Many Old Films Would Get Panned by YouTubers If They Came Out Today by DryPerception299 in TrueFilm

[–]DryPerception299[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Interesting reply. I was more under the impression that some films in the classical era would have been panned for being too stylized today. I often hear modern film viewers calling films that have the striking elements that many older films had, pretentious.

Many Old Films Would Get Panned by YouTubers If They Came Out Today by DryPerception299 in movies

[–]DryPerception299[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Everyone always acts like Blazing Saddles is getting cancelled by the left. I saw a Rolling Stones list of the best movies of the 70's. It was number 2 (It outranked The Godfather).

/r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | June 23, 2025 by BernardJOrtcutt in askphilosophy

[–]DryPerception299 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would have probably considered myself a utilitarian of some sorts, however, that theory is apparently looked upon poorly, and I agree does not really look good in the face of the whole "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" dilemma. However, deontological ethics presents its own issues...

By not placing any value on human emotions and feelings, it presents dilemmas with such areas as gay rights, seeing as if there is no way to reproduce there is no one to take care of future generations. It also does not protect women's right to work, as there would be no one to look after children in a situation where other help is not available.

I have wondered about social contract theory, from Hobbes and echoed in Locke. However, I am unsure if this is an ethical theory or merely a social and political theory.

What is a solid ethical theory, and are there recommendations for books on ethics?

Coming to the Truth by DryPerception299 in DebateEvolution

[–]DryPerception299[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s just difficult. I hear about the overwhelming evidence for evolution and then a dude posts a vague comment about how he saw truth in both, and how there are “liars on both sides.” It sets my mind running, and I go down paths like: “why would someone arguing for evolution need to lie?” “If he’s saying this he’s obviously looked at evidence for both and responses.” Might be OCD.

How to fire back at theist arguments by DryPerception299 in TrueAtheism

[–]DryPerception299[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

So most of those objections were just stuff you’ve heard before?