The red pill /nupol/ can't deal with:
If you support an ideology/policy/viewpoint/idea just because you think it will benefit you, you're a spiritual jew and mental nigger, and enemy of higher man. The healthy man supports what is right, regardless of perceived benefit. If you find what is right does not benefit you, YOU are what needs to change.

>>509166370 (OP)
Who decides what is right nigger?

>>509167442
Me

Or like basic reasoning and logic and stuff

>>509167442
Dumb question. That's like asking who decides at what temperature water boils.

>>509169458
Based

>>509169458
Not dumb at all (the answer to both is God).

>>509166370 (OP)

>>509170072
Chad has right opinions

>>509170015
God is not a who, God is a what.

>>509166370 (OP)
Based and naturalistic-pilled.

There are about four main arguments I see on morality in society:
- everyone deserves an equal say on what is morality and reality (collectivism, communism)
- the whole purpose is to reduce difficulty/pain (materialism, hedonism)
- only matters when it is difficult ("when the going gets tough, the tough get going", paternalism, authoritarianism)
- only the truth matters (naturalism)

Everyone gets too caught up in reasons why their version of the truth is more important, and meanwhile naturalistic monks like myself remain in the center of reality.

>>509171449
The first two need to go in the fire

>>509171449
Riffing on this, I could assemble this in this order:

hedonism -> collectivism -> authoritarianism -> naturalism

Modern liberalism is hedonism that thinks it's collectivism, which authoritarianism can rightfully beat handily. However, what used to be the political left was naturalism beating authoritarianism at its own game.

Generally speaking, these are the steps you have to get through for personal advancement as well.

>>509166370 (OP)
>If you find what is right does not benefit you, YOU are what needs to change.

Coincidentally what's right does benefit me, a lot.

>>509172355
They always do.

>>509172387
>hedonism -> collectivism -> authoritarianism -> naturalism
The reason for this order is the increasing complexity in justifying anything beyond "what is easiest", which many don't even believe is a moral at all.
Hedonism = you do things for yourself, with no consideration for others
Collectivism = you do things for wellbeing of others who have group membership, regardless of whether they are high or low on the list
Authoritarianism = you do things for wellbeing of others, but you don't necessarily allow them to have a say in it
Naturalism = You become open to using all of these methods, or none of them, if the situation requires novel thought.

In the end, it's pretty likely you're an NPC if you haven't reached naturalism.