Has anyone been able to rebut Bertrand Russell's famous argument In Marriage and Morals? Einstein even gave great praise to the work
>Love as a relation between men and women was ruined by the desire to make sure of the legitimacy of children.
>The psychology of adultery has been falsified by conventional morals, which assume, in monogamous countries, that attraction to one person cannot coexist with a serious affection for another. Everybody knows that this is untrue.
>Even in civilised mankind faint traces of a monogamic instinct can sometimes be perceived.
>I should not hold it desirable that either a man or a woman should enter upon the serious business of a marriage intended to lead to children without having had previous sexual experience.
>Science enables us to realise our purposes, and if our purposes are evil, the result is disaster.
>Joy of life... depends upon a certain spontaneity in regard to sex. Where sex is repressed, only work remains, and a gospel of work for work's sake never produced any work worth doing.
>Gluttony is regarded by the Catholic Church as one of the seven deadly sins, and those who practise it are placed by Dante in one of the deeper circles of hell; but it is a somewhat vague sin, since it is hard to say where a legitimate interest in food ceases and guilt begins to be incurred. Is it wicked to eat anything that is not nourishing? If so, with every salted almond we risk damnation.
Russell's father allowed Russell's mother to sleep with Russell's tutor, and Bertrand Russell grew up to be a genius and win the Nobel Peace Prize.
you can't found a civilization on cuckoldry, no one would invest in children or society.
but since Russel was an autist you can tell why he can't understand that.
>>76048254
Did you read the last sentence of the OP?
Buttrand Rustle?
No, never heard of him. I guess he wasn't very effective with his ideas, based on the available evidence.
>>76048414
He's one of the most influential Anglosphere philosophers of the 20th Century
>>76048385
no one besides the tiny minority of cucks that like being humiliated which
in which case you belong here
https://m.reddit.com/r/Cuckold/
>>76048493
Get a fucking sense of humor.
>>76048385
this thread is absolute trash, piss off.
>>76048002
bertrand russel was one of the architects of the NWO, he did studies on kids in the 1930s
>>76048002
You will never get a chance to smite all the arrogant liberal atheist commie professors and rid the world of socialism
>Religion is bad durr
>We gone get rid of it
>Replace Christ with science
Good thing science is constantly evolving and human morality is complete subjective
Should work out fine
>>76048493
Russel is just the most senior version of a stereotypical fedora-lord.
His dad was a cuck and he doesn't want to trash talk the man who gave him everything's lifestyle
Load of bullshit though you can't raise kids properly if the mother is out slutting every night they'll grow up to be weird English pedos like Bertrand Russell
>>76048636
Science would work out fine, the issue is that the left didn't replace religion with Science, they are the most Anti-science group out there.
They replaced religion with the State/government and made morality subject to law; which means that for them they only thing keeping them from making say pedophilia moral the age of consent laws. If the Government changes those then now it is right and good for a 40 year old man to fuck an 8 year old girl.
>one autistic old cuck was raised by fucked up progressive parents and believed cucking was natural
>wins nobel peace prize
>well clearly cucking is the answer
Do you realize how stupid you sound OP? sage this shit
>>76048636
>rid the world of socialism
It never goes away. As a stinky failure wise old drunk Canadian once told me:
This isn't war; this is pest control.
>>76048806
If you deny God you deny all logic and your society is destiny for failure
This is how the Jews became revolutionaries that plague every nation they inhabit
If you deny Christ or throw off his love you deny common sense and logic
Your idea that science isn't the religion is true but it never will be. Its like saying communism has never been tried before. Its simple not possible
Human nature will always corrupt it which is why God is at the top. His laws prevent us from destroying ourselves like dumb children
>>76048002
>Russell's father allowed Russell's mother to sleep with Russell's tutor
>Bertrand Russell was born on 18 May 1872
>In June 1874 Russell's mother died of diphtheria, in January 1876, his father died of bronchitis
lying cuck
>Where sex is repressed, only work remains
And here I've lived a good 95% of my life in some sort of non-existant twilight. Don't know what to feel senpai.
>>76049092
Culture requires religion, it doesn't matter what that religion is, there were great civilizations before Christ, and there will be great ones in the future.
Religion is just a tool so that the top 5% of humanity can teach the other 95% of humanity how to behave so that they don't ruin everything in their ignorance.
Right now the top 5% are teaching the 95% that the 'State' is God and that Morality = law, which by their logic means that if we repealed age of consent laws that Pedophilia would be a moral good.
We could in theory push Science and rational thought as a basis for morality; and for the top 5% who can think for themselves it would work. but the 95% cannot think rationally so they have to be told what to think and be held to that by the mailed fist of divine wrath if they deviate.
Yeah, it's a lot of bullshit.
The more sex you have with more people, the less it means to yourself and the less it is seen as an act of deep union which may be viewed as deeply intertwining your genetic heritage combining your souls until humanity either becomes extinct or finds a wormhole to take them back to the establishment of civilisation. Sex is almost like a drug you can form a tolerance to, but unlike a drug creates a cross tolerance to a very natural human feeling: romantic love.
Bertrand Russell confirmed for postmodernist extreme relativist. I'd never argue that there's only one set of correct or true moral values, but I'll always argue that within functioning societies these sets greatly intersect with each other to form common values shared regardless of your Indian heritage, east Asian, European or even African.
Chastity is a virtue whether you agree it's a worthy virtue or otherwise.
>yfw that Australian is a superior mind to Bertrand Russel
So morally, he was degenerate. He approves of single motherhood, or abortion or both. A moral vacuum essentially.
I am very surprised this guy isn't a Jew. This is textbook Jewish "intellectualism" trying to ascribe mental open or amorality to anything normal and healthy.
>>76049238
>Bertrand Russell was born on 18 May 1872 at Ravenscroft, Trellech, Monmouthshire, into an influential and liberal family of the British aristocracy.[70] His parents, Viscount and Viscountess Amberley, were radical for their times. Lord Amberley consented to his wife's affair with their children's tutor, the biologist Douglas Spalding. Both were early advocates of birth control at a time when this was considered scandalous.[71] Lord Amberley was an atheist and his atheism was evident when he asked the philosopher John Stuart Mill to act as Russell's secular godfather.[72]
>>76048414
>>76050020
THE philosopher of the 20th century
The issue with Bertrand Russel is he also spoke about logic, so if you disagree with him his followers will spam you with his dissertations on logic to prove you're wrong and he's right about virtue or society.
>>76048254
Including this next time I argue in favour of chastity.
>>76048385
Are you advocating cuckoldry for genetic/eugenic purposes? IE if Bertrand wasn't a bastard he'd be stupid? If so, could you not shift responsibility to the mother and imply it was her failure to choose an appropriate husband that caused her to adultery?
A woman's standards should include the mind and body of her man, only through both could there be a strong soul.
>>76048924
You'd find yourself more effective if you could identify which fallacy that is.
>>76048806
I honestly believe it's now the responsibility of religion to create a pro-intellectual culture, assume a cosmological God, that this God tended humans to intelligence for the purpose of self-exploration/understanding and therefore the highest form of worship becomes studying science.
Cuck atheists dismiss this as false "pragmatism."
>>76049510
There has never been a civilisation as great as the one that made education a virtue and information completely free and accessible.
No, there has never been a great civilisation before Christ and I'd argue it took almost 2000 years after Christ's birth for a great civilisation to rise.
>>76050675
Rome, Greece.
You know those old Philosophers who the early christian church mixed with the words of the Apostles to make an actual functioning religion?
yeah they did it without Christ.
>>76048002
Transcendental argument.
Science and reason are unaccounted for in a naturalist worldview, yet we should adopt these things as our guidelines?
What other morality could you expect from a serial adulterer? Usually atheists and nuwave feminists come from a position of inability to deal with proper virtuous behaviour or a rejection therefrom. This seems to be the case from Casanova to Margaret Sanger to Germaine Greer to Dawkins to Harris to Trigglypuff.
>>76048002
>nobel prize in literature
>genius
stop shitposting and go attend your wife's son
>>76051186
A decadent society of unequal education that lead to the idea that only a singular class need be educated, with the rest only following by example, in the failed idea that a person's idols can be chosen for them rather than self chosen.
In our society, those who wish to be educated are so and those who wish not at worst complain about the inherent, purely unintentional advantages of education. In fact, much media targeted at gen x and boomers is designed to shield them from the reality of the digital generation's possible intelligence.
