Why shouldn't a person kill anybody he wants to, even a normal "innocent" person...

your questions don't make sense, ffs

What if I choose not to have a duty?

I'm merely killing this person because I feel like swinging my knife at him.

Then you're a danger to the people around you and you need to be put down.
Dumbass.

t. anpac

I guess if someone comes at you with a gun you just don't kill him right? and let him kill you? after all killing a human ain't universifiable

Then your self defined duty is not to have one. Pretty nonsensical. Much more interesting is: what if my duty is to be evil? (Kant with Sade)

we're not talking about other people and what they should do. We're talking about me. Why so spooked?

Okay. so i can still kill because of my duty to not have a duty. How is it nonsensical?

Why should you or me care?
What is "evil"?

Well from what I can see you don't really have any good reason to kill the person other than because you feel like it. And I don't really see how you're going gain anything from it other than emotionally, but if you are doing it for emotion then it could be argued that you're not actually acting in your self interest and you're actually letting your emotions use you instead of you using your emotions. Also, that's not counting the fact that you might kill this man not to gain anything emotionally and that you might get killed in the process by the person you are trying to kill. t. Stirnerite

Because you having the ability to kill anyone you want to implies you have the ability to kill me or my loved ones, and I don't want you to kill me or my loved ones.

"My duty to not to have any duties" is a duty.

Doing harm to others beyond self-interest, for the sake of it.

Your thread is shit.

To give yourself power of life and death over others' lives means that you, by definition, put yourself above others on a substantial level. If you can kill, you can then be killed by anyone since you possess absolutely zero muh privilege whatsoever (you are no god). However, human don't want a planet where the existence of men can endanger the species because they feel like it. Therefore, if a person should be deprived of their right to kill someone, everyone should be to prevent hatred and one-sided murders.

I am talking about you. If you harm other people, you invite harm upon yourself. It is in your self-interest not to kill other people, or at the very least, not to get caught.

lol getta load of Raskolnikov over here

got it. brb becoming zodiac killer and not getting caught. this does not violate my rational self interest

Because if you try, I'll kill you.

Report this faggot to death.

Okay, so then I can kill and have the duty to not have any reason to kill like the freud guy said. If its emotional though and "my emotions are using me" (whatever that means, humans are always emotional it seems) why should it matter if it feels good and there will likely be no consequences? Language like "your emotions are using you" seems like you're trying to guilt me into feeling exploited from some other force. That is what would be emotional

I still don't see what is nonsensical. How are you defining nonsense? Everything it seems, is made up nonsense and interpretations to shield people.

So is that the definition of evil or an example or expression of evil? Even if its evil, so fucking what? Are you some Christian or something?

Okay, what if I like it?

Okay, and?

If I decide not to kill, I can or will still be killed either way, so how does that matter?

It seems like humans are already destroying the world either way. What if its already like that? And you may not want that world, but I don't see why I should care about what you or "humanity" wants.

It seems life "what humans" would want is not what is happening in reality, and if it is, it seems like humans have an ugly vision already.

Those are arbitrary rules that I don't care about

And people kill each other either way.
Are you saying thought that if murder were legal, everybody would go out to kill? What about the whole "humanity's wishes" shit.

Not if I kill intelligently and selectively. Not if its some defenseless person.

Then I won't get caught

okay

oh, waiting on your explanation of "evil", what difference does it make if it is evil or not. Things happen either way and people call those things different things including "evil"

Am I really supposed to care what you regard as "evil"?
What does it mean in the real world?

this Krauss guy is so dishonest, he gave the atheist movement a bad name when he tried to debate that christian apology guy thinking it would be easy and ended up being destroyed and was caught lying.

There are two people inside me……nicest boy you'll ever meet….and Twisted Fucking Psychopath…

hot

Empathy mostly. Why would you want to kill anybody?

Empathy is a spook. Why should I care about the death of 1/7468000000 homo sapiens? Why should I care that it was I that induced that death? What difference does it make to killing an ant, which has demonstrated collective intelligence far beyond what we originally assumed arthropods could possess? What difference does it make to shooting a pigeon, one of the most intelligent creatures on the planet?

There's no argument you can give me to counter this that doesn't just appeal to the fact I'm human.

If you don't already feel empathy toward other people then maybe, but the point is that most people already feel empathy toward others so they have no reason to suppress this empathy.

...

Empathy is not a spook. It is a natural human feeling and can provoke genuine happines and well being. A spook is an abstract ideal which impedes on individuals acting in their own self interests. If it is in your own self interests to kill then fine, but most people would not get pleasure out of it. If you want to be edgy then fine, but dont appropriate Stirner for your bullshit.

Because then they can freely do the same to you

is not rocket science

Empathy is more than just a feeling. It's an imaginary relationship (literally putting yourself into the other's place in your head).

Spook.

Spook.

Spook.

You're impeding on my self-interest by attempting to define human emotion right now.

Comrades, please contribute to our advancement on the propaganda front.

What's not universifiable is not fighting back in self-defense

yfw CI makes wearing a gun a duty

liberals BTFO

Again, apply special circumstances and then what? What if its a weak nobody in the middle of nowhere of some third world country desert who I just feel like killing. Maybe he made a gesture I didn't like or believed he should have died for?
You're just repeating the whole golden rule shit.

I'm the op btw, I am not incorporating Stirner (and I'm not saying your that you thought you were talking to me).
In reference to and his talk about god, let me try to do a "thought experiment".
Say I am a powerful warlord in a remote (away fro all the powerful "civilized" policy-pushers of the first-world, and I decide to send my men to butcher a bunch of villagers because a) ( ) I am expressing my commitment to my duty to not have a duty (action "without "reason"" ), b) ( ) it emotionally pleases me to see or know that people were killed by my order or I like the corpses, or c) ( ) I am acting out of my self-interest and will sell the victims' organs in the black market to make a tonne of money.
In all scenarios, I know there's likely no way I'll be punished or given "justice" as I've done these things before and am an unchallenged ruler.
Why should I not kill?

Shadow the hedgehog

what?

I belive she is claiming you are an edgelord.
Also, GET boys.

nothing OP, as proof of this kill yourself

Not being edgy at all. I just want a philosophical reason. People often call things spooks and say "why not? derive a real reason" but it just seems like you're all disguised moralists.

Stirner isn't leftist and Holla Forums only uses him for meme purposes.

>>>/liberty/ is probably more up to your speed

wtf, fuck you neo-liberals. I don't want here from your shit. You're even worse.

Again:
-empathy
-maintaining the species
-maintaining social cohesion (people want to be safe, so they give away the freedom to deprive others of safety)
-fear of social outcasting
-and of course, morals
If none of these reasons are enough for you then I dont know what to tell ya. Go on your killing spree mr internet edgelord.

I'll think about it some more. I'm beginning to think that its all foundationless.

yeah stop off with your memes.You cannot even consider a hypothetical or speculative question which is what this was.

Spook

Spook

Spook

Spook generated by society

The biggest spook of them all.

I'm not sure if it's already been said (tl;dr) but go ahead and do it.
The greatest proof of why not to is to examine the effects if you did. You would probably feel guilty even if not a moral spook this particular act will constantly be reconsidered and rejudged by yourself. It will weigh you down and then there's always the fear of being found out. It doesn't matter how smooth it was and if there is no proof left at all. The fear, irrational or not, will be with you. It may give you a god complex which just means your self perception and reality will cleave apart. Your whole life will now be defined by this stupid faget you killed which sounds pretty stupid if the point was to get rid of him in the first place. There's also the practical chance of retribution. Again even if it will certainly not happen, you've got the fear. Enjoy being a paranoid mess. Finally murder for selfish reasons is the lowest form of the dialectic, read Hegel you fucking pleb.
Also read crime and punishment, it's seems just your sort of thing.

Your arguments are stale, as old as Hegel himself.

because we exist under the premise I will not bash your head in with a hammer for fun

Read Dostoevsky

wew sorry didn't realize it was already posted
but yes pretty much this

Also have you actually killed someone before? Report once you do if you're still so sure about muh nihilism.

Emotions may be felt, but they don't mean anything.

Like I said, read Crime and Punishment

Because it's a sin.

Because nobody will want to be around you. They may elect to kill you to get around this.

Not an argument.

well the sort of person who says something like "science progresses and philosophy doesn't" is a wrongun

There is no logical foundation to do anything at all, it all comes down to feelings and will, you either choose to believe in a form of morality or you don't.

No reason why and no reason why not. Just expect them to fight back against you, and consider what you might be able to gain from that person being alive versus them dead

Then do it faggot, kill someone you internet tough guy. If you're such a supreme being who is above petty bourgeois emotions like empathy, guilt, or shame, prove it. I'm sure something in your life can be improved. Go kill some rich guy and rob him. Surely someone with no care for human emotion is clever enough to do it. What stopping you spooky cowardice?

Well if you value your life then you won't want to live in a society that permits that because one day you'll be the random person being killed in a desert. I guess if you don't mind dying a horrible death as long as you can inflict horrible deaths on others before your own, then feel free to move to Somolia or a similar country where you can carry out that fantasy.

this, the rule of law againts murder, torture and so on comes from self-interest

stirner saves the day get again

idc

I'm the the op, that isn't me.

finally, something more honest.

Why should a person care about their own life?
People are bombed daily either way, nobody wants that society you're describing.

I'm only asking questions. Not any fantasies or anything.

yeah, but I should still be able to get away with killing a nobody and then pretend that I want a "nice cute" society with others who could pose a threat.

Why argue in the first place, if you presume that exterminating another for the hell of it can be an option? It undermines your claim to be arguing in good faith: self-refuting.

Why be interested in anything at all? Strictly "rational" thoughts do not exist, your attentiveness to particular details and not others is emotional coloration. Our emotional structure defines who we are in a deep way.

By not having empathy, you miss out on what it means to be fully human, and will never be able to understand. You'll never be close to someone else in a deep and loving relationship, and cannot possibly know what that's like. You're just a slave to raw dopamine, a machine. Unable to ever grasp the meaning of the words you use, formed in a community of human beings who generally care for eachother, your entire understanding is only superficial, your life is meaningless, devoid of anything recognizably human. Everything you do for yourself, you will never take with you to the grave, you will have no influence lasting beyond you besides people scorning your name. You are a pointless, pitiable creature, your life and times utterly nonsensical.

And to amoral leftists who have trouble answering this type of question: why is the end point of full automation not just replacing all of society with a vast hospital, everyone on IV drips of morphine. When it eliminates all differences, everyone's happy all the time, is highly efficient? But what difference does it make if there is 1 person, 1000, or 100 billion? They are undifferentiated. What conversations would they have? Where does meaning come from? What is the point of "progress" to perfect equality, if it resolves inevitably to an utterly meaningless condition? Or are you all just agents of the technological singularity, seeking to replace humanity?

Your emotions will still get the best of you if you want it or not. Emotions are very real indeed and determine what you do.

Define "a useless person/ a nobody".

To add to this user. Would you even care if it was a useless person or not, in the desert? Would you care, if you had killed a beggar or an arabian prince? Would you do a thorough background check to make sure that nobody will avenge his death. If someone does avenge his death would you care that he might not kill you off easily, but rather slowly torture you, until you start begging for death?

do communists believe in the NAP?

Because it is not my will to do so.
It will not bring me pleasure.

No, the NAP is a spooky load of crap that is based off of fatal presuppositions. Ironically enough, it's based off the assumption that everyone is completely equal when entering contracts. Communism is based off of mutual care and the desire for all to flourish without the imposition of baseless forces impeding flourishment. Contract based morality is limited and retarded.

Nigger, you're spooked af.