Total posts: 1,014
Posted in:
1. If some constant in some possible Universe could be changed to create a life preventing Universe;
2. Then, any number of constants could be changed to produce infinite possible life producing Universe's.
C: There are an infinite number of possible life producing Universe's.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I also liked the music, It was just getting old by the last season
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Yeah I watched it a few years ago. The ONLY complaint is that they kept the exact same music all the way to the last season.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
He'll be DARTBard level before too long I'm sure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@gugigor
Haha, I also beat undefeatable ;)
Also no, Intel did not use quantum mechanics to disprove the age of the earth lol.
Created:
Posted in:
How does the site determine what to put in the Quality Debates section? I'm positive i've seen FFs on there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@The_Meliorist
"it seems like Rene Descartes's argument applies to both the brain and a mind.also, it seems very strange (and unnecessary) to concede that the brain exists, and the mind doesn't. Are you saying that you not aware of the world and your experiences, or think, and feel; and have the faculty of consciousness and thought?are you saying you don't think? but if you think, therefore, you are.Also, it seems like the "brain" definition and the "mind" definition are saying the same thing, but with different words, therefore, the brain is the mind."
It just seems like the "mind" isn't separate from the brain. I do think we have the faculty of a heightened awareness, or "aware of being aware" and that we think and feel, but it seems like this is a product of the physical brain, and not a non-physical "mind". This would leave the concept of "mind" as superfluous to simply "brain activity".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
"False and this is your ego speaking. Sad :--(""Your confused and that is partly because of your ego blockage to rational, logical common sense truths.""Your confused and that is partly because of your ego blockages.""Your still confuse and that is partly because of your ego blockages to truth.""Place your ego to the side and approach truth.""Place the ego to the side and approach truth."" More false narrative on your part because of your ego. This is some common for what people with ego blockages to truth do. Please repeat the three cosmically primary catagories when your ready to place you ego to the side and approach truth."" because it is harder for the human to place the ego aside, than it is for a human to go through the eye of needle.""Ego is the greatest danger facing humanity and in the end, it is a collective set of human ego's that will lead to the resultant, end-date-for-humanity on Earth."
Thank you for the diagnosis lol. Now how about you set your ego aside and provide some proof of your assertions?
"Dude you need to us a dictionary and understand what the word "substance" means. A "substance" is an occupied Space, concepts are not."
I'm assuming you're using this definition?
Substance - A particular kind of matter with uniform properties [1].
Can you prove that a concept is not a physical phenomenon, since we know that thoughts correspond to brain activity?
"This work underscores the importance of the prefrontal and orbitofrontal cortices in moral judgment and in the automatic attribution of morality to social events.[2]"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
YOU CAN NEVER BE HELD MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR AN EVENT YOU DID NOT CAUSE.
What about an event you did not cause, but participated in, like a Hitler Youth becoming an auschwitz camp guard?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tarik
@Theweakeredge
Lol it seems like it's always you two
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@gugigor
One of my favorite albums. Just have to get through the kind of weird opening. Best with a decent sub cause they have really good bass riffs in this album.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Soluminsanis
What does P2 even mean? What is untrue about DNA replication? This doesn't even make sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Soluminsanis
P1 is just false. They weren't designed intentionally, but evolutionary theory tells us that our sense adapted to acquire data about the physical world. So even if atheism is true, our senses are capable of determining things about reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
What is the replacement proposed in B?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Let me do some more research and I might take you up on that.
I forgot to ask, what is the end goal of defunding the police?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Lol no I don't think they substantiate racism and sexism. I think some laws are outdated, like many drug laws. I don't think our justice system is outdated.
I agree that police shootings in America are a problem. But the way to address that is not by defunding them, but rather training them more. They need to do more situational training, more jiujitsu training, and they need more psychological evaluations, because men break under different pressures at different times.
You also need an effective police force to enforce property rights and apprehend dangerous individuals.
You said that a police force didn't really appear until the 1700's but coincidentally, that is the century that homicide rates plummeted to historical lows [1]. And they are lower than they've ever been. You can't honestly argue that defunding the police would make them more effective.
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/homicides#:~:text=the%20linked%20articles.-,Summary,more%20than%2050%20times%20higher.
I agree that police shootings in America are a problem. But the way to address that is not by defunding them, but rather training them more. They need to do more situational training, more jiujitsu training, and they need more psychological evaluations, because men break under different pressures at different times.
You also need an effective police force to enforce property rights and apprehend dangerous individuals.
You said that a police force didn't really appear until the 1700's but coincidentally, that is the century that homicide rates plummeted to historical lows [1]. And they are lower than they've ever been. You can't honestly argue that defunding the police would make them more effective.
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/homicides#:~:text=the%20linked%20articles.-,Summary,more%20than%2050%20times%20higher.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
The central concept of police is to enforce law and keep order. Defunding is a significant enough step to equate it to getting rid of, since it literally strips them of the means to enforce law and order.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Nooooooooo, police need reform, not defunding. They need more situational training, combat training and psychological evaluations. Some corrupt precincts need to be upended and replaced with new staff, but getting rid of police would be a disaster.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
You haven't laid out three categories of existence, or explained what that even means. I don't accept your cosmic trinary outline because you haven't demonstrated it to have any substance. You're arguing that concepts exist without a person to build them, but that's simply wrong. Notions and ideas necessarily have to be invented by a thinking thing. Animals like us, with brains and language. Ideas do not exist out there to be discovered. You aren't going to find the Marine Corps "models of competition" (MCDP 1-4), or Einstein's equations behind a rock somewhere. They have to be invented.
Laws of nature are properties of matter that we observe consistently and codify into language. Matter interacts, but these interactions are not a "concept" until they have been abstracted and codified.
Laws of nature are properties of matter that we observe consistently and codify into language. Matter interacts, but these interactions are not a "concept" until they have been abstracted and codified.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
I would disagree and say that concepts exist only because there are animals like us with brains to construct them and a language to codify them for information transmission. Your claim seems like a platonic idea of "forms" that exist independently of the individual's perception of their expressions.
Can you demonstrate how a concept can exist without an animal with a brain and language to construct and codify them?
Can you demonstrate how a concept can exist without an animal with a brain and language to construct and codify them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Are you implying that concepts exist independently of a rational being and that thinking person's simply access them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@The_Meliorist
Mind - the element of a person that enables them to be aware of the world and their experiences, to think, and to feel; the faculty of consciousness and thought.
Brain - an organ of soft nervous tissue contained in the skull of vertebrates, functioning as the coordinating center of sensation and intellectual and nervous activity
Created:
-->
@Soluminsanis
Well P1 is a falsism. Commands from below are perfectly understandable. I mean take democracy and representative democracy as examples. They delegate government powers from the bottom up. Even in the military, a private telling an officer on a comm to bring in air support is a perfectly intelligible command.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
What are the "pseudoethics" of libertarianism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@The_Meliorist
Well you have a brain that is capable of being aware of being aware. Does that mean you have a mind that is separate from the brain?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@gugigor
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Amoranemix
I went to dinosaur adventure land and spoke with Kent Hovind personally. He accepts evolution bc he doesn't know what it is. He's spent his life fighting against a straw man. He has admitted on several occasions that speciation occurs he just doesn't call it that because it doesn't fit his narrative.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Yeah I box, it's very deep. You should consider reading "Championship fighting, explosive punching and aggressive defence" by Jack Dempsey. It's a good book with some interesting techniques from one of the greats.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Yeah you get it. It's also interesting that Connor is having a Mike tyson-esque fall from grace.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Counterpunching is deeper than just waiting on your opponent to move, you have to make them move in a way that you're ready to counter. It's like chess, you have to make forcing moves so your opponent is forced to respond, with the goal of zugzweng
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
He is a pretty well rounded fighter with a solid boxing base. I think he's a BJJ brown belt at SBG ireland. Usually he goes for a knockout. He rose to fame like a rocket bc of his highlight reel knockouts. He got smashed by khabib on the ground though. He likes to pick his opponent's apart with an unorthodox striking style that baits strikes to the face by keeping his hands low. Problem with baiting strikes to your face is that sometimes someone like Porier or Khabib will knock you on your ass. He emphasizes counterpunching it looks, but will absolutely push the pace to force his opponent's to respond.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wagyu
I think he underestimated Porier bc he has knocked him out in the past.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Undefeatable
When you make your name undefeatable, you can expect everyone to be gunning to give you a loss. But loses happen, we just cry a little, and life goes on.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
I am aware of that. But a noumenon necessarily has physical characteristics, which can be observed as phenomenon.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I don't think that noumenon exists because it is logically necessary. It just exists, and because it has physical attributes that are a necessary constituent of it's existence, we can verify its existence as a phenomenon.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Could you give an example?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
I would not say logically necessary equals existence.
Created:
-->
@Soluminsanis
I read a little, but it seems you're defining "greater" As "intuitively superior." Which is really a non-definition. You haven't defined greatness except by being "necessary. "
The argument defines god as necessary but it doesn't make him necessary. And it doesn't make him exist. Like I said you could replace the word God with literally any other noun and it would not make that thing exist. I could replace the word god with marduk, since a marduk that exists is greater than one that does not right? But that doesn't make him exist.
The argument defines god as necessary but it doesn't make him necessary. And it doesn't make him exist. Like I said you could replace the word God with literally any other noun and it would not make that thing exist. I could replace the word god with marduk, since a marduk that exists is greater than one that does not right? But that doesn't make him exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
How do Chinese history classes teach about Mao?
Created:
-->
@Soluminsanis
What constitutes greatness?
This is literally an attempt to define god into existence. I could replace the word "god" with any other noun and it would be equally unconvincing as an argument for its existence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Okay, so sometimes things come in sets of 3. What are you trying to prove?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Although I do disagree that every human is equally valuable. I think humans have an innate dignity but a person's actions can devoid them of value.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Not sure why You tagged me, I don't think I
support abortion
Created: