/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15537574]

Why is slavery morally wrong?

[Anonymous No.15537594]

calling slavery morally wrong means you think Islam is morally wrong.

[Anonymous No.15537603]

>>15537574
would you like to be a slave? If the answer is no, then do you agree that morality requires consistency? If you answered yes than slavery is morally wrong

[Anonymous No.15537624]

>>15537603
if i couldnt control myself via reason, and was at the point of irrational slavery to bodily impulses that dragged me down to the level of an animal, what a blessing it would be to be liberated by another man who does possess the godly gift of a body governed by intellect. perhaps he could raise me up in his presence. in that state of slavery to the body, perhaps i'd say i wouldn't want his intellect's constrain upon my passions and appetites. but if so-called 'slavery' of a master reined these in, and gave me clarity, then that would not be slavery at all

[Anonymous No.15537626]

>>15537574
It is ethically wrong for infringing in someone else's property

[Anonymous No.15537632]

>>15537624
*spits in your face*
heh, you're nothing but my bitchboi from now on faggot

[Anonymous No.15537633]

>>15537626
why?

[Anonymous No.15537635]

>>15537624
You got me even more confused now. What type of slavery are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.15537638]

Do you want to be my slave?

[Anonymous No.15537652]

>>15537635
wouldnt you say someone who is addicted is a slave to his substance of abuse? or a fat man to his appetite? or a coomer to his porn? or a glory hound beholden to the praises of a crowd?

[Anonymous No.15537666]

>>15537652
Everyone is a slave to something. Your only freedom in life is to choose your master

[Anonymous No.15537692]

>>15537666
and in that state of confusion where you wouldn't choose god to be master, and your soul's intellect to dominate your appetites and passions - instead you misidentified one of these worldly, material pleasures or some such as 'the good', wouldn't the thought of an external master who rejected your vice-masked-as-virtue to yoke you and take away these addictions be evil?

[Anonymous No.15537702]

>>15537624
so just christcuckery without christ then?

[Anonymous No.15537712]

>>15537702
there are some souls that don't possess as much memory as others, anon. slavery is good for those who would be slaves to far more damaging masters

[Anonymous No.15537724]

>>15537692
I mean yes, from that perspective. But why do you assume an external master knows best whats good for you instead of yourself?

[Anonymous No.15537731]

>>15537626
this is not the reason

[Anonymous No.15537733]

>>15537724
we're talking in hypotheticals. if a master is governed by the reason you lack, and orders his life in a far greater way, he can give order also to the chaos that defines you. anyway, the point was that just asking someone if they want to be something is not defining what is morally right. pure liberal retardation. consent, choice =/= the good

[Anonymous No.15537741]

Create a maxim:
>I will own slaves
Is it universalisable?
>No, a world in which everyone owned slaves would be impossible to imagine, since the institution of slavery relies on some people (ie. the slaves) not owning slaves.
Therefore, the maxim results in a contradiction in conception and we have a perfect duty not to follow it.

[Anonymous No.15537742]

>>15537733
consent in the sense of ignorant contentment in shadow*

true consent (knowing what is good and thereby affirming it) is necessary

[Anonymous No.15537744]

>>15537741
everyone on the planet is a slave to something

[Anonymous No.15537753]

>>15537733
>choice =/= the good

True, but forced slavery will always be bad in the long term, even if it yields positive results in the short term

[Anonymous No.15537763]

>>15537624
>If slavery was actually defined as something else, it wouldn't be bad
>Ergo, slavery isn't bad!

[Anonymous No.15537764]

>>15537574
It's not wrong. A bunch of random people sitting in a room coming up with "muh human rights" and all these other maxims doesn't mean anything.

[Anonymous No.15537768]

>>15537744
OP's question was about the institution of slavery -- humans owning other humans.

[Anonymous No.15537769]

>>15537741
kant's moral philosophy has been so thoroughly refuted that i'm surprised people still use it. read hegel

[Anonymous No.15537773]

>>15537763
slavery is being beholden to an outside entity to the degree where you have no freedom. slavery can be good for some, your reddit maxim establishes nothing

[Anonymous No.15537775]

I don't get how so many people on here believe that objective morality is at all possible without a god.

[Anonymous No.15537778]

>>15537741
Why says it has to be universal?

[Anonymous No.15537779]

>>15537775
most philosophers do

[Anonymous No.15537783]

>>15537773
that being said the point is if you were a slave (who is already beholden to dangerous vices) to a virtuous, holy master, it wouldn't really be slavery but a liberation via ignition of your long diminished Reason.

