshooter wrote:DoomYoshi wrote:Rampant rutting... How scandalous!
jonesthecurl wrote:You wear Ram Pants?
they block venereal disease...-Jésus noir
Oh I see. I always just called them "condoms".