Profile for Emperor Tullegolar
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Displayed name | Emperor Tullegolar |
| Member number | 7420 |
| Title | Shaper |
| Postcount | 2156 |
| Homepage | http://www.dmeb.net/speb/foryourears/take.mp3 |
| Registered | Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
Recent posts
Pages
| Author | Recent posts |
|---|---|
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 20:53
Profile
Homepage
quote:I never shifted my views before. I am a laissez faire capitalist that beleives the people have a right to overthrow the government. When have I ever diverted from this in all the economic and political discussions we've had? When have I ever not given support to back up my theories? Come on, all that crap about animals had trolling written all over it. As for not being good at humor, yeah I already admitted that. Humor is not my thing, but seriously, if this isn't evidence of an incomming joke, then I must be truly hopeless: quote: -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| To Battle in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 20:23
Profile
Homepage
Most of you here seem like pacifists, which is an easy position to take when your way of life is not under attack. But what if major aspects of the way you live were under attack? How far would you let things go before you finally took up arms? Keep in mind that in each of these questions, at least one aspect of your way of life in under attack. The point of this is to discover what aspects of your life or what causes you are willing to fight for. Also, assume that if you stay out of any of these wars you will live, but you will now be under the rule of an ideology you oppose. Would you go to war with and possibly die fighting against: 1. an opposing nation just like your nation in every way other than name (given that they attacked your nation first)? 2. an opposing religion (given that the religion you follow endorses the war and you will have to convert if you lose)? 3. an opposing government type (Democracies vs. Dictatorships, or whichever type you hate the most)? 4. an opposing economic theory (Capitalists vs. Communists, or whichever theory you hate the most)? 5. an opposing class (Bourgeois vs. Proletariat, whichever one you aren’t)? 5. racists (given that you are a member of their race)? 6. an alien species bent on the destruction of mankind (you may live as a slave mining salt if you surrender)? 7. me (given that you're 'strong' and fairly well off under my rule)? [ Sunday, November 05, 2006 20:25: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 19:11
Profile
Homepage
-Nioca, master of ruining jokes. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Suggestions for new titles in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 18:20
Profile
Homepage
The Cerebrous Wyrm was a better character than Solberg, that title would be awesome, not insulting. How about something like "Disaster" or "Catastrophe?" -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Learnin' me my letters. in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 17:58
Profile
Homepage
1) Where are you going to school (Or where did you)? Villanova University. 2) Was it your first choice? It was. 3) Do you wish you had gone somewhere differently? Yale. Getting into Skull & Bones would have increased my chances of becomming Emperor ten-fold. 4) Are you now, or will you ever be, a member of the Communist Party? I've not had the pleasure. Nor will I ever. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 17:55
Profile
Homepage
quote:  quote:Sometimes I just want to kick you right in the ethics. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 16:53
Profile
Homepage
I doubt he saw me as a threat. As you can all see, I'm not very good at trolling, especially when it has to do with a topic I know nothing about. After all, this was supposed to be a thread on human nature. I won't claim that I really know anything about animals, after all, I'm a mere human myself. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Sunday, November 5 2006 16:41
Profile
Homepage
I suppose this has gotten little out of hand. When I made my original statement "they have no feelings," I was being sarcastic. When you guys took that statement seriously, I defended it as a joke. I thought the joke would be abundantly obvious as I shifted my views constantly and said inflammatory things, but you all continued to take everything I said to heart. TM is the only one that got the joke, it seems. I plead guilty to the charge of trolling, and throw myself upon the mercy of the board. -------------------- I lose? Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 22:28
Profile
Homepage
The article does say they were playing with the dolphins, and sharks are dangerous, so the other two possibilities are proven. That good enough? Surgeon: The surgeon does have the right no not heal someone. That aside, the person's pain is not insignificant because the person will ask for help. A dog on the other hand would rather hide under a porch and die instead of seeking comfort. Edit: Ooo, my very first TM insult. Should I be insulted, honored, or laughing hysterically? Guess which one I'm doing. [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 22:30: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 22:16
Profile
Homepage
quote: quote:I hate repeating myself. Salmon: I'm not impressed. Those humans were probably feeding the dolphins and thus the dolphins were merely protecting a newfound source of food. I won't deny that dolphins are sentient, and enjoy entertainment. They could also have been protecting a source of entertainment. Then there is always the third possibility that they were protecting themselves because they felt threatened by the shark, and the human just happened to be there. [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 22:20: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 22:08
Profile
Homepage
Prove it Mr. Factually-True. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 21:54
Profile
Homepage
Humanity has no 'duty' to animals. Any kindness we extend to them, while a good thing, is already undeserved. An animal would not try to save a human in pain (unless it had been raised by humans, and thus would associate 'saving human' with 'get fed'). But a human would save an animal in pain for no reason other than empathy. If nothing else I've said proves human superiority, this must. As for children and retards, these two groups of people should not be grouped together. Children have potential to become full humans, and thus must be protected until reaching that point. As for the mentally retarded, well, we treat them pretty much the same way we treat animals as is. So... sure, whatever. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 21:18
