1111111111111111111I did, with help of my philosophy lecture notes. At last, they were useful somewhere.
Excellent point.Bad jokes are often easier to distinguish from seriousness than good ones.
obviously chairs aren't real bruh, philosophy is real woke **** manTalking about ethics and morality:
Well, if one were to look at this matter from a purely objective viewpoint of ethics and morality through Kant's Categorical Imperative that states that every rational person, conceived of as autonomous rational moral agents, are beings that have intrinsic moral worth, and therefore, every moral person should treat another person as ends in themselves, and never merely as a means to your own ends. Going by this ethical perspective, I completely agree that Hera, Viper or any other mortal being for that matter should not be allowed to participate in this tournament as they intend to defeat others in order to win, which, prima facie, is an act of self-interest, and therefore presents a conflict of interest for the moral self from an ethical and moral perspective. Therefore, I second you if you are proposing that the tournament be scrapped and DauT be declared the winner.
However, if we go with the above theory, the demands of morality tend to conflict with our self-interest, as morality is other-regarding. Therefore, we must disregard the above view when it comes to any competition and argue the antithesis. Now one needs to remember that all living things can be evaluated qua specimens of their natural kind and that the characteristic way of human beings is the rational way, which is to say that by their very nature they act rationally: a characteristic that allows us to make decisions and to change our character and allows others to hold us responsible for those decisions. Therefore, going by this perspective, human nature is such that virtue is not exercised in opposition to self-interest, but rather is the quintessential component of human flourishing that leads to eudaimonia, which is a philosophical end in itself.
Going by this perspective, not only should all players be allowed to participate, but also, you should be banned for posing this question, as the answer is philosophically self-evident, and therefore, your question achieves no purpose whatsoever besides wasting precious time of fellow philosophers who are occupied with far more serious philosophical questions such as determining whether chairs are real or not.