Total posts: 276
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
I concede on this issue.
I've been reading some philosophy the last couple of days. The topic about whether numbers and logic are real or not is a minefield, and philosophers can't agree. My own intellectual taste aligns with conceptualism, but I am not educated enough to argue it. So I think I should keep quiet about that (for now).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
I don't think that morality is objective.
I will define morality as the set of principles that lead/govern human behavior and guide us in our interactions with others.
I think your definition should be revised:
Morality is the set of principles that guide people in their interactions with others within a society or culture.
These principles can be grounded in religion, philosophy, or culture, but they all share the same common goal:To help us live together in harmony and pursue our goals in a way that benefits us all.
I agree.
There actually is evidence to suggest that morality is objective. Studies have shown that people across cultures share certain moral intuitions, such as the belief that it is wrong to harm innocent people or that fairness and reciprocity are important values.
Is it not possible, that most societies share certain moral intuitions because they have found that they are beneficial? Societies work better when not killing, not stealing, and not raping is customary or the law. You don't need an authority to figure this out -- it's obvious if you have lived in the world for awhile.
If morality were subjective, then we would have no way of resolving moral arguments.
Why not? Local custom or law can be the basis for resolving moral arguments. They work just fine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Thanks. I need to think some more about this before I continue.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
For it to be self-referential it has to refer to itself.
"every statement implies itself"
OK, that was a cheap shot. I get that you meant the entire statement of which the above is a part, is not self-referential.
Be that as it may, lets discuss what “objectively true” means (or doesn’t mean). You seem to mean it in a non-local way, such that a non-human, intelligent being in another star system would acknowledge the truth of your statement (assuming that it was presented in a way intelligible to that being), and that is always true, no matter what. Is this correct?
If it is, you probably would need to educate said intelligent being about the context in which the statement is true. And it is at least possible that said being could have an entirely different way of perceiving the universe and communicating about it, and disagree (as I am disagreeing) based on its own understanding.
For instance, for a being which perceives everything as a one, continuous thing, talking about separate things would make no sense. Why focus on a particular microscopic feature of the universe as a separate thing, they might say. And I'm sure there are many other ways of seeing things that could possibly cause a being to deny the truth of your statement.
I'm being really nit-picky here because to me "objectively true" is an extreme claim about something that sets off my bs detector. Of course I could be wrong, but you haven't convinced me yet.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
their cause
It doesn't have a cause except to govern according to the Constitution and the laws.
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
" That's right we aren't beholden to large corporations like some news organizations. We are publicly funded, which means we can tell you the truth even if wall street billionaires want to keep you in the dark"
I agree with your alternative spin. I would like to see that. However,
Really stupid not to spin this as a good thing and instead by afraid of people knowing that you get funding from government
Maybe this occurred because so many people are expending their energies to convince others that government is all bad. Maybe it is having the effect that they want.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
What I've shown is that "every statement implies itself" is true by definition of "implies."Don't confuse this with the "rules of human language and rules of human logic."
I don't see any confusion here. The "definition" is a human linguistic construct.
I see in that sentence a collection of symbols which is meaningful to human beings. The symbols are not meaningful in any other sense that I know of.
What I don't see in that sentence is any connection to an "external reality." It is self-referential and says nothing about the physical world. Is there some other world that I don't know about?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
You have shown that A and the proposition “every statement implies itself” can be classified as true using the rules of human language and the rules of human logic. That classification is not external to humanity, and does not show that they are “very real parts of external reality.”
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Let's start with this. Do you agree or disagree with the following: The proposition "every statement implies itself" is objectively true.
I disagree.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I guess I wasn't very clear. The correlation didn't matter to me, but obviously it would to those who felt slighted by it. Your comment motivated me to think some more about it though. I thought the study replicated previous work and was not newsworthy, and that such broad generalization is ill-advised in any case. Yet I care more about the freedom to publish such things than about people's reactions to it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
What I recall about Feynman is that he came up with first new way to calculate something in quantum dynamics since the 1930s, and that he was called upon to find the cause of the Challenger disaster.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
There is a lot of aggression masquerading as victimhood.
I agree.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I'm not always sure what someone means by "fascist." My post above is accepted by many people as the best definition to date. But pop media are known for using terms indiscriminately. Have to go case by case.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
The quantum stuff is over my head. I don't have the math to understand the physics. All I know is that experiments have shown that photons travel as a wave and impact as a particle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@Stephen
From The Anatomy of Fascism (2004) by Robert O. Paxton
mobilizing passions (pp. 219-20):
⦁ a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions
"Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation.”1
“We're gathered together in the heart of our nation's capital for one very, very basic and simple reason: To save our democracy. ... We want to go back and we want to get this right because we're going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed and we're not going to stand for that. ... This is not just a matter of domestic politics — this is a matter of national security.”2
‘But it’s not a natural disaster that [Stewart]Rhodes thinks will catapult the country into chaos. In his email announcing the launch of the plan, Rhodes lays out the course of action he predicts “the enemy”—the government—is preparing to follow, including “intentionally triggering a catastrophic economic collapse” as a means of creating disorder that they will then use as an excuse to impose martial law, destroy the constitution and use the billions of dollars in ammunition, armored vehicles and weapons he claims the Department of Homeland Security and local police have been stockpiling “to control and contain us.” “We’re headed for a Weimar Republic-style collapse,” he said. “And Americans are foolish to ignore it.”’4
--------------
⦁ the primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether individual or universal, and the subordination of the individual to it
‘In deciding to attend the December 12 rally, Greene testified that he and other members, including Pezzola, were “ready and willing” to be a part of whatever might happen. ‘3
--------------
⦁ the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external
‘[Trump’s] delivery was not presidential, rather it was harsh and indignant. It resonated with resentful Trump supporters who feel they are the victims of an America that has left them behind.‘1
“But it almost seems that they're all going out of their way to hurt all of us and to hurt our country.”2
--------------
⦁ dread of the group’s decline under the corrosive effects of individualistic liberalism, class conflict, and alien influences
‘... Chapman was kicked out three years ago, he attempted to gain control of the group in the fall of 2020 and steer the Proud Boys toward more open extremism, announcing, “We will no longer cuck to the left by appointing token negroes as our leaders. We will no longer allow homosexuals or other ‘undesirables’ into our ranks. We will confront the Zionist criminals who wish to destroy our civilization. We recognize that the West was built by the White Race alone and we owe nothing to any other race.”’5
--------------
⦁ the need for closer integration of a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary
“The Proud Boys vocally promoted themselves as violent actors, even in their initiation process,” says one former FBI agent. “It’s unusual for any kind of organization to publicly state its intent to break the law.”5
--------------
⦁ the need for authority by natural chiefs (always male), culminating in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s historical destiny
"I am your voice," Republican nominee Donald J. Trump told convention delegates in Cleveland as he accepted his party's nomination in a speech filled with anger but lacking soaring rhetoric. Trump railed against a rigged system. "No one knows the system better than me," he said pausing to smile, "which is why I alone can fix it." 1
‘When asked to denounce the Proud Boys, Trump first said he didn’t know who they were, then said, “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by.” ‘5
‘Bertino said interest and membership requests for the Proud Boys surged after then-President Donald Trump addressed the group by name during a 2020 presidential debate.’6
--------------
⦁ the superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason
“The attacks on our police, and terrorism in our cities, threaten our way of life." He promised, "the crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, very soon, come to an end. Beginning on January 20 (Inauguration Day), safety will be restored." He continued, "We will make America strong again. We will make America proud again. We will make America Safe again. We will make America great again!"2
--------------
⦁ the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success
‘[Matthew]Greene said that he and Pezzola had talked about how “the typical things that had been going on to redress our grievances [with government] were ineffective and were not working.”
“Based on the events that I had seen over the summer and over the past few years, violence seemed to be getting a response,” Greene said. when people acted in violence people did not back down, did not say you were going too far,” Greene said of Proud Boys leadership. “If anything, it was celebrated.” ’3
--------------
⦁ the right of the chosen people to dominate others without restraint from any kind of human or divine law, right being decided by the sole criterion of the group’s prowess within a Darwinian struggle
“Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.” “We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we've been forced to believe. ... The radical left knows exactly what they're doing. They're ruthless and it's time that somebody did something about it. ... The Constitution doesn't allow me to send them back to the States. Well, I say, yes it does, because the Constitution says you have to protect our country and you have to protect our Constitution, and you can't vote on fraud. And fraud breaks up everything, doesn't it? When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very different rules.”2
----------------------------------------------
1 Huffpost, 07/22/2016, on the Republican national convention
2 Donald Trump, 01/06/2021
3 Hannah Rabinowitz and Holmes Lybrand, ”Proud Boys member testifies about group’s culture....”, CNN, Jan. 24, 2023
4 ”Oath Keepers: Bring on the Collapse!,” Caitlin Dickson, Daily Beast, July 11, 2017
5 EJ Dickson, ”The Rise and Fall of the Proud Boys,” Rolling Stone, Jun 15, 2021
6 Quin Owen, “Proud Boys saw surge in membership after Trump's debate message...”, ABC News, Feb. 21, 2023
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Because the media falsely labels all sorts of organizations as "fascist," giving moral justification to oppress all sorts of unaffiliated people.
No, "media" do not. The word fascist was avoided by the MSM until after Jan. 6, 2021. After that date, the term has been justified in many instances, I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Ok, so we disagree about what they are proud of.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
The quote is from and about a Disney character. So these real life men fighting with Antifa scum are likened to a fabled Disney character. And that is what they are "proud" of is it?
What are you talking about? I clearly said I think it means they are proud to be boys, and I said nothing about that being right or wrong. In fact, there is nothing wrong with being proud to be a boy. I think the PBs are acting out a version of feeling discriminated against and put down by Antifa and others.
Why should anyone be against anti-fascism? Fascism is a terrible ideology. Antifa has its share of thugs just like PB, but I think the alt-right extremists and their Republican fellow travelers are a far worse threat to our republic and way of life than the leftists are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You didn't get it. The quote shows that the Proud Boys are proud to be boys. I think it's fair to say that some men feel that they are being discriminated against these days. These guys are standing up and saying, "We are proud to be boys."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
If and when examples need to be made, it will most certainly come from the pool of the unconcerned and defiant first.Yeah, if and when.
Have you heard the expression, "When you have always been privileged, equality feels like oppression"?
I think that's the situation now among a certain number of white males. They like to break things when they don't get their way.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
@Platypi
Stupid people are more likely than eggheads to believe in God, a controversial new study claims.
Even if true, people should know better than to publish it. It just stirs up resentment. I don't think it matters much anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I'm glad I don't feel that way. Life is hard enough without having to worry that government agents are out to get me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well, if you really believe that, what are you doing to protect yourself from it?
Created:
-->
@PGA2.0
Atheism is a claim, a worldview, and a lifestyle.
No, it is not. It is a personal statement about belief in a god. That's it. Atheists' lifestyles vary just like theists. Do you believe in unicorns? If not, how does that affect your worldview and lifestyle?
The atheist lives as if no God exists.
Well, yeah. We just go about our lives without that belief. Not a big deal to us.
An atheist is a person who is their own god
Now you are getting way off base. Do you think that if I don't believe in an external god, then I must be claiming to be my own god? That's incorrect. I'm saying I don't believe in any god.
I often point out to the atheist that not believing in God contradicts the way they live. They live as if there are right and wrong and that such a belief really matters, yet how can it ultimately matter in an amoral universe that doesn't care because it is not personal and conscious.
Here's how it works. Humans evolved in societies which work better when people don't lie, cheat, steal and kill. A small percentage of people do those things, but most of us do not. That's because it works better for us. We get along with our neighbors that way. That doesn't require a god-given morality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
It's no wonder that experts revise their ideas and wonder about what's really going on. Humans are to the universe like subatomic particles are to us. It is hubris to think that we could ever devise a "theory of everything."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The government isn't going to choose favorites when it feels threatened.
I agree. But the US government is not as big a threat as the hundreds of right-wing militia and the lunatic Republicans in this country.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Wikipedia:
The name is derived from the song "Proud of Your Boy" originally created for Disney's 1992 film Aladdin but left out following story changes in production, and later featured in the 2011 musical adaptation. In the song, the character Aladdin apologizes to his mother for being a bad son and promises to make her proud. McInnes interprets it as Aladdin apologizing for being a boy. He first heard it while attending his daughter's school music recital. The song's "fake, humble, and self-serving" lyrics became a running theme on his podcast. McInnes said it was the most annoying song in the world but that he could not get enough of it.
Biden is a lying bumbling idiot that has no genuine interest in the welfare of the American people.
Yeah, you are entitled to your opinion, no matter how divorced from reality it is.
Alt-right wingers are not very imaginative. They just take our criticism and say "I know you are, but what am I?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
So anti-government is exclusively right wing?Being subservient to the government no matter what is considered left wing?
Not at all. Forming militias to overthrow or subvert the govt. is more popular among right wingers now. They are far more numerous than left wing groups.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@Stephen
It looks like I'm interacting with a bunch of right-wingers. No use arguing ... neither of us will change our minds.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
“The Proud Boys vocally promoted themselves as violent actors, even in their initiation process,” says one former FBI agent. “It’s unusual for any kind of organization to publicly state its intent to break the law.” --- EJ Dickson, ”The Rise and Fall of the Proud Boys,” Rolling Stone, Jun 15, 2021
‘[Matthew]Greene said that he and Pezzola had talked about how “the typical things that had been going on to redress our grievances [with government] were ineffective and were not working. ... Based on the events that I had seen over the summer and over the past few years, violence seemed to be getting a response,” Greene said. when people acted in violence people did not back down, did not say you were going too far,” Greene said of Proud Boys leadership. “If anything, it was celebrated.” ’ --- Hannah Rabinowitz and Holmes Lybrand, ”Proud Boys member testifies about group’s culture....”, CNN, Jan. 24, 2023
Maybe it was just a coincidence that Proud Boys appeared at the times and places of BLM protests.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Things like math and logic, however, are very important and very real parts of external reality ....
I doubt that.
They are human constructs. They are not "out there" during the times when humans do not exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Are you a fascist?Nope, you my honest a goodness opinion.
That answer seems a bit garbled. Your other posts are usually more articulate.
Proud Boys.never heard of them. What are they proud of?
Really? I think they are white supremacist fascists. Maybe that's what they are proud of. Sounds twisted to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
He didn't say why he thought they were cowardly scum. I'm new here, so I'm still learning which people believe what.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Thanks. I didn't know how draws were scored (or if they were scored).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You wrote that in your opinion Antifa members are "cowardly scum."
How would you characterize the groups (such as Proud Boys) who fight Antifa?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
I don't know whether this has been reported or not (this is a very long thread).
As of today (April 11, 2023) I noticed that for user Math_Enthusiast, the site shows that they have participated in two debates and have a 75% win rate. The 75% is either an error, or I don't understand how that number is calculated. I noticed something like this for a different user but neglected to document it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Well I believe them to be cowardly scum. Just my opinion of course. Don't take it personal.
I don't take it personally, and I strongly disagree. Are you a fascist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
Spiritual logicism: The belief that spiritual truths about the universe can be understood as, and fundamentally are, an extension of abstract logic.
What does spiritual mean to you? What is a spiritual truth?
... An extension of logicism to the nature of reality.... with certain additional axioms, we should be able to describe our own reality.... The reality we live in can be entirely described by a set of axioms.
Are you asserting that there is one reality for everyone? that everyone shares one and only one reality?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Here's another view. This one from Umberto Eco.
1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition.
2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake.
4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism.
5. Disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.
6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.
7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. ... at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at one and the same time inside and outside. In the U.S., a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson’s New World Order, but ... there are many others.
8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.
9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex.
10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak.
11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. The cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. ... the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death ....
12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits. ... Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.
13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism... individuals as individuals have no rights ... since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. ... Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments.
14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
from The Anatomy of Fascism (2004) by Robert O. Paxton
mobilizing passions (pp. 219-20):
⦁ a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions
⦁ the primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether individual or universal, and the subordination of the individual to it
⦁ the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external
⦁ dread of the group’s decline under the corrosive effects of individualistic liberalism, class conflict, and alien influences
⦁ the need for closer integration of a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary
⦁ the need for authority by natural chiefs (always male), culminating in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s historical destiny
⦁ the superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason
⦁ the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success
⦁ the right of the chosen people to dominate others without restraint from any kind of human or divine law, right being decided by the sole criterion of the group’s prowess within a Darwinian struggle
I think most of these fit Trump and his followers far more than Biden's administration.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Thanks for the info. It's news to me, and I'll find out more about it.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
Your #4 is correct. God does not exist, except in the minds of humans.
Created:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
There is no such thing as objective morality.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Everyone In This thread is for some gun regulations nice strawman though.
Athias sounds like they are for no regulations at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
Everyone has the right to bear "arms."It is not a "right" if it's subject to exogenous limitations. That of which you speak is merely a "privilege" extended by government.
No one’s rights are absolute. In a large, complex society, there will be conflicts. That must be adjudicated somehow.
Does everyone have a right bear any weapon whatsoever? If the answer is no, then you have to decide where to draw the line between arms which are permitted and those which are not permitted.There should be no line drawn. That's the point. The weapon is merely an inanimate object that is used by someone.
Well, then you are an extremist, and unfit for the society we live in.
People already own and possess nuclear weapons and tanks. Some of them are referred to as members of government.
That’s a straw man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
The Concise Oxford Dictionary includes "reverence & dread" and "reverence & awe" as secondary definitions for fear, and labels both "archaic." So, I guess it's possible that those definitions might be applied to some bible verses, but obviously not to all.
Created: