Sum1hugme

The flat earth hypothesis is more intellectually bankrupt than creationism.

I really don't think Justin is gonna shoot for a takedown. I think he's gonna put the same game plan he used on Tony and keep it standing and out box khabib. Unless khabib can drag him down, I think khabib is gonna get outboxed.

An appeal to legality is an appeal to authority. Also, while in the scenario given, cocaine and ak's would share the quality of being illegal, but they don't share the quality of being firearms. So perhaps I should rephrase, should the police come and sieze firearms, house to house?

Well what if I'm the peaceful owner of multiple AK-47 and variant rifles. Should the government send cops to physically come take my rifles away from me even though I own them?

Our current understanding of physics breaks down once you get smaller than a planck length. So it is currently beyond the scope of modern science to say where the initial energy came from. We can only peek at what happened in the first initial moments of cosmic expansion.

But i love my AK's

Ah, I understand now. Thank you.

Yeah exactly, so that's why determinism, if true, hurts the foundation of experimental science. Because it's not a choice to do the experiment and the results are determined.

Performing an experiment doesn't assume the decision to perform that experiment? How is that?

Well that's cool man

Well that's a verbose way of saying they choose the experiments they want to conduct. Ethics committees aside, we seem to agree that foundationally, en experimenter assumes they are choosing the experiment. Determinism, if true, defeats this assumption

Well I'll list a specific example. I have a relative who made $400,000 one year. He had to pay $200,000 of it in taxes. This seems an exuberant sum. A different relative of mine made about $20,000 one year and had to pay only a couple thousand in taxes, much of which she received back. This seems more fair though, than a setup where the latter person is paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the former.

But in contrast, experimental science must assume that the experimenter is free to conduct an experiment of their choosing.

That's the government's failing in allowing loopholes. I've personally known wealthy people who pay exuberant amounts of money. They don't avoid that. Granted that's in the U.S. but in contrast, the poor people I know pay almost nothing. Because they're in a bracket below the poverty line. A flat tax indiscriminately taxes the people who can afford the tax increase the least

Yeah I'm not trying to say it isn't incompatible. I'm just wondering if it isn't wrong, and everything that happens is the inevitable product of something before in an unbroken chain of events going back to the big bang, then where do we go from there? Determinism defeats the foundation of experimental science, which is the frontier of knowledge.

It matters to me lol. So that's a bit of a non-answer

I'm sorry I don't follow. I'm just asking if probability is an expression of ignorance.

Well a dice is functionally random since it isn't practical to calculate which side it will land on. That doesn't negate the fact that the result is determined by physical factors.

He said functionally indistiguishable random. Not simply indistinguishable.

Well, being "functionally-indistinguishable-from-random" is very different from being random. A dice roll is functionally random, but isn't actually random as it's up side is determined by physical factors.

So in the case of photons, you can't determine if an individual photon is going to reflect, but you can determine the probability that it will reflect. My question is: is that probability we are calculating just an expression of our ignorance of the mechanism that determines which photons reflect?

No, but the same percentage will always be reflected depending on the thickness

  Well we consider a dice roll random because we don't have the means immediately available to measure the physical factors that determine what side it will come up on when tossed. 

  When we shoot photons at glass, for every 100, between 0 and 16 of them reflect. That's a probability. But it's nonrandom as the percent of reflection is directly proportional to the thickness of the glass.

I don't think probability and randomness are always the same. It seems dangerous to use them interchangeably 

But is probability an expression of ignorance?

I can't support a flat tax, because it disproportionately taxes the poor

Mango :D

I'm both surprised and flattered to be included on the list even if it's a side note

The primary rebuttal to determinism that I found to be somewhat convincing is the idea that certain things on the quantum level are probabilistic rather than causal. But is probability just an expression of man's ignorance? 

Bro, I literally stalled an entire squad bc I didn't know how to do the basic stuff and got so embarrassed I just practiced on the shooting range for a while. Being a noob is part of it

Thank you for your service to the formal debate community

Yeah like, it sounds amazing. But the process seems cruel just to get a tender cut of meat

Mango mango?

Gotta have a mic. Yeah they're not everyone's cup of tea, but I've been on a modern war tactics kick so it's been really great.

Mangoes are great!

-everybody since forever

Rising storm 2: vietnam is pretty cool too, but the community in squad is just tops. 

I've been trying to decide if it's unethical to eat veal. I'm not a vegetarian, nor do I have a problem with meat. But veal seems a little cruel.

Anyone else playing squad these days? It's so much fun, but waiting on lobbies sucks.

Nam, Go. 

-us govt. 1969

Hawaii seems nice. Although volcanoes are scary