[Anonymous No.15537791]

>>15537775
im a platonic pagan, and yes materialism, atheism and nihilism are an absence of belief that have no room in philosophy. they are sophistic schools of shadow trickery and emptiness

[Anonymous No.15537796]

>>15537791
You have to be 18 to post here

[Anonymous No.15537797]

>>15537775
>the only reason I don’t rape and murder is because God will punish me, not because I genuinely think its wrong
Wow, Christfags are fucking psychopaths. Atheists must be incredibly more moral people since they don’t need the threat of eternal hotbox to not rape and kill.

[Anonymous No.15537803]

>>15537796
lol butthurt

[Anonymous No.15537813]

>>15537797
I'm not even religious.

You don't seem to know what "objective" means.

[Anonymous No.15537825]

>>15537803
>platonic pagan
Yeah that’s something adults are

[Anonymous No.15537841]

>>15537825
ok christard

[Anonymous No.15537854]

>>15537825
Not him, but platonism is a legitimate and noble point of view.

What are you? Define yourself so that we may compare the school to which you belong with the school of the platonists.

Or are you afraid to define yourself?

[Anonymous No.15537863]

>>15537854
>*the only point of view
simple as.

[Anonymous No.15537868]

Get a bad feeling in my tum-tum when I think about it. That's why.

[Anonymous No.15537873]

>>15537744
That's so general as to be an empty statement.

[Anonymous No.15537876]

>>15537854
I'm a romantic

[Anonymous No.15537943]

>>15537854
>are you afraid to define yourself
No, I’m just not a fairy faggot larper who needs to slap terms to themselves to have an identity. I’m a man. That’s all I want to be

[Anonymous No.15537949]

>>15537943
Dangerously based, sir

[Anonymous No.15537970]

>>15537943
Your phone’s ringing anon

[Anonymous No.15537978]

>>15537797
One doesn't do such things because God tells them, and so they grow a genuine disliking towards those things. The other doesn't do such things because their immediate society tells them, and so they grow a genuine disliking towards those things. You are more similar to those who you think differ from you, both of you reached the same conclusion but through different roads.

[Anonymous No.15538135]

>>15537773
The OP asked why slavery was bad. To answer his question, we have to analyse the institution of slavery (ie. the institution of humans owning and having absolute power over other humans), not pick out individual unrealistic cases where slavery might be permissible.

[Anonymous No.15538177]

>>15537594
made you look

[Anonymous No.15538202]

>>15537574
It’s not. Read Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.15538221]

Slavery is better than wage-slavery. It would be preferable. Slaves are taken care of, fed clothed and sheltered. Owners have an incentive to see you healthy. Slavery was such a good intuition that many people in Greece and early Rome voluntarily entered slavery. Slavery bad = NPC cope. People are saying w-well at least I'm not a slave. This is why the school system also spends so much damn time harping in the perils of slavery so people are brainwashed to think they have better lives than slaves.

[Anonymous No.15538388]

>Slavery is better than wage-slavery. It would be preferable. Slaves are taken care of, fed clothed and sheltered. Owners have an incentive to see you healthy. Slavery was such a good intuition that many people in Greece and early Rome voluntarily entered slavery. Slavery bad = NPC cope. People are saying w-well at least I'm not a slave. This is why the school system also spends so much damn time harping in the perils of slavery so people are brainwashed to think they have better lives than slaves.

[Anonymous No.15538396]

>>15538388
>chattel slavery is the only kind of slavery
American education, everyone. Plus that nigger should have behaved if you didn’t want whipped

[Anonymous No.15538444]

>>15537624
You seem to have mistaken slavery with being gay

[Anonymous No.15538488]

>>15537574
slavery is only wrong when it is us who impose it. the holy text preaches two items of this: 1) we must be slaves to god; and 2) no man can serve two masters. to demand another to address you as their master is to obstruct their service to god, and is as immoral as it would be to bar the doors to the church

[Anonymous No.15538499]

>>15538396
>>chattel slavery is the only kind of slavery
>American education, everyone. Plus that nigger should have behaved if you didn’t want whipped

[Anonymous No.15538527]

>>15537574
it wasn't because they are not people so moral considerations involving people do not apply
except the irish, enslaving them was wrong (but only because they are people)

[Anonymous No.15538544]

It depends on the way slavery is carried out. If your master treats you kindly, lets you live decently and gives you a certain amount of freedom then yes, you're still a slave but that's social structure, something that is part of the natural order. I think having a family who specifically exists to serve another family is not such a bad thing, the master lives with his servants since early childhood and treats them as almost family, the servant knows his path is set and he won't have to worry about his family's future, this assumes everyone's a decent human being and willing to accept their fate though. But anyway, compared to working 30 years for a company who could fire you at any moment, I don't think it's that bad.