Total posts: 4,920
-->
@3RU7AL
We may agree on definitions, but still disagree on the logical implications.
Logical implications will require us to demonstrate what type of logic we use right?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
If we agree on the definition what would people be arguing again?
If people agree on the definition of cause and effect and God, they will understand they contradict one another but they don't.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
So an axiom is that we have to agree on definitions?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
So on its own it is not quantifiable meaning you require other axioms as in we use the same definition of free?"Free" is Quantifiable when it is rigorously defined.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
So is free a quantifiable axiom?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Quantifiable axiom?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Trump is stupid. See his appointee Giuliani. A clever person would eventually know the loose cannon is Rudy Giuliani and would remove him from his position yet he still keeps him. That alone shows how stupid he is. Here is a great video. It took him 30 seconds to fuck up. If you want to say after this that Trump is playing 25D chess then go ahead. I don't think there is anything I can do to tell you he is stupid.
Biden is not failing. He is still number 1.
The reason why the impeachment doesn't actually matter is because no gives a flying shit about justice, just if it helps them. If you were going to jail I bet you would do anything to try to avoid it. The very few who have "morals" would be too gullible or wouldn't even be in that position. Most people posture like they care but they don't. They only care about their happiness and that can be lying to save face whether it be intentionally or unintentionally. People can realize the very thing they use to declare the Bible is true is testimony yet when it comes to Trump's impeachment we are going to reject it. People do this all the time. It would take great effort on your part to realize your faults and change and majority of people don't even want to bother to actually critique the very positions they hold and know when a position they hold cannot be held anymore.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
The study of philosophy can yield concrete answers regarding Quantifiable AXIOMS.
Give me a quantifiable axiom.
Please make it short as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Basically the problem with labeling yourself an altruist or egoist, no real way of telling if you are doing things because you are doing it for others or doing it for yourself.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I have established that insurance is not a means of production.
No you haven't.
Since everyone gets injured or sick
Gets doesn't mean in the present tense they require healthcare.
Give me your money or die sounds more like a mugging than a choice.
Still a choice. This is just feelings from you.
Humans are hard wired to want to live
You have no biological backing for this. For one scientists still have yet to make any decent strides in the brain and if it wasn't clear we need that to understand the very thing that makes everything else do stuff. Another problem is that you are pretty much discounting humans who commit suicide as humans.
More of your emotional speak with what I have found out is political populist talk.
Your framing is just as emotional.
I didn't describe things. I merely said what they are. It is isn't an appeal to emotion so please stop lying about what things are.
Everything else after this wasn't relevant to what I asked. You haven't given a better framing instead of doing what theists do, shift the burden of proof and don't even bother explaining your side.
I just realized how useless this talk was. You don't understand when you appeal to emotion. You don't understand clear comparisons. You don't answer simple questions.
I am not responding here instead will next time completely talk to you about one point at a time even if you are intentionally put in more than what was warranted from what I said. Do respond back if you want but don't expect me to respond about this topic.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
The definiton you are looking for is "In economics and sociology, the means of production (also called capital goods)[1] are physical and non-financial inputs used in the production of economic value. These include raw materials, facilities, machinery and tools used in the production of goods and services."
I am talking about the transnational period and anything to do with buying something online and it staying online. Lets go with V-bucks.
Every person needs healthcare to live.
No every person needs there basic needs met. This can be if they are injured they need treatment. Healthcare can help with that. I disagree with your structure. Healthcare inherently isn't necessary but it can be.
You have no option but to have it.
You can die. You can not have it. You can use private insurance depending on the person. Stop making concrete statements which are so clearly missing out relevant information. A better phrasing would be healthcare is the best option we have for x reasons. No option is a lie.
Your constant hate jerk of right wing people will never be entertained by me. If you have made a valid point and start talking about right wing people expect me to avoid it. I am not here to talk about other people who are not involved in the conversation.
A more accurate, although equally biased, way of framing it would be "corporate greed free for all vs community supported healthcare"
Mine talks about the likely economic positions that US can go towards but yours is just an emotional appeal aka the entirety of populism. I am waiting for a better framing.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Something that produces value is not necessarily a means of production.
You are not arguing against me nor attempting too. I'll just bring out a definition:
Production is a process of combining various material inputs and immaterial inputs (plans, know-how) in order to make something for consumption (output). It is the act of creating an output, a good or service which has value and contributes to the utility of individuals. Link
I am going by the economic definition.
Forgot to add this:
I would be talking about the transaction phase given we already have the necessary to facilitate your user.
Amazon Prime is part of the seller (amazon). So it is still direct communication between the person paying for the item and the person selling the item.
The same person facilitating Amazon Prime and making sure you have it, is not the same person you are buying things from.
Didn't you know almost all of Amazon's products are from consumers? You know the names of people when you buy a product used. Amazon Prime products might also be from a third party so essentially Amazon is a middle man for you to buy what you want. I can't believe I missed this. I want to see if you actually argue against this point.
But you are automatically biasing the conversation in the way you are framing it.
We would have to frame it someway and I argue it this way. Do you have a better of framing it?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
A means of production is something that produces a physical product
A production can be non-physical. This can be your status on this website. You can't touch it but you can see numbers indicating how many posts you have. Under capitalism something is worth whatever somebody else thinks it is. If people think your non-physical product as in your user on this website is worth 1k then you can choose to accept that offer for your product or decline it.
They do not represent the person buying the insurance.
Yes they do. The middle man needs business. The insurance buyer needs insurance. The insurance buyer relies on the insurer to deliver them care when they need it. People pay for Amazon Prime when they need to use it.
A corporation is a group looking to turn a profit at all costs. They will step on anyone and anything they need to in order to do that. If that means letting poor people die, they will absolutely do that. A community is a collection of people. They do not have an inherent profit motive driving them to cause damage chasing profit. Communities are usually more focused on the health and well being of the community. A corporation is only interested in their profit margin.
Corporation definitions:
A corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners. Link
A corporation is an organization—usually a group of people or a company—authorized by the state to act as a single entity (a legal entity; a legal person in legal context) and recognized as such in law for certain purposes. Link
None of these definitions disagree with me. An example of something that would fit under both definition is Native American tribes. Link
I mean republicans still think Obama was a socialist.
I am putting this on a spectrum. On one end there is capitalism. On another there is socialism. Medicare for all leans more towards socialism.
If I didn't comment on what you said, it would be because I didn't think it was relevant. If you think it is relevant do ask me to rebut it while also telling me what I need to rebut.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Dude add my as a receiver.
When you blur the terminology it just makes it impossible to discuss issues.
This and everything before this doesn't demonstrate how I am wrong. You just added more stuff. A middle man is facilitating a deal. Please demonstrate how that a production.
They add no value. All they do is take money in and then try not to pay it back out. That is their entire business model. That business model ends in hurting people when their claims are denied. That isn't emotional, it is factual.
Yes they do. Whether or not agree with a value doesn't mean it is one. Facilitating a deal is still a value.
The value of a middle man is that it is vital in having someone represent what a person wants. This is akin to representatives because in a representative democracy, the United States appoint people who would act as a middle man in enacting policies. They act as a middle man by voicing your opinions by voting on what you would like. Sometimes they advocate for policies to be enacted, it just so happens insures can very well be the same party to create the care that you will ask for.
Representatives are also put into place for future actions that are not immediate. If you are against insurers you are against representative democracy and would rather have a direct democracy.
They have no financial incentive to lower prices.
Under the assumption they are not profiting. If they are then there is no need for them to target lower classes. Another insurer can come in for them or something like the ACA or medicare for all can help them.
A community and a corporation are nothing alike.
Please explain.
There is no reason to put a for profit company between people and healthcare. It doesn't serve a purpose other than soak more money out of people.
This seems like an argument for making anything needed to live a government run operation. People need: food, water and shelter as well. I guess you are for it I am assuming? I am not going to engage with what you ought like to happen. Whenever you do bring in proof for that ought then decide to challenge me on it.
Is america a socialist country then?
It is less socialist than I think almost all European countries.
You seem to think that the government providing services for people is socialism.
You are misunderstanding. Socialist esc as in it more aligns with socialism than capitalism.
Right wing people try to paint providing universal healthcare as a divergence from american values. I am pointing out that the government providing services has been an american value for a long time, thus invalidating that argument.
Excuse for the appeal to tradition. Don't bother engaging if you want me to respond to it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
Wouldn't I have to accept he is somewhat competent in philosophy?
A contradiction would more in line with philosophy than politics which is why I changed it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
DK effect refers to someone during lets say their novice years in an industry thinking their ability is greater than their what it actually is. I would have to accept if he even has the ability to fairly view these events to even think about the DK effect. Maybe my definition is wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
More important word to describe him is conservative.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Good nuance take. It would've been better if you brought in numbers. I disagree with the loaded question part but everything else seems okay.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Which one now do you consider more violent?Christianity has, historically, been the more violent religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
No evidence so this is just a waste of my time. You don't understand your faults nor do you understand what you are even typing. You choose to not give me evidence instead spout more words that are void of anything tangible. Must be really difficult holding onto something that doesn't exist and has no scientific backing. I'll come back whenever you do decide to bring in evidence. Not talk about it. Not lie about what I asked. Not completely avoid what I asked for. I'll come back with a link to a study. If you don't have a link to a study don't waste my time.
Speak to F4 because I sure had enough of whatever you call yourself. Spiritualist I am guessing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
So you don't have evidence like how you don't have evidence for your worldview? Oh, gotcha.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Quote?
At this point I don't think you even know what evidence is. If you don't know do tell so I can quote on your behalf. I don't know what happened to you in your past but you can always receive help for your weaknesses.
In this case I have never stated I was superior to yet you went out of your way to say so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Do tell them me how he is reasonable when he says this:
Theism has the advantage. IMO.
Where did I claim the superiority over him? He makes it clear about his superiority. Don't you think that is a bit off? Sorta like he isn't actually open minded instead postures to seem so. I guess his act is up when someone brings up reasonable critiques against his side so he takes the reductionist side to my argument but can't help, as an "open-minded" person, claim that his view is superior to mine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
I never stated that you did. I am asking was there something wrong with what I said?
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Doesn't go against the percentage. The more nukes the more percentages that have to be added individually. You are making a claim which I have already addressed and expecting me to give a nee response.That is the whole idea of mutually assured destruction: the fact that others have nukes deters you from using them at all.
I don't think there is any realistic way to get rid of all nukes and ensure no more are made, so this is what we have to go with.
What percentage would you put every single of the nukes going off at?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Do you think I am wrong?
What do you think I am missing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
If it wasn't clear since you haven't mentioned it. Every single reason that he brought apart from testimony is begging the question.
Begging the question: begging the question is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.
Interpretation
His interpretation is through the lens he sees the world meaning of course whatever I see confirms what I see because I see it.
Logic
His way of using logic just so happens runs in accordance to what he believes so by him saying logic what he means is my way of validating myself is getting me these answers.
Commonsense
What is common sense? Well it is a sense that is common to people as in the people who you are surrounded by agree with what you see. Blatant begging the question because I can see evolution as just the way we became us but someone will see that as proof for a God. If I ask why and the person says commonsense they are essentially begging the question not presenting an argument.
I could include testimony but I don't want to.
If it wasn't clear whenever eternal is not demonstrating something to be true instead stating something to be commonsense, logical or based on my interpretation understand that this is simply him clearly showing what he thinks not how he got there. It is basically posturing. I hope you agree or eventually get to this conclusion because there is very little to learn from a person who does this and refuses to explain himself instead just spouts words that just so happen to arrive to the conclusion that agrees with him. Another problem with this is that what if you say it is logical that I am where I am? There is no discussion instead we appeal to evidence in the hopes we can bring about a better view of the world. If the person is not willing to give evidence all that he is giving is claims. At the point why bother even entertaining his conversation when you can entertain a crazed homeless man's conversation instead?
If it wasn't clear when someone doesn't demonstrate how they are right instead spout words like logical, commonsense etc they are begging the question as in asserting what they know is true without giving an argument for it.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I am just pointing out having a lot of people with really dangerous weapons leads to more chances that they can be used to instigate instead of retaliate. Lets put it at 5%. There is currently 3,730 nuclear weapons meaning 3,730 nuclear weapons have a 5% chance of being used to instigate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
What would you say are the pros and cons compared to this website and debatepolitics?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
The design looks like something 10 years ago. Boomer was an exaggeration.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I don't think he is mentally there so expecting a worthwhile answer is well wishful thinking.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Yes it is. A middle man is doing a job facilitating a deal. That is still a production whether you feel like it is or isn't.Insurance isn't a means of production.
They aren't producing anything. All they do is soak up money and hurt people.
This is the difference between me and you. You have to inject your feelings even though the other person is trying not to be emotional.
But medical care is something that every single person needs to live.
Fully able 18-24 year olds?
Hiding that behind a massive paywall
Under capitalism if there was such a barrier to entry that was impacting enough customers they would have to reduce their prices. If they don't they lose out on potential profit which can lead to eventually shutting down for not meeting profit margins.
greedy corporations should not be permitted.
Emotional yet again. Community and corporation are the same thing.
Health insurance companies add no value to anything.
They do deals when other people cannot.
But again, that isn't socialism in the same way it isn't socialism for the government to provide roads or schools.
It is more socialist than it is capitalist. It doesn't have to be a socialist state in order to have socialist esc ideas.
It is no different than what america has been doing for a very long time.
Appeal to tradition.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
So source?You need a source that you can pull from that you can actually relate with, meaning there are plenty of ways you can approach spirituality.
It's obvious from reading the OP you think Theism is absurd
Nope that is your feelings towards it. If you actually look at comments I made after in the same thread you would understand I applied no real negative connotation to it.
When I read the OP I'm not reading from someone who has an open-mind about the topic, but why would you want to be that way?
I don't think a close minded person like yourself would be open minded. I wasn't always an atheist. I would've needed an open mind to accept the argument that would link towards that.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Do you understand that nothing what you said was directed at what I said.
I said: 1 person can launch nukes which can lead to other people launching news.
You said: Ideal world no nukes. Present day US leverages nukes to get stuff and other countries are doing it as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I still do not understand this.You are able to relate on many levels, you just need a source to connect with.
You don't relate to Theists in your direct word view because of their absurdities, but don't forget you have a connection with those who can connect the dots with a Creator absent of those absurdities.
Another sentence I don't understand. Do try and make it simpler.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
They do not produce anything. They are a parasite. They take money from people with a promise to pay for things later. Then later, they do everything they can to prevent having to pay it back.
This is socialist rhetoric. Do we want to avoid parasites? Yes so we should remove private insurance. That is what you are heavily implying. Insurance is inherently taking something now and promising something later. You can't change that unless you want to remove all insurance and you know only have public healthcare.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Michael Brooks does. Bernie Sanders heavily implies he or people should want to abolish private insurance and you still haven't answered who you follow on the left.But neither does pretty much anyone on the left.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I think you think you are unable to relate to Theists, I challenge that position.
Why not just remove "I challenge that position."?
You are able to relate on many levels, you just need a source to connect with.
I don't understand how this follows from what you said earlier. You said I don't in the first quote but here you say I do relate. Please make it simpler or rephrase.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Please explain what made you want to say this. I didn't say anything to instigate this apart from past actions that are far enough I think to not put the primary blame on me. Are you cranky or something?
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Are you a lefty as in a socialist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
I start at #196 and it finishes at #210. I could've conducted myself better but I still agree with my post in #210.
Don't make debating theists a common occurrence. My posts on this thread make it clear on the obvious problems.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Don't bother responding to me. Respond to F4 mainly because I would like to see if you are as "open-minded" as you say you are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Okay but if you really can't wait like I do for his evidence then simply read our past few interactions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Why are we the one's that need our minds changed and not yours? did you actually prove something in your OP or in an argument somewhere?
It was an intended to be a structure and a likely way of changing people's mind. If you can't see that it is on you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
You engage with him, ask him for evidence with anything you are unsure about. I guarantee you he won't be able to bring up a source. He lives in his own bubble and thinks he is open minded.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I keep myself flexible and open to all forms of knowledge and sources
This is completely untrue but given your deflection is so obvious that you have to be delusional to think that, I don't think it is worth arguing against. If it wasn't clear I am still waiting for any evidence for your worldview. The last time I asked you, you didn't even bother to reply back. I wonder why.
Wow thanks for the opinions, very shallow and generic opinions and ones that get real old but that's all we ever get TBH. All assumptions, all pre-conceived notions not a single question or argument, pure biased opinion with no filter well done Nihilist another first class intellectual. Whatever you guys have to tell yourselves so you don't go coo coo. Next...
No real feedback instead at best can be considered an ad-hom. Who knew such an open minded person can be at best be so toxic?
Created: