3RU7AL

the question is, WHY DID THE TRUPPIES STORM THE CASTLE?

the answer is, BECAUSE THEY LACK FAITH IN THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM.

the answer is because they believe there was widespread fraud and that the election was illegitimate. They believe that because trump and groups like fox and news max say it constantly even though it is all lies. 

indicates that you are [EITHER] unable [OR UNWILLING] to articulate a cogent response to it.

Apes demonstrate (social) moral behavior.

Perhaps I should’ve been more clear, I was specifically speaking in regards to human beings.

OBJECTS ARE EMPIRICALLY DEMONSTRABLE.

I’m not disputing what your saying I just want you to be more specific, what are empirically demonstrable things?

because to claim a Reality that we originated from "unknowable" is rather stupid.

If a Deist accepts or interprets our universe as a product of intelligence then the Deist fits into the only other one of two categories.

The costs and risk I mentioned were more than a mere inconvenience. Consider them and consider whether or not it's worth it.

Maybe Trump could be locked in a bunker with Melania?

No I’m arguing that moral belief is religious belief.

And what are concrete and demonstrable things?

ATHEISM is NOT a belief.

Yes, it is. That is a claim.

The human brain is empirically demonstrable.

The human mind is merely apparent.

Hate to steal your line, but that was well stated

I’m not convinced that justice is important enough to outweigh the costs and risks.

this topic is about the insurrection at the capitol and whether trump should be punished for it. That relates to trump's fraud claims. It does not relate to whatever other crap you feel like brining up.

ok sure, you should also be proud of where you came from

And 3RU7AL wasn't talking specifically about religion, they simply were using a well known turn of phrase to explain differences between people.

What’s the point of that? Unless I implied people are all the same which I didn’t.

yes because now its your turn to conti nue the great things

When it is defined as the opposite of "subjective", it can be objective.

If the bombs were dropped as a demonstration of their capability, why were they not targeted on some uninhabited island off the Japanese coast or something?

And if you cannot remember the protests and riots at that time, then your memory is intentionally selective. 

that isn't true. You said it was because of lack of faith. I responded specifically referring to the fraud claims trump was making. You then went on your tangent about unrelated stuff. 

By rationally thinking that, given that conditions are not likely to cause a life-ending experience, the risk of smaller-scale injury may be exceeded by the thrill of accomplishment, even for selfish motivation. one may be motivated by something that appears irrational, but there is rational thinking in comparing risk/reward.

you dont take credit, you take pride

HOLACRACY

First, wouldn't this necessitate that everyone who participates in this system to (willingly)  subscribe to some code or principles?

Second, how is compensation determined in Holocracy? Is pay equally distributed? Is pay subject to referendums? If there are no "managers," with whom do workers negotiate?

Third, how is this different from other theories of the firm where management is simply decentralized?

River water is a good example.

Do upstream farmers "own" the river?

If upstream farmers divert the flow of the river to irrigate their crops and thus deprive downstream farmers of adequate water for their crops, is it "stealing"?

If upstream factories dump chemical waste into the water making it dangerous to plants and animals downstream, is that "vandalism"?

Who is the "owner"?

What would be your proposed solution or mechanism which regulates the use of river water so no farmer in proximity will be deprived of adequate water?

c : of, relating to, or being in the service of the community or nation

The stakeholder doesn't have to be an individual. It can be a company, foundation, hedge funds, etc.

Who does the State rent from?

No one.

Who does the State rent to?

Everyone else.

Not if it is willed otherwise. Mind over not just matter, but feelings, as will. In fact, the response to any feeling is: "The secret is not minding." Thus, the ability of some to walk over burning coals.

It's important to clearly distinguish QUANTA from QUALIA.

I've never understood that terminology. 

Certain people matter to certain people for certain reasons.

What exactly was it that he stated? I'm curious because it was completely irrelevant to my topic. 

Here though, in this topic I would define God as Creator, as in the cause of our existence. 

And "subjective" still does not mean "non-existent".

it means you have pride of your ancestors

If a thought process is measurable, how abstract can it be? True, we have not yet developed the tech to measure what a person is thinking, but in very broad stroakes, but, according to MIT, that the person is actively thinking at all is measurable.

Do you segregate the concepts of emotion and reasoning? I disagree that we are exclusively emotional creatures.

Yes, the Creator was Bumba.  According to the Boshongo people of central Africa, in the beginning, there was only darkness, water, and the great god Bumba. One day Bumba, in pain from a stomach ache, vomited up the sun. The sun dried up some of the water, leaving land. Still in pain, Bumba vomited up the moon, the stars, and then some animals. The leopard, the crocodile, the turtle, and finally, man.

Deist fits in to one out of the two propositions, either God created the universe or God did not. One is called Theism and the other materialism.