6 ms·

I offend and I try to offend, I try to offend the anti-vaxers, the pedophile priests, the corrupt politicians, I try to offend anyone who hold ideas or behavior

I offend and I try to offend, I try to offend the anti-vaxers, the pedophile priests, the corrupt politicians, I try to offend anyone who hold ideas or behaviors that clearly shouldn't be part of society, specially I try to offend people that long ago decided they don't care for reasoning and not matter how much proof there is about them being wrong, to be clear I don't mean any kind of offending but offenses that show how ridiculous or inmoral their stance is on such matters.

AlexB138 8y ago
And how do you manage to identify which ideas shouldn't be part of society? I can't imagine having the level of self assurance necessary to consider myself the arbiter of acceptable ideas for all of society, let alone to actually intentionally agitate people over my chosen results. It's fascinating.
- mattigames 8y ago
  “The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.” - Charles Bukowski
  - rosser 8y ago
    That's a re-phrasing of Bertrand Russell's "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
    - mattigames 8y ago
      Sorry, its the first one google shows, I will make sure to quote this one next time, even more for being a tad more offensive.
    - benjohnson 8y ago
      As I understand it - W. B. Yeats beat Bertrand by a few years with "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." I'm sure this lament is as old as time - someone probably has Yeats beat by a few millennia.
      - cbanek 8y ago
        "Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know.” Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching (date: controversial, but definitely BC)
- eeZah7Ux 8y ago
  We all have a moral compass and it's constantly at work. The decision of remaining neutral is a moral choice in itself. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
- PavlovsCat 8y ago
  > every individual must act as if the whole future of the world, of humanity itself, depends on him. Anything less is a shirking of responsibility and is itself a dehumanizing force, for anything less encourages the individual to look upon himself as a mere actor in a drama written by anonymous agents, as less than a whole person, and that is the beginning of passivity and aimlessness. --Joseph Weizenbaum
  - mcguire 8y ago
    “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law” Kant
ada1981 8y ago
Looks like this offended some people.
- mattigames 8y ago
  Yes it did, seems the most popular counterargument is "what if people who are wrong believe the same" and fail to understand that many of them will use worse tactics regardless (e.g. calling people you dislike "rapists") and all they are doing its asking the right side to fight with plastic knives when the wrong one is already firing fully automatics.
paulsutter 8y ago
I'm sure you're fine with non-pedophile priests and non-corrupt polticians, and perhaps you never misinterpret ideas or behaviors But I do suggest this as a really interesting read: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapons/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapo... > I try to offend the anti-vaxers, the pedophile priests, the corrupt politicians, I try to offend anyone who hold ideas or behaviors that clearly shouldn't be part of society,
- mattigames 8y ago
  I never said I never misinterpret ideas or behaviors, but if I assume all my interpretations may be flawed I might as well be death because my range of action would be just as nonexistent.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    If you assumed that all your interpretations might be flawed, you might not be so eager to condemn. And when you did condemn, you might choose a course of action more likely to lead the other person to change.
    - mattigames 8y ago
      Or I might do nothing like most people do and fail to understand that I'm not talking to a reasonable human being but a human fixated on doing wrong for all the wrong reasons, such lack of action is one of the things that allowed Trump from being a joke to being on charge of the biggest military in the world.
- mistermann 8y ago
  What a great read that was .
manfredo 8y ago
So it's okay for someone to offend so long as the offender thinks the offended should not belong in society? By that logic plenty of people are justified in offending gays, transgender, immigrants, etc.
- mattigames 8y ago
  Yes they are free to offend, and if all goes well we shall remember them the same way we remember racist people that offended black people; as bigots from a worse time.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    "If all goes well"? Yeah... um... in the real world, what do you think the odds are of that?
- zorga 8y ago
  In a free society, it's always OK to offend; offense is not given, it's taken. The offended person chooses to be offended, they are responsible for their own emotions. > By that logic plenty of people are justified in offending gays, transgender, immigrants, etc. Being offensive doesn't require justification, it's always OK; that's what free speech means. If you are not free to offend, you quite simply are not free. Gays, transgenders, and immigrants, and all other people might need to remind themselves the simple things children learn, words are not violence and can simply be ignored. If you're not mature enough to ignore a loudmouth trying to offend you, you are the one with the problem; you are not mature. As they say, prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    The point of the comment isn't that said offense should be banned. It's pointing out the irony in that the above commenter's pride in offending those he or she doesn't want to see in society is the same motivation as many people said commenter probably despises.
quickthrower2 8y ago
What does it achieve to try to offend? If you offend as a byproduct of trying to persuade as a goal to change things, then that's OK. But if the goal is just to troll some emotional reaction, and not change anything, what is the point?
- mattigames 8y ago
  Not, that's not the goal, if they feel offended or not is a irrelevant by-product, they already made their mind, the goal is for the anyone else watching the discussion from the fences (e.g. the undecided, the ones watching their twitter-feed, anyone) how ridiculous an stance or an idea is, also because it's entertaining, and as we know making things more entertaining makes them more likely to be shared and/or remembered.
- zorga 8y ago
  > What does it achieve to try to offend? Mockery is quite useful to onlookers.

AlexB138 8y ago

And how do you manage to identify which ideas shouldn't be part of society? I can't imagine having the level of self assurance necessary to consider myself the arbiter of acceptable ideas for all of society, let alone to actually intentionally agitate people over my chosen results. It's fascinating.

mattigames 8y ago
“The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.” - Charles Bukowski
- rosser 8y ago
  That's a re-phrasing of Bertrand Russell's "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
  - mattigames 8y ago
    Sorry, its the first one google shows, I will make sure to quote this one next time, even more for being a tad more offensive.
  - benjohnson 8y ago
    As I understand it - W. B. Yeats beat Bertrand by a few years with "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." I'm sure this lament is as old as time - someone probably has Yeats beat by a few millennia.
    - cbanek 8y ago
      "Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know.” Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching (date: controversial, but definitely BC)
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
We all have a moral compass and it's constantly at work. The decision of remaining neutral is a moral choice in itself. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
PavlovsCat 8y ago
> every individual must act as if the whole future of the world, of humanity itself, depends on him. Anything less is a shirking of responsibility and is itself a dehumanizing force, for anything less encourages the individual to look upon himself as a mere actor in a drama written by anonymous agents, as less than a whole person, and that is the beginning of passivity and aimlessness. --Joseph Weizenbaum
- mcguire 8y ago
  “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law” Kant

ada1981 8y ago

Looks like this offended some people.

mattigames 8y ago
Yes it did, seems the most popular counterargument is "what if people who are wrong believe the same" and fail to understand that many of them will use worse tactics regardless (e.g. calling people you dislike "rapists") and all they are doing its asking the right side to fight with plastic knives when the wrong one is already firing fully automatics.

paulsutter 8y ago

I'm sure you're fine with non-pedophile priests and non-corrupt polticians, and perhaps you never misinterpret ideas or behaviors But I do suggest this as a really interesting read: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapons/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/12/weak-men-are-superweapo... > I try to offend the anti-vaxers, the pedophile priests, the corrupt politicians, I try to offend anyone who hold ideas or behaviors that clearly shouldn't be part of society,

mattigames 8y ago
I never said I never misinterpret ideas or behaviors, but if I assume all my interpretations may be flawed I might as well be death because my range of action would be just as nonexistent.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  If you assumed that all your interpretations might be flawed, you might not be so eager to condemn. And when you did condemn, you might choose a course of action more likely to lead the other person to change.
  - mattigames 8y ago
    Or I might do nothing like most people do and fail to understand that I'm not talking to a reasonable human being but a human fixated on doing wrong for all the wrong reasons, such lack of action is one of the things that allowed Trump from being a joke to being on charge of the biggest military in the world.
mistermann 8y ago
What a great read that was .

manfredo 8y ago

So it's okay for someone to offend so long as the offender thinks the offended should not belong in society? By that logic plenty of people are justified in offending gays, transgender, immigrants, etc.

mattigames 8y ago
Yes they are free to offend, and if all goes well we shall remember them the same way we remember racist people that offended black people; as bigots from a worse time.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  "If all goes well"? Yeah... um... in the real world, what do you think the odds are of that?
zorga 8y ago
In a free society, it's always OK to offend; offense is not given, it's taken. The offended person chooses to be offended, they are responsible for their own emotions. > By that logic plenty of people are justified in offending gays, transgender, immigrants, etc. Being offensive doesn't require justification, it's always OK; that's what free speech means. If you are not free to offend, you quite simply are not free. Gays, transgenders, and immigrants, and all other people might need to remind themselves the simple things children learn, words are not violence and can simply be ignored. If you're not mature enough to ignore a loudmouth trying to offend you, you are the one with the problem; you are not mature. As they say, prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child.
- manfredo 8y ago
  The point of the comment isn't that said offense should be banned. It's pointing out the irony in that the above commenter's pride in offending those he or she doesn't want to see in society is the same motivation as many people said commenter probably despises.

quickthrower2 8y ago

What does it achieve to try to offend? If you offend as a byproduct of trying to persuade as a goal to change things, then that's OK. But if the goal is just to troll some emotional reaction, and not change anything, what is the point?

mattigames 8y ago
Not, that's not the goal, if they feel offended or not is a irrelevant by-product, they already made their mind, the goal is for the anyone else watching the discussion from the fences (e.g. the undecided, the ones watching their twitter-feed, anyone) how ridiculous an stance or an idea is, also because it's entertaining, and as we know making things more entertaining makes them more likely to be shared and/or remembered.
zorga 8y ago
> What does it achieve to try to offend? Mockery is quite useful to onlookers.