Can you Objectively defend any of your preferences?

[DoomYoshi]

What about your preferences for continued existence, or of objectivity?

[Army of GOD]

Why did you capitalize "objectively"?

[DoomYoshi]

Just to piss you off, which I prefer.

[Army of GOD]

f*ck you you assmongrel

[mrswdk]

Why would I need to defend my preferences? 'I like humping' is not something that can be rebutted.

[BigBallinStalin]

This thread is stupid.

/therrad

[warmonger1981]

Im undecided and that's final.

[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.

[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.

[BoganGod]

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

[mrswdk]

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.

[oVo]

No, but it's inconsequential, unnecessary
and a moot point.

[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.

[BoganGod]

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.

[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.

[Serbia]

Never felt a need.

Bollocks.

[natty dread]

Yes I can, but I prefer not to.

[BoganGod]

I know it is racist, but I do have a rather strong loathing for wasps.

[tzor]

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.

[BoganGod]

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.

[jonesthecurl]

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?"

[DoomYoshi]

Rampant rutting... How scandalous!

[jonesthecurl]

You wear Ram Pants?

[owenshooter]

Rampant rutting... How scandalous!

You wear Ram Pants?

they block venereal disease...-Jésus noir

[jonesthecurl]

Rampant rutting... How scandalous!

You wear Ram Pants?

they block venereal disease...-Jésus noir

Oh I see. I always just called them "condoms".