Total posts: 1,014
Posted in:
-->
@Checkmate
Whiteflame is up there. Fruit inspector is also seriously good. Ragnar hasn't been taking super serious debates so he's only had to display a small portion of his power, but his depth of understanding of burden of proof really sets him apart. Undefeatable may not be one of the best, but for a guy who will post a 9,000 character argument 30 minutes after his opponent's argument he does pretty well And is already above 1600. TheWeakerEdge has really honed their formatting And I think it's helping him blossom. There's others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Okay, so "consisting of three parts". What do you mean by cosmic?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
I don't really want to go into all of it here, but if you want to know the general layout see my debate, "Kantian Ethics vs Utilitarianism"
Then tell me what you think.
Then tell me what you think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
So, a trinary is the number 3? Is your argument that there can be 3 of something?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Because we don't need emotion to determine moral law. We can use theoretical deduction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
What im saying is you could choose any third thing to make the example, but it would still seem arbitrary. I could say "two eyes and a brain to process it." That doesn't mean those are the only three things about that system, so it isn't clear what you're trying to demonstrate with these examples.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
.
Bilateral ovaries and internalized entrance { XxWhy choose the entrance to the "place" as the thirdling for your example? It seems arbitrary.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Well if by objective you mean separate from emotion then yes, morality is objective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/news/black-hole-image-makes-history
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Lol what? What did hawking make up? And we have a picture of a black hole now. Also, we detected gravitational waves from black holes. Also, we have the ability to calculate the effects of a black hole's gravity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
"randomness"
How is a cause effect relationship random? What do you mean by random? If a physical system works a certain way mechanically, that isn't random. Maybe you're confusing probabilistic with random. But probabilistic theories are often fundamentally deterministic, like fluid dynamics
How is a cause effect relationship random? What do you mean by random? If a physical system works a certain way mechanically, that isn't random. Maybe you're confusing probabilistic with random. But probabilistic theories are often fundamentally deterministic, like fluid dynamics
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
I think that by using Reason alone, via theoretical deduction, we can arrive at moral law. I don't want o say objective because people use that word to mean different things and idk how you mean it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Of course murderers should be removed from society, but your robot would not be a moral agent, just a dangerous weapon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Free will cannot exist if everything is the inevitable result of an unbroken chain of events leading back to the dawn of time, because physical causality determines action at the most fundamental level.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Scientific determinism was formalized with laplace's demon. Suppose there was a demon with perfect knowledge of every particle and thing in the universe, or perfect knowledge of the present. That demon should necessarily be able to perfectly predict the future.
Causality is the bedrock of determinism. That's why it's called causal determinism.
Causality is the bedrock of determinism. That's why it's called causal determinism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
@Benjamin
.
"What for?""In fact, no - a murderer would be just as dangerous to society even if he was a robot"
Because if there wasn't an option to do otherwise, like a robot following it's programming then there is no moral decisions making. There is no ethical responsibility. There is no moral agency.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
You have to assume that the person pulling the trolley lever had the option to do otherwise
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Well if free will exists then determinism isn't true. But scientific determinism can be argued with great force. You dropped that the cosmological argument isn't an argument for god. You seem to be presupposing gods existence and reasoning from there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
The cosmological argument is not an argument for god, it's an argument for a caused universe. You dont get god from that without special pleading.
Unless god specifically intervenes to disrupt the flow of causality, then free will probably doesn't exist. You haven't refuted the incompatibalist syllogism
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
But you can't prove god exists so that's a non starter. Also, the existence of god doesn't impact the incompatibalist argument I gave you above. God can't simultaneously have a determined plan while also allowing person's to choose freely. The syllogism applies the same
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
1. If someone acts of her own free will, then she could have done otherwise
2. If determinism is true, no one can do otherwise than one actually does
3. Therefore, if determinism is true, no one acts of her own free will
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/#FreeWillProbCausDete
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Seems like your third part of each of your examples are just arbitrarily chosen to prove your point
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Determinism is incompatible with free will but ethics must assume free will
Created:
Posted in:
Please post links to your favorite debates from here, DDO, or wherever.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Does "the mind" exist in the same way if one does not have eyes?
Created:
Posted in:
I've been thinking about sarcasm lately. It's interesting how, by exaggerating just one or two letters, the meaning of a sentence is reversed.
In the following examples, the sarcasm (and therefore the reversal of the sentence's original meaning) is underlined. Try saying them normally, and then again while exaggerating the underlined letters.
i.e.
- Oh, I love it.
- Gee, Thanks.
- Sure.
- Good for you.
It almost seems like sarcasm lies in the vowels. Are there any other ways to make a sentence sound sarcastic?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
so every time you say "mind" you mean "brain" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Well we wouldn't say that a question is separate from the sound waves or photons that constitute and transmit it. So can you say the mind is separate from the brain?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
The freemasons are a christian organization that traces their origins to the original masons that built king solomon's temple in the bible. I've personally decoded a handful of masonic texts and it's mostly rituals and codephrases. They have levels of membership and you have to have some kind of craftsman ability to be considered. Master mason is I believe the highest rank, and usually is obtainable after like 20 years as a mason.
"I have seen his star in the East, and I have come to worship him."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@gugigor
A wise man once told me that we are all but slaves to our own desires.
To act truly autonomously you must will over your desires and act according to the moral law you give yourself, out of a sense of duty to that moral law, out of a sense of reverence for the moral law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
The human brain is hardwired to detect patterns. Just remember the axiom of statistics that "correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation."
Created:
Posted in:
6 busy mice run from shelve to shelve.
Inside of this lady's kitchen and cupboards they delve.
One finds some cheese, another finds a trap,
One mouse finds a bottlecap for little a hat.
One finds a baseball, that was too big to carry,
And frankly quite useless to a mouse on the scurry.
One finds some army men strewn all about,
But the final one found something they couldn't do without.
The meeces looked in awe at the sight that they beheld.
They hadn't mind to speak, as they began to delve.
Some knawing here, a nibble there, 'fore long the box gave way.
Inside was the sweet surprise of cereal!
To mice it is surreal.
They had found the treasure trove,
Of snacks to bring back home.
Now it was time to feast.
Inside of this lady's kitchen and cupboards they delve.
One finds some cheese, another finds a trap,
One mouse finds a bottlecap for little a hat.
One finds a baseball, that was too big to carry,
And frankly quite useless to a mouse on the scurry.
One finds some army men strewn all about,
But the final one found something they couldn't do without.
The meeces looked in awe at the sight that they beheld.
They hadn't mind to speak, as they began to delve.
Some knawing here, a nibble there, 'fore long the box gave way.
Inside was the sweet surprise of cereal!
To mice it is surreal.
They had found the treasure trove,
Of snacks to bring back home.
Now it was time to feast.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
Seems to be written in the same syllable count and general formatting as a haiku. The climax of the battle was a little underwhelming. The narrative shift was smooth, but the rhyme scheme wasn't consistent so it didn't flow very mellifluously. However, the twist at the end wasn't bad.
6.2/10
Thank you for sharing your poetry
Created:
-->
@Jasmine
It's mostly composed of people from there
Created:
-->
@TheMelioist
It could be argued to be a monetary vacuum blowing tons of resources on something with way too many physical barriers. If I remember from school, the colony can't be above ground bc of the multi-month dust storms and lack of atmosphere. And it can't be below ground because of the ravenous, constant earthquakes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Admit you're not an atheist, you're a faitheist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Well at least you admit it. Why you so against something you don't even believe in? That's one I've heard before.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Lol y do you hate god? Y'all athetits just wanna be y'all's own god and sin all the time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Faith is separated into two definitions because the word is used differently in religious contexts than it is in colloquial contexts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
If you redefine atheist to actually mean deist, or anything other than one who does not believe in god, then the term is no longer describing the people it originally did. If you redefine atheist to mean something else, then the non-believers will just find a different word.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Also, it's not that atheists invented a term and definition so that they can be godless. There's just people who don't believe in god. Those whose understanding of the world does not include a supernatural god are not theists. Well what's a better way of saying "not theists"? A-theist, because a means not. It's just a way of shorthanding the demographic of non-believers.
Created: