₦airaland Forum

Botragelad:
There's no Palestine. Gaza will be pounded.

This is just how apartheid whites often claimed that South Africa was empty when they settled there.

Kukutente23:
When Israel went after Hamas, you all started shouting genocide
Iran is hitting residential areas and no one is hearing cries of genocide from hypocrites
Even the clown at the ICC is quiet

How many people have been killed so far by Iranian strikes please?

ChristCee:
Reminder...Ronaldo won non. How about that? Let it sink in

Reminder again, Nine years in Spain, Ronaldo won the league just twice. 🫨😮😮 Messi, Six times during those Nine years that Ronaldo was there.

To show you how crazy that is, Lamine Yamal has won the league two times and he has not turned 18😮 (it took Ronaldo nine years despite playing for madrid🤣🤣)

Someone mentioned Pele and you are talking of Ronaldo

AllBlack:
Ibrahim held the head of the four birds in his hands? Really?

Ibrahim placed the bird pieces on 4 hills?
Do you know what it takes (time, energy, endurance, food, water) to climb four different hills just to place bird parts?

The bird parts (plus blood & bones) all came back together? okay oh.

Different birds of the exact same species will come and they will say amazing!

Kukutente23:
Are you gay
When did Asa and Teni tell you they are gay?
s

Sometimes one can tell from the physical movements, demeanor, posture and build. At least infer a tendency or likelihood if not a certainty.

Reed - I cant resist some clarifications. I owe you that. Because I think I see what hobbled us. It may be to do with group vs individual.

LordReed:
How did I misquote you?

You said different times. I consistently referred to different circumstances. Note that the same circumstance may be occurring to different people at the same time. So I never said different times.

What you said implies that I was saying one thing could be right at one time and wrong at another time. No I said the same action could be right in one circumstance and wrong in another. And this is beyond any possible disputation surely.

Morality is a human construct. We are the ones who made morality. It's wasn't handed to us. Humans are the ones who are making value judgements.

I not for once alluded to morals being handed over to humans. My argument is it does not belong to any individual - which is what it is to say it is subjective. You seem to think subjectivity can refer to groups? Subjectivity never refers to groups. Maybe that is what has hobbled us - if you say that morality is subjective then you are referring to the individual. In short, whatever I believe is right, is right for me.

Dont you think I could be wrong? Of course I could be wrong even regardless of my personal opinion. And this what you are missing. You seem to be saying regardless of any objective fact, I am right in my personal moral opinion, or at least entitled to act in accordance with it.

Maybe here I detect what has hobbled us. You think I am saying objective morality comes from outside all humans. Rather I am saying they exist outside any individual human and whatever he may personally think.

Let us use a small example. Let us say I believe it is right to spread disease to my children. Am I right in that moral opinion, since it is my subjective opinion? Clearly not.

Then it is not OBJECTIVELY wrong. Its that simple. As far as I am concerned you are just doing mental gymnastics to avoid using the word subjective. Because the meaning of the word OBJECTIVE does not support being variable.

If all morality is subjective to the individual you can have no quarrel with even Adolf Hitler. None whatsoever. No basis to condemn him at all. All you can say is whatever he did, he was entitled to do as it was it opinion. No one thinks of morality in this way. There is almost universal agreement on what is good and what is evil and what is pardonable, etc. And no, its not a modern thing. Societies will not have survived by ever thinking that certain things were right among them. Almost no society would have survived.

From where is this external objectivity?

From the nature of beings itself - and as we didnt cause our own existence, we cant say it is determined by us.

Why, at the individual level, will one commit a nasty deed (say, steal, kill etc) and then feel bad about it? Is there anything within us that causes even the worst of us to have a pricking in our hearts and a feeling of revulsion at certain deeds? It is worthy to look at this again. While some individuals may be perverse, if you say morality is subjective, the worst perversity is nothing. In fact, there would be nothing like perversity. If I say it is right for me to rape one year old babies, no one can question me about it. No one whosoever. That is my subjective moral value judgment and that is that. In fact, by so doing they will be imposing their thoughts on me which in itself is a problem.

What are you talking about with this destroy talk? What brings destruction into this discussion?

Now this may be the most salient point. Behavior that leads to destruction is a cardinal determinant of what is immoral - not anyone's subjective opinion. Probably the most cardinal factor. And it is not subjective to anyone - it is damn objective. In fact, even if the entire human race thinks a certain destructive pattern of behavior is morally right, nature will show it objectively wrong.

Let me add here that life promoting behavior is what is objectively right while death promoting behaviour is objectively wrong.

LordReed:
I think it would be rather instructive for you to point out where you say I misquoted you.

Regrettably I believe this conversation has failed. It's better to forget it.

PS: No offense but you don't know the meaning of "objective."

LordReed:
How did I misquote you?

For old time's sake and the dear respect we bear one another please try and spot the error.
Because i strongly believe if you cant, there is a huge problem that may make it impossible for us to discuss.

This is how many women end up as single aged spinsters.

LordReed:
I explained my statement, I didn't mean that you said it verbatim. Something cannot be objectively 2 mutually exclusive things. You are saying an action can be good sometime then bad another time. You CANNOT use the word OBJECTIVE for such a thing.

You have misquoted me again. I hope this is not becoming deliberate.
I will see if you spot the error here again in order to determine if you are not doing it deliberately.

Then the misunderstanding is yours because whatever the case it is a value judgement capable individual making a choice. There is no externally imposed "thing" making the choice for the individual. By necessity all value judgements are subjective. We get to choose our moral frameworks which can help guide our actions without any guarantees that we would adhere strictly to those frameworks. This is why a Christian who professes to love Jesus more than life can still kill, it is all in the individual's powers of choice.

Is the individual's power of choice the basis of morality?
Please think carefully.

Because if you insist it is, I can only conclude that there is nothing like morality in your worldview. And that nothing is right or wrong or good or bad.

If killing is OBJECTIVELY wrong then no situation would make it right.

Look, I am tired of repeating myself. Self Defense can make it right for example.
Or are you denying that?

I think about these things fairly regularly, subjecting my thoughts to examination from time to time. I am fully convinced there is no external objectivity to morality. It is firmly entrenched in the capacity of value judgement beings/species/populations.

There is external objectivity to morality. What destroys a people and even the whole human race is external to any single individual's opinion.

Kukutente23:
I find it disturbing that you think genocide is a game of chess and checkers
Probably because you're not directly affected
As I said previously, hyping the ability of the herdsmen over the indigenes is misplaced. What the herdsmen basically profit from is the willingness of the Tiv people to surrender their sovereignty to the Nigerian state which forbids them to bear arms while the herdsmen refuse to accept the same condition as citizens of the state. Were the ground to be level in terms of arms, I can assure you that the result will be different. Factual history established that the Tiv have always beaten the Fulani black and blue during conflicts in pre-colonial times.
So your game is having different rules for the players. And in this case, it is the rule breakers that seem wise and superior while the law- abiding are deemed weak and unfortunate.
This is the summary of the Nigerian state

I can bet the erad fellow has never seen a chess board and cannot place the pieces on the board at the start of the game.

Kukutente23:
So how has equity and unity been enhanced under your arrangement of power rotation? Has Nigeria become more peaceful? Do southerners feel more Nigerian now that power has rotated south? Are north seeing things more in terms of equality?
You see, it is self- deceit to see leaves and take them for branches. If you all so much believe in rotation, Jonathan will not be allowed to run not to talk of winning in 2011. Principles and solutions of corporate existence are not built on feelings or comfort but on what's true, fair and just. The issues that bedevil Corporate Nigeria are not issues that can be solved by simply rotating power like communion among desperate politicians. That's why when they get there, they basically behave the same and do the same while employing people of low reasoning to defend them.
Power rotation is a self- serving principle among politicians. It does not take the interest of the larger corporate body of Nigeria into account. That's why you can claim rotation but you choose a Muslim Muslim ticket. It shows you're not on equal footing and you don't pretend to be. If rotation was a serious remedy, a southern Muslim/ northern Christian pair will not look untenable. Conversely, if a Muslim Muslim ticket is acceptable, a Christian Christian ticket should also be feasible. That one scenario tops the other already shows the divisive nature of the rotation principle and hence it's narrowness

There are equitable ways of creating peace in a complex nation and rotation is one of them.

erad:
Lol... A lot of you don't understand how deep-rooted this problem is. You keep thinking of checkers moves in a game of chess.

You have a group of people that are mobile, have no fixed properties and can easily disappear in the twinkle of an eye and you have another group of people who are grounded. They are in their home and most of all they own is fixed.

In a fire for fire situation, who do you think will suffer the greater casualties and losses.

Everyone can choose to be emotional or logical, it's up to them.

At the end of the day, you are still saying they should be robbed and they should give up what they own in exchange for their lives. That is the definition of armed robbery. "Your money or your life" is what armed robbers always said. So master chess player that you are (and you dont know chess at all) you are advocating such nonsense.

nwirinedu:
How did he set himself ablaze? With your lighter?

Lol. You believe he had money. I do hope you know a lighter can be borrowed.
If you insist that a poor man had 2000 naira and thats all he needed to get a meal, then you dont know anything about poverty. Or you are trying to justify the government.

nwirinedu:
A ragolis of petrol is N1800, that could buy him a decent meal in Kano.

So how do you know he bought the Petrol?

Kukutente23:
Before nko
Has he every visited any scene of any disaster since he became president?
He's a man who is very concerned with how the West see him so anything they raise, you'll see him on top of it

Thats just embarrassing. Must a Pope reach out first before you do what every single western leader will do within two seconds when such a massacre of hundreds happens?

Kukutente23:
The state already gave a law against open grazing. The state already said they have no land to give Fulani herdsmen. All these positions were articulated and taken when Buhari a Fulani was president. Ortom has cows and he has built ranches for them. Why are strangers refusing to obey the laws of their hosts and the president of those that ask people to respect their hosts seems ready to placate them?

Its a Fulani genocidal and conquest project and it is coming all the way from the Sahel.

erad:
I wish Nigerians with think before complaining.

You want solutions, a solution has been profered but you're not satisfied with it. This is the same reason this problem has festered for so long.

It's not their land, blah blah blah... Is it not better than bloodshed every now and then? The whole ranch thing is a structure, and anything outside that structure can then be handled appropriately.

All these gra gra won't solve anything and will only put innocent people at more risk. If you guys could handle the herdsmen on your own, you wouldn't be crying to the president in the first place. There is Sabo in almost every southern location in Nigeria. If that has not been a problem all these while, why will a ranch be a problem?

Once there's a structure, people are easily traced and solutions are easily profered.

Everything is not noise making. Those who lost family and friends to the massacre will welcome any positive step to give them their homes back and enable them sleep with both eyes closed.

Are you trying to repeat one of the worst things ever said by the FGN - through Femi Adeshina that they should give up their land to avoid bloodshed? In short that since they will be killed, they must give up their land? Dont you realize that that is not just armed robbery its genocide and ethnic cleansing in order to seize what they have, mine rare earth minerals and use fertile land?

In short, you said Nigerians do not think, you you have not thought even for a second.

It is highly likely that the only reason BAT went to Benue was an urging from the Pope.

What if this man was simply tired of poverty and starvation?

Very likely.

Not a single bullet shot or person killed in Rivers and he suspends the governor and legislature - illegally.
Hundreds of people killed in Benue and he doesnt do same.

Nigerians should learn that everything this man does is simply for political corruption.

LordReed:
This is what is called subjective morality. I'm still surprised you are just dancing around the word subjective.

At least recognize your error first then we can debate it properly. You said I was saying something which I never said. You said I said morality is both objectively good and bad. Thats an incongruous, meaningless and absurd statement - and you know very well I didnt say that.

Subjective morality would simply mean if anyone personally believes it is right to r.ape, murder, commit genocide, burn women at the stake, do human ritual sacrifices - in fact anything - then its moral for them to do so. To say that all morality is subjective simply means anything a person feels like doing or thinks it is right to do - even the worst atrocities is actually okay. You are wrong on this score.

There is a reason I use terms like relative morality and situational morality. Because a thing can be relative. For example an insane person may not have any idea of what he is doing. A person with even dementia may not have any idea of what he is doing. Even medical issues like sleep walking fall in the same category - that person may have absolutely no idea what happened. And anyone can see that this is objective, rational reasoning. Even a child may have no idea what he is doing and the consequences - and that is why minors are treated differently before the law. In law we say that even a child below the age of 12 can commit no crime because he understands nothing - he is not at the age of criminal responsibility. All this is rational and objective.

In situational cases, just imagine if there was a war going on and thousands of people were stuck in a trench trying to escape from enemy bombardment. In that situation many people could do anything to get out of the trench quickly and it may be a mistake, it may be a split of the second instinctive escape etc - but could lead to the deaths of other people. That is a clear situation that no rational or objective human will think the crime was deliberate or premeditated.

I urge you to think carefully on what I am saying.
I will go further if you kindly reflect and consider that I am not dancing around any word unnecessarily.
I did tell you that this is a pure philosophical matter which I wonder about.

Kukutente23:
Abegi
What was Akume's achievement as gov?
He was as bad if not worse and instituted the incompetence governance has become known for in Benue

Ah my friend you are back.

Long time.

How are you..

LordReed:
That is what you said in essence. I asked you if lying is objectively wrong and you said yes but there times when it is objectively right. So you're telling me that morality can be objectively right and wrong in essence.

Back to this. Have you had time to see the error you made?

Never said morality can be objectively right and wrong.

Said a deed in different circumstances could be objectively right OR wrong.

Think about it. Wish to be brief.

It's pretty simple. If you have no reason for killing a person and you do it, that's objectively wrong.

If you did it in self defense that's objectively right.

Be careful with words. I never said what you claimed I did.

It takes a Royal Father to speak bluntly to the Frog.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

LordReed:
The kind of women I've been with wouldn't do stuff like this so maybe I'm having a little rose tinted vision.

Same here.

I just understand how most women to that to most men.

LordReed:
With the way she was protesting, I want to hope she is principled enough.

Lol LordReed. Abi you sef don't know women? Forget it.

Even if it was a flight ticket that cost N10 million it's gone.

She will NEVER refund.

She will only lie on the man.

And it's not just oloshos that do it. Even classy women from supposed good homes do it.

If anyone knows a single case where the woman refunds the money, I will stand doubted.