Profile
Homepage
Alec: I never shifted philosophies, I just used more than one. Since the two are not fundamentally different, I see no problem with doing that. There is no reason I can't beleive that the suffering of animals is lesser than that of humans and that since it is lesser it does not deserve recognition. Was that the 'shift' you were talking about? By the way, I may think animals' pain is insignificant, but I never said that justified humans to cause it. I already explained that making animals suffer makes them weak, and if you know me, you know that I approve of the weak less than I approve of people that are actually evil. quote:Is a man who spends his life reading poetry and never fathering children furthering the species? [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 21:26: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 20:57
Profile
Homepage
quote:No, because humans value the mind over the body. Animals exist to further their species, humans can exist for the sake of existing. That is what I mean by 'soul.' I did not mean soul literally. [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 20:57: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 20:52
Profile
Homepage
An animal would endure great pain to save its life. Some humans would rather take their life than endure great pain. Animals can feel pain, but they can't know pain. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 20:38
Profile
Homepage
You know, there's a reason I gave this topic the title that it has. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 20:23
Profile
Homepage
When an animal approaches me and asks to be treated as an equal, I'll treat him as an equal. Until then, they have no sentience, no souls. "But Tullegolar, studies show that dolphins have sentience and-" I don't care, I have an opposable thumb, I get to make the rules. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 19:57
Profile
Homepage
I don't think hurting small animals makes you evil. They have no feelings. It does, however, make you weak an insecure. If you cause a human pain and enjoy their pain, you are evil. However, since animals have no feelings, the only thing you have to enjoy is a feeling of dominence. Not evil, just pathetic. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 19:18
Profile
Homepage
quote:How can you compare a misunderstanding between a couple of people to ancient hatreds between races and peoples that go back thousands of years? I'm not saying hatred as a concept will be eliminated, I'm saying that historical hatreds, you know, the kinds that start wars, will be. It may not be everything that you want, but would it not be an improvement? -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 16:49
Profile
Homepage
Anything good that religion has ever done could have happened just as easily without the religion part. Can people not be taught compassion without also being taught servitude to a mysterious unknown power? No, all religion does on its own is divide people. Without it, there would be one less wall. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 16:32
Profile
Homepage
What would they form these new hatreds from? Religion would be gone, so that's 99% of all hatred right there gone with it. Color maybe? I think color based discrimination started due to cultural differences. When Europe first came to Africa, they literally were inferior, and all hatred towards Africans today are based on that assumption. If you take culture out of the picture, I believe that color will no longer be an issue. If color still is an issue, that would simply mean that humans are naturally hateful. Are you saying humans are naturally hateful? -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 16:19
Profile
Homepage
Of course I would set myself up as Emperor. Prepare for Mind Control!  If I did want to use my powers for good for some reason, I would erase the hate from history. There are far more people who look at history and think "I hate those people for doing that" than there are people who think "I will definitly not do that again." So much can be gained from erasing historical hatreds, much more than can be gained from leaving them there and hoping people will forgive and learn from them. Edit: Don't you just wish you could erase my memories and teach me to be a good person? [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 16:22: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 15:55
Profile
Homepage
quote:Either that or it will give people an example to follow. Would people be racist if they didn't learn how from someone else first? I think such ideas could be eliminated with mass memory alterations. Edit: Does history prevent more hate than it propagates? I think not. [ Saturday, November 04, 2006 16:00: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Mindcontrol - sort of in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, November 4 2006 15:48
Profile
Homepage
People on these boards are the worst when it comes to answering hypothetical questions like this. "Oh, I wouldn't want to mess with the space-time continuum" "Wah, I could never disturb the delicate balance of the universe" and "People's memories are not meant to be ruined like that." Bah. If I had such powers, Hitler would not have been born, religion would be dead, and everyone would be perfectly equal to everyone else in society... in regards of their service to me, the Emperor. Sometimes you just have to step up to the hypothetical plate and change the world as we know it. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
| Humans Only in General | |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Friday, November 3 2006 20:43
Profile
Homepage
Some of you are actually agreeing with me? I shall offer an opposing argument as well, then. Aristotle explained what it means to be "good" and why humans naturally lean towards it rather than evil. It is a simple one word answer: empathy. When you see someone else suffer, you feel a instinctual need to ease this persons suffering, even if it does not benefit you at all. Garrison was right when he said that the personal satisfaction people get from good deeds makes people naturally good. Even someone living in the woods does not like to see suffering, simply because it triggers memories of their own suffering, and thus a natural desire to remedy it. One could even argue that that person in the woods would seek only to benefit others rather than themselves. After all, is it not society that teaches us the value of material goods and the importance of personal accomplishment? And so, people are naturally good. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |