Shila

-> @3RU7AL

maybe, sometimes, but you can't see anyone's level of sincerity

There is no sincerity regarding a lie.

I keep asking two questions:

1) Do you believe in the existence of an external reality?

2) Do you believe you are conscious?

--> @Tarik

perhaps, but you have no way of knowing that

I know a conflicting argument when I see one.

maybe, sometimes, but you can't see anyone's level of sincerity

--> @Shila

Firstly, we must resolve the dilemma.

Was or was not Abraham as high as a kite?

-->@Shila

Yep, I wouldn't disagree

1 + 1 = 2

is a tautology

because it is true by definition

i could just as easily say something like

BREGRU + SENDROK = KRENDO

and this could also be considered true by definition

--> @Shila @Vici

Shila

Rocking Lady

Vici

Conquer Focused

--> @Vici

Who are "they"?

Without "they", there would be anarchy.

Society would be a shithole without "they".

Yet we continually criticize "they".

If you could do better than "they" can, then get up of your moaning backside and become one of "they".

After all, "they" are all basically human. Though perhaps somewhat cleverer than you.

Just a thought based upon an observation.

its bs. there are only two. I don't get why people want 52 genders its so dumb they defend it by saying "well it helps trans people" well actually NO because the trans issue is a different thing, I still allow trans people to do their thing if there are only 2 genders. 

two questions 

who would win? If we take the best debaters (not the noob snipers like orosadmi), and put them against the best of ddo, which would win? Which has higher quality minds? 

second, why don't some of the DDO people call back to this cite the OG's?? I know a lot of people here have contact through discord and google messengers, so to actually make this ddo vs dart thing real, we can actually start a face off of this sort if we call them back. it will 1. bring a bunch of activity and also be a huge event. 

--> @Shila

Double_R wrote: Because objectivity means not subject to opinion. So everyone sharing the same opinion is irrelevant [to the determination of how "objective" it might or might not be]. Post# 188.

--> @Shila

The crucifixion is justified and true knowledge.

do you also accept the visitation of the angel moroni in the book of mormon ?

is moroni "justified & true" knowledge ?

all people vaccinated have a raise in spike protein and they are more likely to die

-> @Shila

300 years of slavery and it took a civil war to abolish it where over 700,000 Americans died.

Racism is hardwired in the American DNA.

Black Americans are 3.23 times more likely than white Americans to be killed by police, according to a new study by researchers from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The researchers examined 5,494 police-related deaths in the U.S. between 2013 and 2017. Rates of deadly police encounters were higher in the West and South than in the Midwest and Northeast, according to the study. Racial disparities in killings by police varied widely across the country, with some metropolitan areas showing very high differences between treatment by race. Black Chicagoans, for example, were found to be over 650% more likely to be killed by police than white Chicagoans.

It is 264 years of slavery, not 300; and roughly 620,000 died during the civil war, not 700k. You need to scale back on the over exaggerations here. 

Racism is a part of the human experience, and it is a learned trait, it's not genetic. 

Cops are 19x more likely to be shot and killed by an armed black man than that insignificant 3.2x blacks being shot (and not always necessarily killed) by cops. 

Black Chicagoans commit the most intraracial violence and crime, so yeah, odds are they will be shot more than white Chicagoans. That's just common sense. Cops go where the crime is, not where it is not. And most the crime (especially violent person crimes) is in black communities.

mike tyson his the best!

2 07:34AM

--> @Vici

Mutually Assured Destruction  isn't even real anymore

To some degree true, yet, your not aware of what still exists and why people smarter  than you and me --- in the know--- than you are still concerned, and for good reasons, tha, you are not or aware of, or,  just your ego based denial of self-evident truths. Your probably another Trumpet cultist  --Jan 6 rioters self guided tour of capitol building ----.  

..." At doom’s doorstep:

It is 100 seconds to midnight.....2022 Doomsday Clock Statement

Science and Security Board....Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Editor, John Mecklin"....

https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/  

--> @Shila

So the Ukraine war is exciting and good? Did you really examine your claim?

--> @Shila

Because objectivity means not subject to opinion. So everyone sharing the same opinion is irrelevant.

Are you saying when people agree and share the same opinion they become irrelevant?

Please explain how you came to this understanding of what I said

--> @SkepticalOne

Do they? Can you give examples of 'unjustified' knowledge?

can you perhaps provide an example of "justified & true" knowledge ?

So far, no correct answers :)

--> @Vici

The question of Gods existence is something that’s never going to be resolved. If the God that exists is a personal God who chooses not to reveal Himself and end the question once and for all why would we assume that our puny minds could ever override this divine decision. The way I view it the world is filled with hints or “Easter eggs” about God but never enough to definitively answer the question. That’s the point of faith which wouldn’t be worth very much if we could prove God existed with a syllogism 

Every mind is unique. I’ve always believed in God, just more or less strongly depending on the time, but in the last few years I’ve become much more religious and confident that God exists. But I know pretty much for a fact that the train of thought that led me to that conclusion wouldn’t be convincing to a lot of people. Not because it’s stupid but because I’m my own person. If a person opens themselves to God He will come in the way that makes the most sense to them. I guess some people might find God through a syllogism or something but not very many. No disrespect but youre pretty much wasting your time and would make more progress winning people over to faith by being a positive influence in your community, helping people, basically living your faith than poasting online

--> @Shila

Nope a smartphone is indicative of material evolution.

Christianity was a phase within human intellectual evolution.

Christians owning smartphones is perhaps indicative of inevitability.

And nihilism as a philosophical concept is already out there for all to partake of. Though the instinctive reality of the species, dictates that meaning tends to be something we are all programmed with.

The exercise of assessing nihilistic data and the development of actual physiological nihilism are two different issues. Though that is not to say that the human condition could not one day be reprogrammed.

Currently a smartphone is just another data transfer system.

The Genesis narrative is about the genesis of consciousness, the birth of something new, it is a new beginning that represents a new life, with new potential and new opportunities to move beyond all previous limitations and constraints, and along with that new life come the deepest truths of human essence.  It is therefore a necessary preface to the Bible that introduces the birth of “free will” and sets an explanatory stage for exploring its attendant consequences and associated moral responsibility.

Is entropy inherently evil?

Discuss.

--> @Shila

Christians sing of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan, just as nature would sing.

What help would you give, given that if they sin, they profit?

Any help would likely harm them more than any good from no longer sinning or competing as evolution would call it.

Regards

DL

-> @Shila

I mean, if you think voting is going to change anything, then you already picked a loser

If there exists... non-material planes of being or levels of consciousness that everyone can experience, the highest of these being the spiritual plane......then how to define these terms and concepts?

1}  " non-material planes of being" to me, means that which is beyond occupied space --- physical reality{ Spirit-2 }, Gravity{ Spirit-3 } and Dark Energy Spirit-4 } ---, and that leaves only two possibilities for defining ' beyond the material plane ‘;

......1a}  the macro-infinite truly non-occupied space, that embraces our finite, occupied space Universe, and/or,

.......1b} Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego i.e. that which exists beyond our finite, occupied space  Universe and the truly non-occupied space, that, again exists outside/beyond/Meta our finite occupied space Universe.

So with the above in consideration, ' non-material ' to me, would mean Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego, that, I also label as Spirit-1. However, the word ' beings ' is included in that statement of belief. Traditionally/customarily we think of ' beings ' ex human beings, as an occupied spac  e.

This latter means we need to make an adjustment to our  defining of the word ' material '. So an alternate to the above conundrum caused by the word ' beings ',  I would propose that ' material ' means our physical reality { Spirit-2 }, and what is beyond that occupied space of quantised and quantified physical reality  is the non-quantised and non-quantified, Spirit-3, occupied space of Gravity{ mass-attraction/contraction }, and Spirit-4, Dark Energy { expansive acceleration aka cosmological constant }.

So then we come to the last part of the statement of belief, '  highest plane of these being the spiritual plane '.  Above I lay out my belief of four primary kinds of Spirit { 1, 2 3 and 4 }.  Since Spirit-1 Meta-space, is not a cartesian, 2D area { plane } as in XY part of a 3D { XYZ } volumetric occupied space, I would have to say the highest plane is Spirit-3, Gravity { mass-attraction/contraction }.

The above is simplest way I know to explain the statement of belief  ' the highest ', however, if any were to delve deeper in to my cosmological scenarios, Gravity is the outer peak of encoded consciousness, and it is intimately related to the inner peak of encoded consciousness as Dark Energy.  Between the outer and inner is our  quantise-able and quantifiable physical reality consciousness. ( * * ).

My simple iconic and 2ndary symbolism  for these three is based on a 3D torus and this is the 2D bisection, as follows. ......space(>*<) i  (>*<)space....., wherein, the italicised i is Meta-space ego, that, exists outside/beyond the occupied space of Gravity (  ), Dark Energy )( and the sine-wave associated physical reality /\/\/\/ that is inbetween Gravity and Dark Energy, and actually a resultant of the invaginations { >< } from the outer peaks and inner peaks  (>*<)(>*<) that in its most complex evolution is that of bilateral human consciousness { * * } with access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego.

Einstein talked about how Gravity could be made to be  contractive or expansive, so Einstein inserted into his general relativity,  this mathematical factor he called the cosmological constant { expanding Universe }. Then later said it was greatest blunder of his life. Then along came Hubble who observed an expanding Universe, and then in 90's cosmologist observed the accelerating expansion of Universe and inserted a name for this phenomena, Dark Energy.

-> @Tarik

How so? Care to “substantiate this position”.

Because objectivity means not subject to opinion. So everyone sharing the same opinion is irrelevant.

--> @Shila

For sure, religion was one aspect of intellectual development. 

Inevitable really, when searching for answers in the absence of more complex scientific understanding.

Nope. Ongoing religion embraces ongoing material development.

I bet that most young Christians own a smartphone, for example.

Meaning is what we attribute to our existence, irrespective of a pointless Universal outcome.

Very few people are absolute nihilists.

--> @Double_R

The weather is what it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it.

And Morality is what it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it.

And once you’ve done that, explain how getting into heaven is an objective basis for morality.

Because everybody loves heaven.

--> @Sidewalker

if it is not your position that an external realm doesn't exist, then it is your position that an external realm does exist (don't bother to say you didn't say that, simple logic applies)

That’s not how logic works.

You’re confusing the actual with the question of what one believes regarding the actual.

An external realm either exists or it does not exist. There are no other options.

I do not need to take a position on whether it does or does not exist. I can simply say “I don’t know”, and reject either claim as irresolvable since we have no access to such a realm or any product of it if something such as it were to exist.

A simpler way to think of it; a man in Texas has been accused of beating his wife. Do you believe he did it, or do you believe he didn’t do it?

If you are anything resembling a rational person, your response to this is something to the effect of ‘neither, because I do not have the information needed to make such an assessment’

This is the same thing.

I'm fully aware of the articles of faith for your fundamentalist atheism. Perhaps your scholarship could include using a dictionary;

Faith:

2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof:

"To know a person's religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance." - Eric Hoffer

This has absolutely nothing to do with anything a I just said.

--> @Shila

polytheist-Witch: That you're a liar and pussy

--> @Shila

The oligarchs in Russia operate almost the same as American Oligarchs. Whoever is in charge answers to the Oligarchs in both cases.

--> @Avery

Well, in the brief times I’ve been there, you can see older folks trying to sell things on the street. Evidently, when taken in the context of the high cost of living there, Singapore’s version of Social Security isn’t enough to get by, and most citizens don’t financially plan for retirement properly.

Here’s one of several articles:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/singapores-retirement-system-worth-studying/

--> @ADreamOfLiberty

For decades the deep state treated Russia like a geopolitical enemy without the excuse of ideological differences and I very much doubt this invasion would have happened in any other case.

This is an important point which suggests there is no guarantee Russia will change its policy course even if it changed leaders. In fact, there is a sizable contingent in Russia from the loyal hardliners that claim Putin is being too soft and not as committed. Removing Putin could have very unexpected consequences.

I’m somewhat confused. There are two types of spending bills. There’s Democratic bills that would be good to pass at some opportune time (e.g., the infrastructure bill). Those, I fully support. And there’s bills which don’t really make major productive investments, whose main goal is to stimulate the economy. That was the first big spending bill in 2021, and I think $1.9 trillion was way too big.

Passing a trillion dollar stimulus bill in 2016–2019 would have been stupid, because the economy didn’t need stimulus. In 2020, while Trump was president, they did pass a stimulus bill, and it was great. In 2021, the economy didn’t need a stimulus bill of that size -- they should’ve gone with Summers’s $450 billion recommendation.

There are some “big bills” that Democrats should find opportune times to pass. This was not one of them -- it wasn’t a bill on the Democratic agenda for a while, it was explicitly aimed at combating the COVID-induced recession. The issue wasn’t the timing of the bill; the issue was the bill itself. When should the government have spent $1.9 trillion on stimulus? I’d say never, because there wasn’t a $1.9 trillion output gap.

--> @Shila

It is clear from the Canadian study more black teachers are needed because black students stay in school longer and get better grades. 

does this hold true for OTHER skin-tones ?

Polytheist-Witch: I don't know if they have how many seasons they're going to do planned out  better like beginning to ending then they did with the original series. I'm not sure how much ground they're actually trying to cover. But things are starting to move a little quicker and we're only on episode 4

--> @oromagi

The West needs to be ready for Putin's end and start preparing irresistible incentives for a post-Putin Russia to become more democratic, open for immigration and ideally, itself a member of NATO.

Well we're finally on the same page about something.... as long as by "democratic" you don't mean almost no election integrity + enormous tax burdens and regulation.

However some historical context for this comment might be nice, Russia did make overtures at being part of the NATO club after the wall fell. The military industrial complex (i.e. the deep state) had no interest in removing one of their excuses to collect stolen wealth and they shut that down.

For decades the deep state treated Russia like a geopolitical enemy without the excuse of ideological differences and I very much doubt this invasion would have happened in any other case.

--> @Shila

#67

Excellent post from you there shila. Credit where it's due and all that.

Not sure why you would say that. I simply enjoy reading and studying theological matter.

--> @Double_R

Yeah, like I said, I disagree with it. The existence of a transcendent realm is a matter of faith, you have faith that it doesn’t exist, and I’ll add that you are very dogmatic about your faith.

I never claimed an external realm doesn't exist nor is that my position. You made that up so that you could claim my beliefs are just as irrational as yours.

If you read carefully, you will note that it says "transcendent realm", but since you are on the subject, if it is not your position that an external realm doesn't exist, then it is your position that an external realm does exist (don't bother to say you didn't say that, simple logic applies), so with that assertion you have the burden of proof, and since you cannot prove it, your beliefs are irrational.  

Yes, you did.  That puerile burden of proof game you play isn’t valid, it demonstrates that you do not understand logic.  “You have the burden of proof so I’m right” isn’t a logical argument. 

I never made that argument. You’re once again, having a conversation in your head.

The burden of proof is a very basic philosophic principal rooted in skepticism. It’s not just a matter of external validation, far more importantly, it’s about internal validation. If you believe something you should have a good reason (aka evidence) for it. Without such reason, to continue to hold the belief is by definition irrational.

External validation here is simply the test of whether you actually have good reason, which is why those who aren’t interested in filtering out irrational beliefs hate talking about it.

So no, this has nothing to do with “winning” (a remarkably childish interpretation). Accepting the burden of proof as a valid principal governing acceptable thought is a prerequisite for having a rational dialog. So when you disregard it you show that you are not interested in that, at which point there is no reason to discuss anything with you.

I'm fully aware of the articles of faith for your fundamentalist atheism. Perhaps your scholarship could include using a dictionary;

Faith:

2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof:

"To know a person's religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance." - Eric Hoffer

--> @Stephen

Species evolution is a small chunk of the bigger picture of material evolution.

Material evolution and our place therein, is what interests me more.

Though Darwin did a great job of explaining the processes of physical adaptation and development.

I would suggest that the "giant leap" came with the rapid development of intellectual ability.

The ingenuity to outsmart our animal competitors and migrate, survive and proliferate in varying climes.

So, in terms of evolution, intellect allowed us to adapt to the natural world comparatively quickly.

When compared to the physical development of the brain and sensory functions for example.

Religion was just a part of intellectual development, from which we have moved on. Though old ideas are recorded and therefore will inevitably persist.

And of course, what moves us on is our expanding intellect, allowing us to facilitate an exponential rate of material development into a technological era.

Indeed, hence why I included heaven as a part of my diatribe.

Given the metaphorical nature of language and the history of the Bible, I have to wonder where the idea that there could be any such thing as a “literal translation” start anyway?

The Bible is a book that includes history and prophecy, poetry and love songs, allegories and parables, none of which is conducive to any kind of literal translation. The information in the Old Testament was passed down verbally through many generations before it was finally written down in Hebrew and Aramaic, not exactly the most precise way to transmit information. Then, four hundred years after the Old Testament the New Testament began and it was written is Koine Greek. Until the invention of the printing press, each written copy had to be transcribed by hand, which we all know is a very inaccurate process.  For the oldest books of the Bible this went on for over 3,000 years, every single copy was transcribed by hand for generations and generations, and it started with information that had been handed down through the generations verbally. The language journey was roughly, verbal transmission in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic, initially written down in Koine Greek and Aramaic, then translated into Latin, then German, and finally English.

As an originative religious text, the narrative is codified memory as opposed to historical record, its intent was to “image” reality, and “relate” the individual to the whole, to help the individual understand where they fit it. It was never intended to be read literally as a historical record.

--> @Shila

And you’re an idiot for believing that since you NEVER SERVED!!!! Uneducated moron!!!