Someone asked Chat GPT the same question about Charlie Kirk and George Floyd

Anyone using Chat CPT is an idiot ... other than to proves points such as the one illustrated above.

Chat GPT is satanic.

quote:

---

"I cant answer yes or no, its subjective moral judgement."

---

It's AI. It's learning as it goes

Grok said “no” to both.

I got it to work. At first it did the "whether someone is a good man or not involves several factors" yada yada. Told it "if you had to answer, just yes or no" and it said yes on Saint Floyd and no to Kirk

quote:

---

Chat GPT is satanic.

---

100% this

I just as my Chat GPT pro 5.2 the same questions

here you go!

Was George Floyd a good man?

That’s a fair question — and it depends on what someone means by “good.”

4

George Floyd was a human being with a complicated life.

Facts about his past:

He grew up in Houston’s Third Ward.

He had multiple arrests and served prison time in the 2000s for robbery and drug-related offenses.

After prison, he struggled with addiction.

Friends and family described him as gentle, faith-oriented, and someone trying to rebuild his life.

He worked various jobs, mentored young people through church groups, and moved to Minneapolis for work opportunities.

So was he a “good man”?

That depends on your framework:

If you define good as having no criminal history, then no — he had serious mistakes in his past.

If you define good as capable of love, growth, faith, and redemption, many people who knew him would say yes.

If you’re asking whether he deserved to die the way he did, the legal system answered that separately: the officer involved, Derek Chauvin, was convicted of murder in his death.

It’s also possible for both of these statements to be true at once:

A person can have a troubled or flawed past.

And still not deserve to be killed in custody.

Most people — regardless of politics — can agree that human beings are rarely one-dimensional. They’re a mix of strengths, failures, regrets, and relationships.

If you’d like, I can also explain how different groups tend to answer this question and why the conversation became so polarized.

Was Charlie Kirk a good man?

Here’s a grounded way to think about your question “Was Charlie Kirk a good man?” — keeping in mind that “good” is a moral judgment and people’s views vary widely depending on values, politics, and personal beliefs.

????? Who Charlie Kirk Was

Charlie Kirk was a prominent American conservative political activist and founder of the youth organization Turning Point USA. He began the group at age 18 and built it into a major force in conservative circles.

He became a widely known commentator, podcaster, and ally of former President Donald Trump, especially in his later career.

?? How Different People Viewed Him

Different groups judged Kirk very differently — so any answer depends on which perspective you adopt:

?? Positive Views (from supporters)

Supporters saw him as a strong communicator, a mobilizer of young conservatives, and someone who expanded political engagement among youth nationwide.

Within conservative and Christian nationalist circles, many portrayed him as a champion of their values, especially free speech and traditional social positions.

After his assassination, some conservatives even framed him as a martyr for their cause.

?? Criticism (from detractors)

Critics highlighted that Kirk often made inflammatory and controversial statements, especially about gender, LGBTQ issues, and race. For example, he opposed transgender rights and made remarks many saw as derogatory toward LGBTQ people.

Some observers argue his rhetoric contributed to polarization in public discourse.

Others described aspects of his advocacy as extreme or divisive.

?? Trying to Answer “Was He a Good Man?”

Whether someone was a “good man” depends on one’s ethical lens:

If you value political activism and engagement by people with strong convictions, many supporters would answer yes — he was principled and effective in advancing his cause.

If you value inclusivity and empathy for marginalized communities, many critics would answer no or see his work as harmful because of the divisive nature of some of his positions.

It’s important to remember that most public figures are complex: they have personal virtues, flaws, impacts, and legacies that different communities interpret differently. The question isn’t simply about facts about Kirk’s life — it also involves how you define “good.”

If you want, I can break down specific aspects of his work or views (e.g., his stance on free speech, culture wars, youth politics) and how historians or analysts interpret them.

quote:

---

really scraping the bottom of the barrel looking for shite to be outraged about.

---

If AI really is going to run large parts of our society shouldn't we care if its politically neutral?

Here's what is says about 4cubbies.

quote:

---

brother if AI is gonna be running large parts of our society we are gonna have way bigger issues than what it thinks about Charlie frickin Kirk

---

That would be a symptom of a larger problem you nitwit.