Total posts: 3,457
-->
@fauxlaw
Um.... Not really no. First of all, we are on the internet, is she required to share her personal details with you? Obviously not, just as I would not require you too, if you voluntarily gave the information fine, but pointing out that she doesn't want to divulge her age, isn't proving anything. If anything its more aligned to an ad hominem than anything. I also see you completely ignored my other point.
Regardless
Privacy - "A state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people."
In this case - she wishes her age to not be observed or disturbed by other people, there isn't anything wrong with that. People deserve privacy. Full stop.
Created:
Posted in:
Unfortunately, my power over this realm is limited, as I refuse to touch forum games, and I can't respond to archives. RIP
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
That would be great, yes definitely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
I've looked into it briefly, but its not my personal field of study, I'm much more into psychoanyalzing people and deducing things about them, it can be pretty fun. Essentially I do a lot of cold readings.
Created:
Posted in:
SO - This forum - Basic interpretations of sports - what are they? why are they designed how they are? how many people enjoy them? why should one play or watch them? It's to simply quantify anything and everything about a sport.
May seem kind of cliche, but football, anyone wanna tackle all this for football, just to get the ball rolling?
I'm sorry.
Created:
-->
@PGA2.0
Atheism can simply be, being unconvinced of an assertion, whereas theism is inherently a proposition which is often unfalsifiable. By near definition Atheism is more reasonable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
Ignoring Corona?
Well first off, that Ice needs to be destroyed, immigrants should not be held separated from their families and have their rights violated.
I think that America was literally founded on immigration, like Rome, without it there would be no America.
America should allow more refugees to stay here
America should have a better system to help people come here instead of cracking down on illegal immigrants so hard. Most of them are just refugees, if we just made it more accessible to people, fewer people would try to come over illegally, its pretty straight forward logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
Eh, it has to be agreed to by both debaters, and I'm actually pretty careful about what debates I accept and don't accept.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Thanks....... Would I be considered a kid?
On this topic, maybe, if it were we'd have to assume either rating system was actually enforced and that it actually effectively censored whatever we assumed didn't need to be seen by children (Are we just defining children as people under 18, if so :( )
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
You think I could be a final boss? I'd be down for sure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Could you give me some good places to check it out? Anywhere that's cheap to buy it? I've actually been meaning to buy it for a while
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
I am so up to join? Can I?
ah... saw edit, now I'm dissapointed, if any spots open up think I can join the tower?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
I am nearly the definition of roastable - destroy me -...................with words.
Created:
Apparently you're still posting, so, yes?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Safalcon7
I actually agree with you - a lot of comedy and satire may, on the surface, not be genuine but the thing they are criticizing often is. It allows people to express themselves in such a fundamentally relatable way that we often forget how integral it is to our everyday life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Definitely a fair position, I'm not all that familiar with the numbers for baseball, but intuitively at least, it seems much less risky than either sport, and therefore shouldn't get paid as much. Of course there is always the position that one signed on with the knowledge that it was very possible to get hurt? I don't know that doesn't seem very compelling to me at least.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
This is false, he was impeached, the Senate never voted him out of office
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
But you haven't proved the first thing!
Look, I get it, you believe that god is everywhere is everything, etc, etc...
WHY do you believe that? And is that reasoning justified?
Created:
-->
@K_Michael
Well, essenitally, yes. But how would we ethically do that is the question? I think it's an important topic to explore, as you are correct, depopulation would solve a lot of problems, or at least slowing down the birth rate through ethical means. Any ideas?
Created:
Posted in:
As a guy currently in high school - homework - is complicated - we have a complicated relationship. One on hand - it is useful for studying or reinforcing topics you didn't understand in class on the other hand it can every easily overwhelm you or just confuse you more.
I don't think there is a perfect balance, but I believe we can make a better one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ImminentDownfall
Yeah I was just curious, not to say all centrists or the like lean one way or the other, but I always find it interesting to see where one lies
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
But would arguing for one system completely independent of the other even work? There are clear examples of socialism in America (Food banks and the like), and a lot of people like those in isolation but not it as a whole (which is understandable) Similar to my last question, when does there get to be too much of capitalism or socialism? Is there even a balance? Should we prefer only one side?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I'm curious, people often debate whether foot ball players should get paid as much as they should, with formula one it seems apparent that they should be paid a lot, considering how much risk there is and all. So where do you think we should draw the line as being paid too much for sporting?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Progressive here, we are actually climbing the ranks at an impressive speed, just as atheists and such are. Idk why people think they're dying out, we're just getting our foot in the door lol
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I.... what? This is honestly very concerning....... That also seems very harmful to people in general, why doesn't this get more attention?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BearMan
LMAO!! That's so good! I kinda disagree though - while it's true that skilled conversationalists can make their wording much more concise, it is also true that sometimes the simpler wording is a ship of Theseus or incorrect, the sometimes a more complex lexicon is just necessary to more effectively communicate a point. If that makes any sense....
Created:
-->
@Username
Agreed, thats the very least that needs to happen
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
It does seem intuitive; if we want to use anecdotes of immigrants, we should probably actually talk to the people who deal with immigrants (you know and aren't paid if they get an extra one deported)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Do you think he was just a druggie? Was he murdered? Was it murder disguised as a murder? I'm kind of interested by the pure strange circumstances of the case, is there any more information you can provide?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
So.... essentially: We have fundamentally different paradigms and therefore will not agree on most politically debatable topics? As for Danielle's willingness or lack thereof to "go out there" is just a privacy concern. Perfectly reasonable.
Created:
-->
@Username
Personally, I find these reports pretty compelling, and a reason to at the very lest reform the h*ll out of Ice until it's not ice anymore. What would you do to solve the problem (Not saying there isn't or you can't I"m genuinely curious) How come more Trump supporters aren't jumping to claim this is fake?
Really it shows an overwhelming difference between what Obama did and Trump did, yes, Obama messed up on immigration, but we simply did not have the consistent amount of human rights violations by the immigration police basically.
Does anything I say on the matter actually matter? Or will my perspective be ignored for better ones? Fair either way, just throwing in my two cents
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
So.... a partisan divide in the middle? Towards either side? Is there any way to help stop the divide? Can we bridge the gap without compromising values? Or will something need to be sacrificed? I just want to hear your thoughts, you seem to have a unique enough perspective to give me some insight.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Definitely something I agree with (in general), tu quoque's aren't valid ways to discuss a problem, but so many people rely on them... it's sad really, imagine if we could just work together on one issue, there's practically nothing we couldn't accomplish.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ImminentDownfall
Your profile says your centrist and agnostic, do you lean left or right or atheist or theist, or are you solidly in the middle on both?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I'll give you one thing, you definitely type really really fast
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Pursuing that spirits exist, I would assume so. It also depends on what type of soul you are talking about. This seems like an obvious extrapolation from most beliefs of reincarnation and the like. I would also argue that there are clearly individuals who do not have a clear gender or even sex, what happened to the soul there? I am genuinely curious about your opinion regarding the matter.I'm not sure what you are getting at here, it should be clear what I'm saying. The only time you have a gender (identity) is when you have a physical body. Consciousness (soul) does not have body parts, which is what reflects a gender. Reincarnation is just the placement of the soul in any given part of creation, once the soul is placed within an embodiment that's what dictates what gender that soul will possess, but again just at the physical level not the soul itself. However, many times the physical body morphs from what people normally expect, because there is never perfection at the physical level. And often times, a persons Karma dictates what that soul must experience within the physical world.
No. Body parts do not reflect a gender, they reflect sex. I don't know if that was just misspoken, but it was incorrect. Also, Karma? That's another new topic, what proves Karma? What determines who gets what Karma? Why is Karma fairer to some and not to others? Is Karma operating on another plane of existence or does it also have some sort of physical presence we can detect?
The reason I'm confused is that I have no idea what concept of soul you were talking about before you clarified, again, I have no idea where you getting the properties of this apparent soul, so I have no way to fully parse what it is until you give me some kind of general description or something like it. I was essentially shooting in the dark based on what I saw as most likely given your text.
Like I said, an interesting take, not one I buy, but I’ll grant for the sake of discussion. This is practically where I went in my last response. To elaborate on my own response. Gender is not binary, regardless of how one attains it, it is clearly a complex scale of spectrums that determine gender. How does the reincarnated soul interact with this?I agree, but remember much of ones identity rests at the physical surface layer (psychological) at least superficially, because like you say it's a complex configuration, much of which is influenced by ones surroundings. Since a souls perception is confined primarily to the physical experience it is tossed about like the wind with much of what it observes. What I'm saying here might not ever even cross the mind of most souls experiencing what they are experiencing, they may inadvertently feel it but not know it. This of course is how the physical world and bodies were created, so that the soul believes that what it is experiencing is what reality is. This helps one keep their focus and attention on the physical world while they are here.Again, reincarnation is simply the destination of the soul, it is just a term used to describe the transmigration of where the soul goes next. The only interactions are the soul itself and with the embodiments of that soul. Which include the mind and emotions.
Mind and emotions are just the physicals, again, it's presumptuous to assume otherwise, but once more granting the soul. Why is it so dependent on the body to drive it? Why isn't the soul more in control if it literally the person behind the face? Essentially you're saying that the soul is based on it's surroundings. But so is the brain, so what is the difference between the two?
So then let me rephrase the question, how does the soul interact with the gender spectrum? which the answer seems to be, reflect what the brain says? But that really isn't a unique or interesting interaction. Does it just copy the brain but less effectively? How does the soul uniquely interact with the gender identity, if it doesn't interact with one's gender identity uniquely from the brain, then how do you know a soul even interacts with gender identity?
As for gravitating towards one or the other, could I ask why? Why does the soul do this specifically? You have some kind of principals behind whatever souls you are using, so I’m curious about a lot.The soul instinctively may gravitate towards a masculine or feminine characteristic because of what it desires or what attributes interest it, but again it may want to express both. So this is why I say this answers many questions about transgenders. Because the physical body may not always determine anything.
Okay.... but that wasn't my question (the last part), my question was why, to which you responded essentially because the soul wanted to. But earlier you said the soul started as a blank slate? So why did it gravitate towards one then? Because it interested them? That seems kind of like a weak basis for someone's gender identity to be determined. Especially whenever a god was the reason we assume the soul is there.
I wouldn’t assume that no.Well maybe you wouldn't assume it, but I would guess most religious people would assume it and why they tend to look down on the topic altogether and why they judge it wrongly.
Fair enough
Gender is societally constructed,That may be true, but gender "identity" is usually assumed with what physical apparatus one is born with. Whether a person is "male" or "female". Since the soul has no physical apparatus gender doesn't exist, however a soul may have natural attributes, and those attributes may reflect a masculine or feminine role or even both.
Why does it have natural attributes? A couple of quiotes up you said that the soul may gravitate towards certain attributes, but why? Is it just the random will of the soul? Is there any real reason at all? I'm really curious as I have no real idea about what these souls really are or what attributes they have besides a few basic ones we've discussed.
therefore any base layer or model would not have one. I agree. I agree, if there were a god, they would recognize the need to reproduce, and therefore create us with organs in order to accomplish that My question, if the creator is not bound by normal rules, why not make us capable of sexual pleasure and able to reproduce asexually? It would be less hassle in the long run.That's a good question and much of what could be explained by experience alone. In creation God does things primarily for the pure experience not really by what may be more efficient. What you propose may be true of another species and even somewhere else in creation, but God wanted it this particular way for whatever experience it brings forth on this planet.
So essentially - because god said so? That isn't really a very compelling answer. If this god wanted to maximize a process or even make the experience better, then having our sexual pleasure and reproduction entirely separate would have been her best bet. It just doesn't make sense why any intelligent god would do it as she did.
So in other words, the foundation of the human is never truly changed, parts and other things are simply added as they gain physical being? A truly fascinating take, however, I would pose a different interpretation. I would say that if reincarnation is how the soul moves after their original body is gone, that they would collect kind of like an echo of all of their past lives, and slowly build up towards some maximum or unstable state, similar to atoms or molecules.Yes they do collect a trail of experience that the soul carries in their consciousness unconsciously. What that amounts to I can't say, all I can say is that you are what you are through all of your experiences. I don't think it amounts to some usable state, that seems illogical to me. It may lead to a certain state, but your journey in creation is long and tailored for you specifically. The end of your state of being is actually where you originated.
I meant the end of the soul, it is seemingly arbitrarily selecting its next soul, gathering characteristics and such. Would that mean that the more bodies a soul has inhabited the more aspects the body would attain from the soul? Wouldn't that mean that transgender people would become less and less apparent, even though the opposite has happened? In regards to the unstable thing, it makes perfect sense, it is slowly gathering "things" just like an atom collecting electrons, either the decay would outrun it, destroying it, or it would achieve balance.
So in other words, perhaps my theory wasn’t as far off as according to you?Our implications are much the same, just with different foundations. That's kind of what I'd like to point out. I am not really trying to prove you wrong more than I am trying to resonate with you.
I'm not necessarily trying to disagree with or prove you wrong, I just want things that make logical sense is all.
Part two of however long this takes
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Thank you for such a long and comprehensive response! :)
Even a valid and sound syllogism would work, and while fascinating your points are all claimed. They do not actually prove anything regarding the matter.But you just said a sound syllogism would work, so here that's what I will do as opposed to "proving" something for you. Again I can't prove to you there is a soul all I can do is point to you the implications, and in that alone everything should make sense, be perfectly clear to you. Reading over your post I'm not sure if you fully absorbed the simplicity of my propositions as being clear answers for this topic. Having said that, I think there are clear forms of evidence for considering the existence of the soul.
