There is another way to think about this. If someone asks you for a diamond pickaxe and says they will give you five diamonds back when they have them, would you give them one? Of course you would get a good investment if it works. But at the same time, they would just be skipping the whole mining portion anyways, something that you had actually done. So, I believe that if you would have told your friend beforehand, and possibly made a 50-50 split so both sides profit, I think he would have complied nicely.
You guys may have hit a dead end, but let's see how you pull off a poor argument on this one.
Have I ever said that I think you're logically wrong? No. Assuming that EMC cannot build up infinitely, and assuming that all the EMC and diamonds were restored when your friend came back on, then it is just like taking water from an infinite source, or punching some melon blocks. I personally think that logically speaking, you are correct.
Morally speaking, and referring to property rights, he does have the right to demand the product of his device be returned to him. Is he acting a bit immature? Yes. That however, does not override the fact that he is in the right in demanding the product of a device that HE MADE, a device on HIS property, which, if we take this even further, you should not have been on without his permission.
In my opinion, it would be easier just to give him his diamonds back, and then go activate your 16 power flowers, and let the sun's rays give you infinite diamonds.
You do realize that your IQ level has ultimately nothing to do with your intelligence right? It simply means you score higher in certain things then other people. My IQ is 82, I'm not afraid to say that, I just severely suck at math, doesn't mean I am dumb though, and with that I fully agree with the OP, except I did facepalm at this.
Back onto topic though, surprised this is still going on like a heated political debate.
Anyways, after much thought I have come to the conclusion that, no, the OP did not steal but in fact ensured that his friend would have more EMC. However! What OP should have done was inform said friend before hand so to prevent any misunderstanding. OP's friend did clearly overreact, since in the end it is still just a game after all. OP had the right intentions and reasons as to why he took those diamonds out, except it was done in such a fashion that it is deemed wrong by his friend.
OK, mea culpa. It was late, I was tired, and the combination of arrogance and ignorance that I saw set me off. I shouldn't have gotten down in the gutter with the poster I was replying to and called people morons for disagreeing with me.
I actually read the post when it was originally posted and thought it was so inane and childish that no one could take it seriously and therefore wasn't worth replying to.
To then see the OP hold this up as a piece of irrefutable logic that everyone was unable to counter pushed me over the edge into excessive and inexcusable flaming. So let me take a calmer approach to it:
Is filling bucket of water from an infinite water source someone else built stealing?
Hint: If you say yes, you're a moron.
First off, this isn't a logical argument. It's a question followed by an unrelated ad hominem argument. However, the question implies a statement, so I'll let that ride.
Is it stealing? That's a moral determination. Whose morals? Well, who do we have available? There are three choices:
The opinion of the person that took.
The opinion of the person that was taken from.
Public opinion, to which 1 and 2 contribute in small part.
OP knew 1 and 2 when he posted and was asking to be informed about 3. My guesstimate, without counting, is that there are more replies that say it's stealing, but that doesn't mean much. The responders are self-selected and may not reflect the population as a whole. Morals in this country aren't what they used to be, and never have been. Meaning they've never been up to the level we would have liked.
But getting back to theft, which one of 1, 2 and 3, above, should we give the most weight? Obviously not 1. People that take things from other people always have some rationalization as to why they were entitled to. And these rationalizations usually carry little weight with 2 or 3. I think most people would agree that you can't rely solely on the taker's opinion as to whether the taking was theft.
What about 2, then? We give 2 a little more weight because we're relying on 2 , in part, to indicate whether a theft has taken place. If 2 says, "No. I don't care if he takes it.", then no theft has occured. If 2 says yes, that's not proof (he may be mistaken or making it up), but it's cause for 3 to evaluate the situation.
Moving on to 3, public opinion. Public opinion is useless for determining facts, but public opinion plays a huge role in determining morals. Four centuries ago it was moral to burn witches. Now it isn't, because public opinion has changed. Most of our morals are picked up from those around us. That's not to say it's all learned, though. For instance, we've always had wars, and on the other hand, every major religion has some form of the golden rule. So we seem to have some built-in tendencies. However, there have been periods when war was considered good and moral, and periods when altruism was considered evil (Ayn Rand, anyone?) Most of us lean most heavily on number 3 to decide whether theft has taken place.
And what does public opinion say in this case? As I've already pointed out, we don't really know. No valid studies to determine public opinion have taken place. I'm not going to go back and read every post, but from what I can remember they all consist of someone giving their own personal opinion and implying that public opinion agrees with them.
Coming back full circle to the post I replied to, what's my problem with it? Several things:
It's in the form of "This is my opinion. No other opinion can possibly be true. Therefore you're a moron if you disagree." But zero proof of any kind is offered to support the opinion. It's presented as self-evident.
The statement carries the seeds of its own destruction. The qualifier "someone else built" implies that you recognize that there's a difference whether you built the water source or not. If it doesn't make a difference, why mention it? Doesn't mentioning it imply that the person who built it has a right to some input as to how it is used?
"If you say yes, you're a moron." Do I really have to cover what's wrong with this? You certainly jumped all over me when I replied in kind. Here's a hypothetical exchange:
Debater: "Two plus two equals four."
Cloudit: "You're a moron."
Debater: "The earth is round."
Cloudit: "You're a moron."
Debater: "I give up. You win! Your superior debate skills have defeated my poor attempts at logic. If Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were alive today they would be gathered at your feet, drinking from your fount of wisdom."
Cloudit: "You really ARE a moron. Nothing I said invalidated or even addressed what you said."
And again, I apologize for last night's post. I hope I addressed your post in a more mature manner this time, and if you still feel insulted, well, then, perhaps you should be.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to. - J. R. "Bob" Dobbs
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
2/9/2012
Posts:
288
Member Details
Omg all you had to do is not tell him the Flower Power will make more.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Help me! The evil is taking me away,
its pulling me into the darkness.
Please help me, if I go in there
I will never come back, the world
is slowly drifting away. All I can
see is the pain and sorrow in my
eyes. My tears are drying up. I'm
already gone....
3 things.
1: I'm back from vacation. Hi all.
2: Luis, if you don't have anything useful to contribute, don't post. Whether or not he stole is still undetermined, and it's only your opinion at the moment.
3:
Have I ever said that I think you're logically wrong? No. Assuming that EMC cannot build up infinitely, and assuming that all the EMC and diamonds were restored when your friend came back on, then it is just like taking water from an infinite source, or punching some melon blocks. I personally think that logically speaking, you are correct.
An argument for both sides here, the logical proof doesn't seem to mean much at this point. Nobody is willing to accept 'no harm no foul' and so we're moving into L/D moral arguments.
Morally speaking, and referring to property rights, he does have the right to demand the product of his device be returned to him. Is he acting a bit immature? Yes. That however, does not override the fact that he is in the right in demanding the product of a device that HE MADE, a device on HIS property, which, if we take this even further, you should not have been on without his permission.
Ah, the device that was his property may have been producing the diamonds, but the diamonds Doctor "Stole" don't belong to the friend. They belong to the person who made them, Doctor. They wouldn't have existed without him taking them, and therefore it's safe to say he created them in a sense. You can't steal what the other person doesn't own.
In my opinion, it would be easier just to give him his diamonds back, and then go activate your 16 power flowers, and let the sun's rays give you infinite diamonds.
Indeed it would. But I think we've moved past that point. [redacted]
Think of it this way: I have a half stack of diamonds You have a half stack of diamonds You drop all your diamonds on the floor under me, and I pick them up. You demand your diamonds back. Your diamonds, not mine. Which diamonds are yours? The first 32 I drop? The last? Every other one? Unlike IRL, in Minecraft items themselves are nothing. ANY diamond in the stack is yours, so long as the othe rhalf are mine. There is no singular ownership at all. So those diamonds you might normally consider his due to having been created could easily be counted as the uncreated diamonds.
Honestly, I believe you're fine, but if he really wants them back and he keeps throwing a fit then just toss them in lava and poof it's like it never happened
Honestly, I believe you're fine, but if he really wants them back and he keeps throwing a fit then just toss them in lava and poof it's like it never happened
Theft is theft, regardless of intent. He stole. I can not let this thread end the way it did. Absolute madness how many of you justify thieving.
Are you kidding me? You come back over half a year later to continue this dead argument? Basically all there can be said has been. Everyone has different minds and thinks of this subject differently, it also depends on the exact situation. Therefore, there is no definite answer. I should have realized that before posting this topic back in OCTOBER.
Have I ever said that I think you're logically wrong? No. Assuming that EMC cannot build up infinitely, and assuming that all the EMC and diamonds were restored when your friend came back on, then it is just like taking water from an infinite source, or punching some melon blocks. I personally think that logically speaking, you are correct.
Morally speaking, and referring to property rights, he does have the right to demand the product of his device be returned to him. Is he acting a bit immature? Yes. That however, does not override the fact that he is in the right in demanding the product of a device that HE MADE, a device on HIS property, which, if we take this even further, you should not have been on without his permission.
In my opinion, it would be easier just to give him his diamonds back, and then go activate your 16 power flowers, and let the sun's rays give you infinite diamonds.
OK, mea culpa. It was late, I was tired, and the combination of arrogance and ignorance that I saw set me off. I shouldn't have gotten down in the gutter with the poster I was replying to and called people morons for disagreeing with me.
I actually read the post when it was originally posted and thought it was so inane and childish that no one could take it seriously and therefore wasn't worth replying to.
To then see the OP hold this up as a piece of irrefutable logic that everyone was unable to counter pushed me over the edge into excessive and inexcusable flaming. So let me take a calmer approach to it:
First off, this isn't a logical argument. It's a question followed by an unrelated ad hominem argument. However, the question implies a statement, so I'll let that ride.
Is it stealing? That's a moral determination. Whose morals? Well, who do we have available? There are three choices:
- The opinion of the person that took.
- The opinion of the person that was taken from.
- Public opinion, to which 1 and 2 contribute in small part.
OP knew 1 and 2 when he posted and was asking to be informed about 3. My guesstimate, without counting, is that there are more replies that say it's stealing, but that doesn't mean much. The responders are self-selected and may not reflect the population as a whole. Morals in this country aren't what they used to be, and never have been. Meaning they've never been up to the level we would have liked.But getting back to theft, which one of 1, 2 and 3, above, should we give the most weight? Obviously not 1. People that take things from other people always have some rationalization as to why they were entitled to. And these rationalizations usually carry little weight with 2 or 3. I think most people would agree that you can't rely solely on the taker's opinion as to whether the taking was theft.
What about 2, then? We give 2 a little more weight because we're relying on 2 , in part, to indicate whether a theft has taken place. If 2 says, "No. I don't care if he takes it.", then no theft has occured. If 2 says yes, that's not proof (he may be mistaken or making it up), but it's cause for 3 to evaluate the situation.
Moving on to 3, public opinion. Public opinion is useless for determining facts, but public opinion plays a huge role in determining morals. Four centuries ago it was moral to burn witches. Now it isn't, because public opinion has changed. Most of our morals are picked up from those around us. That's not to say it's all learned, though. For instance, we've always had wars, and on the other hand, every major religion has some form of the golden rule. So we seem to have some built-in tendencies. However, there have been periods when war was considered good and moral, and periods when altruism was considered evil (Ayn Rand, anyone?) Most of us lean most heavily on number 3 to decide whether theft has taken place.
And what does public opinion say in this case? As I've already pointed out, we don't really know. No valid studies to determine public opinion have taken place. I'm not going to go back and read every post, but from what I can remember they all consist of someone giving their own personal opinion and implying that public opinion agrees with them.
Coming back full circle to the post I replied to, what's my problem with it? Several things:
- It's in the form of "This is my opinion. No other opinion can possibly be true. Therefore you're a moron if you disagree." But zero proof of any kind is offered to support the opinion. It's presented as self-evident.
- The statement carries the seeds of its own destruction. The qualifier "someone else built" implies that you recognize that there's a difference whether you built the water source or not. If it doesn't make a difference, why mention it? Doesn't mentioning it imply that the person who built it has a right to some input as to how it is used?
- "If you say yes, you're a moron." Do I really have to cover what's wrong with this? You certainly jumped all over me when I replied in kind. Here's a hypothetical exchange:
Debater: "Two plus two equals four."Cloudit: "You're a moron."
Debater: "The earth is round."
Cloudit: "You're a moron."
Debater: "I give up. You win! Your superior debate skills have defeated my poor attempts at logic. If Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were alive today they would be gathered at your feet, drinking from your fount of wisdom."
Cloudit: "You really ARE a moron. Nothing I said invalidated or even addressed what you said."
And again, I apologize for last night's post. I hope I addressed your post in a more mature manner this time, and if you still feel insulted, well, then, perhaps you should be.
1: I'm back from vacation. Hi all.
2: Luis, if you don't have anything useful to contribute, don't post. Whether or not he stole is still undetermined, and it's only your opinion at the moment.
3:
What world do you live in.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumAre you kidding me? You come back over half a year later to continue this dead argument? Basically all there can be said has been. Everyone has different minds and thinks of this subject differently, it also depends on the exact situation. Therefore, there is no definite answer. I should have realized that before posting this topic back in OCTOBER.
Proud member of spigotmc.org.