eXeCuToR vs Denminator — Everything about everything.

Agilist

18 years ago

Auto-translated

PLEASE, NO ONE BUT THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE DEBATE SHOULD POST ANYTHING HERE!
Topic: Does everyone have their price?
eXeCuToR is trying to prove that not everyone has a price.
Denminator is trying to prove that everyone has a price.
Please behave respectfully, as this is just a game :).

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Well, the question is a bit unclear. Is it about proving that everyone can be bought, or that everyone is worth something? We decided to prove the latter. So, I need to prove that not everyone is worth anything. Okay. Let's take a simple example – a homeless person who has fallen into alcoholism and drug addiction and is willing to do anything for a bottle. Is such a person worth anything? Damn)) It turns out that I need to prove the first assumption... Okay) But I won't delete the first thought I expressed. Let it stay. Not everyone can be bought. I think we shouldn't only consider the case with a large sum of money. We can also pay attention to things other than material possessions. For example, let's remember Matrosov. He threw himself on the embrasure. Although he could have stayed alive. This is also a kind of moment... But he wasn't bribed. And he committed an act to his own detriment.

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Okay, Agilist just explained to me that I need to prove that any person can be bought.

A homeless person who has fallen into alcoholism and drug addiction and is willing to do anything for a bottle. Is such a person worth anything?

Yes, I don't argue, the person has fallen so low, but it cannot be said that he is worth nothing. Every person has a price. Yes, we sometimes don't notice it. Let's take a simple example: You get a job, you choose it, that is, you automatically try to sell yourself at the highest price. A bottle of vodka is the price for a homeless person.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

This is the price at which he can be bought. He himself isn't even worth that bottle, because he can't earn it, but instead collects the sum through begging and scavenging. And the price for which he can be bought is insignificant. He can be bought with anything. But there are people who have everything. They don't need anything. It's very difficult to deal with such people. Take, for example, those hermits... On the one hand, these are people who have rejected all the benefits. But they didn't do it because they wanted to, but because they think that this is how they will achieve something even better. This is the price at which they were bought. It seems like I'm arguing with myself? Well, yes. But hermits are one thing. What about people who sacrificed themselves for others? People who created not for money, but for others? Take, for example, Kurt Cobain. He earned a lot of money. He made a huge breakthrough in music at one time. But he didn't need that money. He lived the same way he did when he didn't have that much money – he bought things at thrift stores for a pittance, etc. Would you buy a child from almost any normal mother?

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

This is the price at which he can be bought. He himself isn't even worth that bottle, because he can't earn it, but instead collects money through begging and scavenging. And the price for which he can be bought is quite insignificant. He can be bought with anything.

Exactly, that's what I was saying in the first reply.

Would you buy a child from almost any normal mother?

The question is: Every person has a price. But it's not said how he will sell himself. Let's consider the case with a mother. A child is not a very good example. Mothers are different, and their behavior is different. For example, a mother needs money to support her child. The question is: Where to get it? Of course, by working. As I already said in the first point, we "sold" ourselves and will continue to "sell" ourselves.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Well, no... That's not quite it. People are working, yes. But they're more selling their labor than themselves. This is generally accepted and therefore I don't think it's worth discussing a specific instance of work... We can, of course, discuss it, but it doesn't seem very representative to me. And about the mother... Yes, you need money to support a child. But it's not that you need a child in order to have money. A proper mother won't be forced to sell her child. The maternal instinct is too strong in her. A person who has all the material possessions won't be forced to betray loved ones, because when they have material wealth, all that's left for them is to receive moral benefits, and if they sell themselves, they will lose at least their self-esteem, and possibly even the esteem of others, which is far more important to them at this moment than money.

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

But rather, they are selling their labor, not themselves.

I agree, but let's consider whether labor can generate income, or whether a person can without labor. Only together can they. He is selling his labor, the experience of many years, but by working, he is selling not only his labor but also himself. Let's look at an example: A surgeon performs serious operations. This is hard work. Then, he accidentally kills a patient. The doctor is responsible for his patients not only to them but also to the state. He receives money. The state pays him for his labor.

STATE<>WORKER

Next, an example of "selling." I put the word "selling" in quotation marks for a reason. We "buy" friends, but it doesn't necessarily involve money. It can be charm, manners, attitude – a kind of currency. The way one approaches a person is their own kind of price.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

It's different with friends... It's more like a mutual exchange, because they buy our services just as we buy theirs. As for work... Well, you could say that's true. Yes, they buy our services. But there are people who don't work and still live comfortably. Foresters, for example, are not state employees. Furthermore, I repeat – selling yourself and selling your labor are two different things. This is a generally accepted concept. If you don't work, you're selling yourself to laziness, but if you do work, you're adhering to generally accepted labor and moral standards.

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

It’s more like a mutual exchange.

But it’s still a purchase.

If you’re not working, you’re selling your laziness.

The word “selling” appears again.

Another example. We were choosing the President of the Russian Federation. There were many candidates – these are the “products,” and we are the “buyers.” We base our decision on our internal feelings and opinions. They offer us a lot, but we make one single choice. Votes are the “money.” We are “buying” not just the work of a person, but the person themselves, who will lead us.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

And yet, it still buys power over us. But is it possible to buy a person in such a way that they don't sell themselves to you in return? Is it possible with everyone?

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Nevertheless, he still buys power over us. But is it possible to buy a person in such a way that they don't sell themselves to him in return? Is it possible with everyone?

I understand that the debate continues. Heh-heh. Let's get back to the topic of the president. Power over us is essentially a purchase, and we ourselves pay him for it.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Yes. And we bought it because now he is obliged to listen to the will of the people (at least in theory), make decisions that will lead to a better outcome, and so on. Such power also entails responsibilities. So, in a way, we bought him.

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Yes. And we bought him because now he is obliged to listen to the will of the people (at least in theory), make decisions that will lead to the best outcome, and so on. Such power also entails responsibilities. So, in this sense, we bought him.

Notice that you yourself are confirming what I am saying. We are essentially "buying" the president.

eXeCuToR

18 years ago

Auto-translated

And again. I'm talking about the fact that this is a mutual exchange, not quite buying a person, but also selling yourself to them. As I mentioned in previous posts, it is indeed possible to "buy" anyone. But the act of buying from one side... I'm not so sure.

Denminator

18 years ago

Auto-translated

The question is precisely whether everyone can be bought. Note that a reciprocal purchase is a double purchase. A purchase is a purchase everywhere.

I'm talking about a reciprocal purchase here, which isn't quite buying a person, but also selling yourself to them. This is what I was talking about in previous posts. So, indeed, everyone can be bought. But a one-sided purchase... I'm not so sure.

However, I might disagree with this. A common and well-known example is BRIBERY. Some people give bribes, others receive them; this is a suitable method. At first glance, it seems like "I have a conscience, I won't do it," but why do some deputies, who are also responsible for us, take them, effectively buying themselves?

Reading content in

Interface language

Posts from eXeCuToR vs Denminator

Statistics

Library

Users Online 11 users 1341 guests

Today's Visitors 32