Interesting - What I was saying is that whenever there is something proposed, say the existence of a soul, it is then necessarily true that the person who made the claim has now a burden of proof to make that claim true. Regardless of one's implications, you would have to do the leg work to make this certain.
As for any evidence you have for a soul, while that would be interesting to discuss, I'm not certain if it would muddle the other part of this conversation, so I'd ask we address that separately, we can always visit your evidence for it, but I'd rather we discuss what we already have.
Interesting, both the concept that me being an atheist is unfortunate and that if I were open to it I would understand things. To clarify - being an atheist does not inherently mean that you don’t believe in spirits, it means you don’t believe in god(s). Full stop.I only meant unfortunate in terms of you dismissing my posts, which at first seemed like the way you were going. I'm glad you decided to keep this flexible :) just don't assume at any point I'm being insulting because that's not my intentions.I would argue though, spirits or souls existing without God involved makes for an illogical premise. Because now you have multiple layers of reality that somehow began to exist, I don't think it's worth arguing but maybe later I could elaborate on that. For now, lets just assume if the soul exists, it's more than likely it is because God exists. No need to make things more complicated.
That does make sense I know of certain users who would no doubt stop the train at the very beginning of the conversation. I think there is a certain value in regarding propositions that you believe to not be evidenced. A) Because you could always be incorrect, and B) Because they could offer a perspective on grounds agreed. So I try not to dismiss claims due to something like that.
Unfortunately, I would disagree, I presume the implication that we wouldn't, therefore, know where or why these souls or spirits existed without a god? The problem with that is that regardless of what may or may not be more complicated it's just the truth of the word, others have their ways of justifying it, me myself do not accept either proposition, so I suppose this is a nonpoint.
I understand the concept perfectly well, people are misinformed and don’t understand transgender people. People react to things they don’t understand very differently, some are afraid, some lash out at it, some deny it in some hopes of it going away as long as they don’t acknowledge it, whatever.Hopefully you don't see me as being any of that. I'm not reacting to it really more than just showing you the implications of an existing soul how it is in reality and how it effects our experience. And many religious types would never even go this far with you, TBH. Most would probably just call it an abomination or some rebellion to God's will. Perhaps a sin or some perversion. I've gathered a lot of information believe it or not to articulate this simplistically.
Again - you insinuate some larger research or insight, as well as presume the soul and such, which, given my framing of this conversation I will grant. I don't see you as someone who particularly fits into the brand of someone who doesn't understand transgender people, well, I suppose that you have a take on the situation, but I do not see it as valid per se, at least not with the same weight that I give to the psychological perspectives
Not really, but I’ll try not to dismiss it. “Homosexual tendencies” I find that phrase a bit more insulting than any claim you make of spirits. It might just be me, but it just gives me a feeling of the whole, “It’s just a phase!” thing ya know? I could answer why people are homosexual. Because some people like the same gender that they are romantically and/or sexually.If what I'm saying is true, would it not be plausible? all I'm really saying is to put less emphasis on the physical side of our existence, whether we have a male or female body, that should resonate with you so I wonder why you didn't really ponder about it more. I certainly wasn't using the term "tendencies" to be insulting, what would you rather me say? I just mean an attraction to a certain gender....
It was really supposed to be a note, a side point, that people used phrases like, "Homosexual life style" and "Homosexual behaviors" to insuinate that once chooses their sexuality, which is very untrue. As for do I think its plausible given your view of souls/spirits? I suppose, but I don't really think it resonates with me. I'm granting a position for the sake of discussion, I'm actually heavily and solidly against the proposition that a soul exists.
Boom done, no souls required.The conclusion to you might be that simple, and I would agree if we were to assume no soul exists. But, in a world where we have to face a variety of worldviews we can't afford to just assume things. I am trying to show you it's just as simple though, even if we have a soul. Basically I'm trying to get the point across that there is a compatibility here, between a soul and what transgenders and homosexuals experience. Most religious sources would never offer a compatible platform, they would mostly just reject any thought of being either. And mainly I'm referring to religious people.
I agree that most relgious people and organizations wouldn't give it a second thought, and I applaud you for your obvious thought to the matter. However, whereas you see me as assuming souls don't exist, I presume you are assuming they do (A note, I will get to your post on my "Does God exist" page, I had a set back and most of my response was deleted, but it'll take a little bit longer to get to.)
While I don't disagree that your idea of a soul and transgender don't contradict one another, I want to point out that it adds another, unneccesary level to the equation, similar to what you noted earlier, except this time it;s with regards to the plausibility and not simply how a position works intrinsinically.
Definitely an interesting take; however, there is no other realm but the physical.This is something you've assumed and really for no good reason. It definitely does not explain the full scope of human experience or account for it. I don't think it is a good practice to simply ignore testimonial evidence, especially when it is so widely recorded and so well established, at the very least one should consider a transcendent reality as being possible. This would obviously account for such a wide date base of religious and spiritual experience. Not even getting into NDE's or OBE's, but certainly those are included.NDE's would be a very clear point of reference supporting the claim that the soul exists independent of the physical body, no other clear reason should this phenomenon happen at all. At face value, it's a perfect match for this premise.
Um... just because something is a possibility, that does not make it a likely possibility. Something which is supernatural is by the laws of physics: impossible, and therefore if anyone were to claim it would need strong evidence than an appeal to populum. Else, one could also justify: The earth being flat, aliens visiting earth, the sun revolving around the sun, etc, etc... My point is, tesimonial "evidence" which is so loose 95% of the time isn't trust worthy in the first place, the other 5% that have other plausible reasonings not to mention.
Your mind is simply a connection of high-speed transmission of nerves and the like. I don’t see another realm to particulate someone’s experience in. I think there is a clear-cut answer. If someone’s gender identity is that of a female and their sex expressed phenotype is male, that person is a female.I don't believe that is more clear cut at all. If the soul is non-gender (which it is) then that is a much more direct answer. That would explain why in some instances, a person does not really identify with their born gender role because at the center of their being nothing of the sort exists. Basically then, gender and preferences are just a superficial occurrence at one level.BTW, I'm not using another realm of existence to articulate what one experiences in their mind per say rather what one experiences in their immediate conscious experience. The physical body and or the brain is just a conduit, a component that confines a souls experience to this world. The conscious awareness of a person is always connected to the soul, where the soul goes there the conscious experience follows. The mind is only a piece of machinery, the soul uses the mind to navigate creation but the conscious soul is the one observing the mind. The mind is really more of a storage compartment for memory and information, it is inanimate.
The problem with the first claim is that is lacks evidence, the second question is a misunderstanding: Something which is simpler is not always the preferred solution, something with the least amount of assumptions are. One way is based on multi-layered scientifically verrified fact, one is based on the (to me at least) assumption that sould exist, but I digress.
I find each of these claims interesting, but even if I were to presume a soul, I'd have to ask, why are all of these seemingly arbitrary properties being ascribed to it? Not to mention, how could we detect this soul? You're saying there isn't another plane of existence, or at least you're not using it for souls, but then there should be some physical basis for souls, plasma, wavelength, etc, etc, can we detect them? I would say no.
1st of however many this takes......
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Did you forget about..... all of the old testament?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
Nah it's fine, just next time if you could tag me for convenience as you said, I'm pretty active, so I'm usually busy with something else. If I see it I also may get distracted by something else. I have a couple of other things I have to get to, then I'll address this, kay?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Depends:
first off, you didn't answer my question. Don't think I didn't notice the deflection.
Second off, why I am giving credence to a god in the first place? I never specified which god, so this goes to whatever you may or may not believe in.
Disobedience all the way, I would prefer not to get murdered.
Created:
Posted in:
Does that make anyone uncomfortable? I'll ask it again:
The bible says you should stone gay people.
I'm gay
If you had the means and God ordered you to do it, would you murder me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
So....... you agree with me? At least that the bible is homophobic? I'm gay, question, if you had the means and were commanded to by god, would you murder me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Um.. Career-wise? I don't know if you've read it, but I plan on graduating with a dual degree in psychology and philosophy, I plan on writing books and essays regarding my work (mostly as a side unless it picks up steam), perhaps video essays (If i ever learn to properly script and edit videos), but I plan my main revenue to be from psychology, chiefly consultant, psycho-analyst and the like.
Tldr: I will be a mess
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
You know I'd appreciate it if you would've linked me to this topic that way I could actually respond to each of your points.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
I wasn't meaning to say you made the argument, just the one it implies to make
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@seldiora
Typically instrumental rock, I do have a taste for older rock too: Piano Man, September, Cold as Ice (Foreigner), Seven Nation Army, stuff like that
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
No... Yes, my gender is male, I am a guy, but I'm 16 and I spend all of my time arguing with people online (some would argue not very well), so.... Idk... colloquially I wouldn't call myself a man. It's an anxiety thing I think. And I'm also fine with cheese, but I think the best (besides arguable a pizza which is just a giant chocolate chip cookie) is pepperoni
Created: