Most active channels

Most discussed users

Most supported premises

Cannibalism is inherently wrong.

"inherently wrong" implies a reason beyond health concerns. If human meat could be guaranteed safe to the consumer, would cannibalism then become acceptable?
3 supporter.

The universe is a simulation.

This seems to imply machinery to effect the simulation beyond the scope of the "Universe" being simulated. Where exactly is this machinery if not in the Universe?
2 supporter.

argüman is a cool platforme

The List View does give you what you seem to be asking for.
2 supporter.

The universe is a simulation.

Its being in principle, fathomable to you and I is material to our ability to hold the original contention that the Universe is a Simulation. Otherwise there would be no meaning to that contention, such as with the following: "A thing which can never be understood has some indescribable property."
1 supporter.

There should be inbuilt definitions for logical fallacies in arguman

In order to improve an argument after a reported fallacy, we need better tools to determine whether a fallacy report is just.
1 supporter.

Cannibalism is inherently wrong.

Surely the opposite. Whether you agree or disagree with the premise, calling something "inherently wrong" or abominable is absolutism, not relativism. i.e. there can be no relative circumstances where cannibalism may be considered acceptable.
1 supporter.