Because there's no greater butthurt than realising how superior a younger, stronger mind is.
>>76052062
Your Idols are chosen for you; it is exceedingly rare for one to break away from what they are taught from birth.
You can give education to everyone, doesn't mean that anyone under 110 IQ can do anything useful with it.
His dad was a literal cuck and he was minimally better
what a retard
>>76052268
>IQ
Is at least 40% purely from education. Do a CE degree and watch your IQ jump 20 points, it's such a meaningless distinction relied on by the untermensch to justify their personal mentality rather than forming it via rationality and empiricism.
No, everyone should be educated even the manual labourers.
>>76052062
Of course. If a society operates properly, the newest generation should be better educated and better prepared for any challenge. A strong internal sense of morality and cohesion can exist within the community through the traditional family structure, most religions and nationalism. This has been shown through history as the most effective way to ensure our children learn from our mistakes and gain from our victories.
Those societies didn't fall because of the younger generation's "superior", "stronger" minds, they fell to invading barbarians coupled with an internal collapse in social fabric.
A strong society cannot collapse with only external enemies. If a strong invading force appears, an even stronger internal sense of community and moral guidelines rallies the population against them.
If internal elements, once held as the gold standard for how a society operates are becoming compromised, what actual defense do we have against a real threat?
Right now our morals are degrading and being relativist. The barbarians are at the gates.
The "young strong superior" minds are telling us "let them in. Also let them fuck your wives. It's only logical to do so."
See where this is going?
As an atheist I don't believe this is true. Symbols and symbolism play a powerful part of the human psyche that nothing really fulfills besides religion. Therefore, religious belief will never go away until a secular substitute accomplishes the same mental needs.
>>76053738
>Those societies didn't fall because of the younger generation's "superior", "stronger" minds, they fell to invading barbarians coupled with an internal collapse in social fabric.
Of course, whether the Greek dark age, pagan war on civilisation or the postmodernist response to the nihilism caused by failed existentialist modernism, the cause is always apparent:
Anti intellectualism.
>The "young strong superior" minds are telling us "let them in. Also let them fuck your wives. It's only logical to do so."
My stance is that the voice of our youth has been misrepresented, deliberately, by a media that is instead appealing to gen x. Gen x are the ones saying this and they feel justified by the media's portrayal of the youth as agreeing with them and even taking it further. To which gen x can say "okay sonny, I'll vote more cosmopolitan for you," thus redistributing their responsibility in a faux democratic position to represent the future generation.
I'm still reeling from crash course economics ending statement on immigration that the youth predominantly agree with it. It's abhorrent that gen x feels entitled to tell younger generations what they think and feel.
In fact, it is not so. We have been slandered and libeled.
For instance, gen x believes in affirmative action is democratic as it's applied almost strictly to junior and graduate positions under the belief that people this age agree with such pathological altruism. In fact 88% of gen y/millenials disagree with affirmative action and view it as a moral hazard (MTV 2014). Affirmative action is therefore the least democratic and the best example of intergenerational warfare.
>See where this is going?
Mate I'm only 10% disagreeing with you. You're otherwise spot on.
>Love as a relation between men and women was ruined by the desire to make sure of the legitimacy of children.
Raising children is a long term task, and long time relationships cannot stand on just mutual love, since it fades in time and is replaced by love for children, mutual respect, moral and discipline required to support the family.
Family and children is not a by-product of relation between man and woman, it's a project, life-long responsibility.
>attraction to one person cannot coexist with a serious affection for another
this may be untrue for man(polygamous), but is true for women(hypergamous, i.e. if she's attracted to another man it means she's started losing affection for the previous), and humanity decided to obey women's psyche 2000+ years ago.
>Even in civilised mankind faint traces of a monogamic instinct can sometimes be perceived.
So?
>I should not hold it desirable that either a man or a woman should enter upon the serious business of a marriage intended to lead to children without having had previous sexual experience.
that is total BS. read my first paragraph above.
>Joy of life... depends upon a certain spontaneity in regard to sex. Where sex is repressed, only work remains, and a gospel of work for work's sake never produced any work worth doing.
I'm pretty sure this guy is sexually frustrated.
