zedvictor4

I try not to be.

For sure.

But I currently dismiss the pointless concept of belief.

Which I think is a reasonable option.

And not everyone has such dependable cornerstones.

Though they seem to have an ongoing dependency on natalism.

Selfish hey?

It poses the question:

Is it morally right to produce unnecessary people.

Our moral obligation may not necessarily be to each other.

So, I continue to run with the idea of purpose rather than chance.

Though I could easily come at it from a nihilist angle.

Though I seem to not  think nihilistically.

Which I'm guessing is a mix of inherent and acquired data.

Actually, isn't antinatalism a self-defeating philosophical argument.

Rather similar to nihilism.

It's just that we season the antinatalist debate with a sprinkling of abstract conceptualism.....Namely morality.

Take a thousand pages or more of folktales myth and gobbledygook.

Reinterpret,

And,

Make post dated predictions.

Materialism is the new spirituality.

In fact, materialism has been the spirituality of the masses for quite a long time.

Spirituality comes in the palm of the hand.

Maga and Anti-Maga.

Yin and Yang.

Red hatted and blue hatted.

Americans

Are you certain?

This week British Telecom a national communication provider announced that 5000 jobs were to go, citing  AI technology as the reason.

These were not unintelligent people who's jobs were on the line.

Ok, so loosely related to topic.

But what I'm asking is;

For how long will human society be able to justify and support  the production of a unnecessary under class and the hardships that will be imposed upon it?

Will morality prevail?

Though what would take moral precedence?

The Right to unchecked procreation.......Or population control based upon intellectual necessity, removing hardship before it occurs.....Antinatalism as it were, though not necessarily as the likes of Schopenhaeur were meaning. 

How realistic is Best Korea, is also another discussion.

Strong chance that visiting aliens will have gone through the WW3 phase long ago and actually be very understanding about it.

Given the purposeful nature of species development relative to the Universal Law of Material Development..

I'm also assuming that said aliens will also have given the idea of antinatlism short shrift. Seeing as their species survived long enough to overcome the difficulties of inter-stellar travel.

Only joking Kaitlyn.

Does that mean that the ratio of Palestinian men to Palestinian women is 1 to 4.

Or simply mean a similar ratio of Israeli women to Palestinian women.

In so much as women usually only produce a child once every nine months.

Because, for Palestinians to outbreed Israelis, there would clearly need to be a higher ration of Palestinian women to Israeli women.

In fact the number of Men would be irrelevant.

Nonetheless:

On the basis of a 1 to 1 ratio, Palestinian Men to Palestinian women.

And a marriage ratio of 1 to 4, this would mean that 75% of Palestinian men would never marry.

Seriously depleting the gene pool.

But consequently increasing the pool of potential suicide bombers.

Who needs a drone when you've got an idiot in a vest.

NB. This is merely a satirical response to Best Korea, and in no way meant to offend Palestinians.

For sure.

I don't live my life worrying about flipping coins.

Nor do I worry about purposefulness or purposelessness....And I certainly don't believe either.

Though I think that the term "astronomical" is very apt, when it comes to universal probabilities.

As for lower and higher purpose.

I was thinking more a deistic GOD scenario  (higher)...... In comparison to an evolutionary system of material processes and development of which humanity is a part. (lower).

Not that I would disagree with the idea of innate human purpose. Which in itself is contradictory to the abstract concept of antinatalism.

Which of course is not to say that intellectually derived conclusions and subsequent actions in themselves are not purposeful.

From which we could infer that antinatalism might also be purposeful within that context.

Nice discussing with you.

So in on breath you admit.

And in the next you're,

If you cannot prove something, then you have no basis to suggest or indicate that something is substantially more likely or less likely.

Come sit on the fence with me Kaitlyn.

And purpose is simply  an alternative idea to purposelessness.

Whereas, I would suggest that "higher purpose" is perhaps an unnecessary over-dramatization of the idea of purpose.

Though interestingly, your reference to a higher purpose indicates to me that you do acknowledge the idea of a lower purpose.

Freudian slip perhaps.

Let's refer to it as social guidance then.

Though it is nonetheless the imposition of one's ideology upon another's.

Which I suppose is the basis of species evolution and it's material achievements.

Do you think that the labouring under-class is becoming redundant?

Unfairness is a data construct.

And innate mechanisms generally incentivise the opposite of self destruction.

And afterlife is wishful thinking.

Your personal feelings have everything to do with the topic.

It is impossible to detach your feelings from a thread that your feelings created.

The closet door is ajar.

The birth death thing means that humanity is constantly in a state of flux.

So I would suggest that to save humanity, only requires the salvation of a few current fecund humans, rather than most humans.

Realistically, it would probably be better if less people were saved.

Or.

We just die and decay.

And biblical scribblings are just 2000 year old, manmade BS.

Maybe it's weird not to behave like that.

Who decides what is and isn't weird.

Maybe if something can and does occur then it is actually normal.

Though I have a genuine inkling that you actually found this video quite erotic.

I sort of get the impression that your extreme aversion is designed to mask your real feelings.

The problem with "society" deciding a "societal standard".

Is that it is rarely society that decides.

Usually just a handful of Academics and/or influential people.

Who want to tell us what we should decide.

Intellectual tyranny as it were.

Nonetheless, modern religious ideology has been thrashing out it's message for 2000 years or so and, failed to achieve totality.

Human tyranny breeds human resentment.

So I would suggest that to achieve a state of ideological totality, will require a more advanced level of connected intelligence. 

High School is probably more about point scoring than actually discussing.

And indication is a word that you introduced, but not a word that is particularly relative to the discussion.

The appropriate word is suggestion.

Basically suggesting an indefinite purpose, brought about by the very fact of existence.

Idea and purpose generated by intelligence and communicated through language, which is what we both do.

"Not objectively bestowed upon us via the author of existence" for example. ......Nice 

And magical beings......Although just as likely as unlikely, have not previously been suggestively bestowed upon you by this author.

So Kaitlyn, can you unequivocally prove that everything has no purpose at all?

I certainly cannot prove the opposite, and I'm also certain that you cannot unequivocally disprove the opposite.

And it's been 47 years since I attended High School, but I'm still sure that I don't know for sure.

And I'm also sure with equal certainty that you do not know for sure.

There are certainly no nth degrees relative to this particular topic.

Biblical scholars are those who read the bible way too much.

And don't read science books.

Because they know that the World was invented 6000 years ago

When a bloke named GOD switched the lights on.

They are also certain that GOD had a son by a Jewish virgin.

But wait for it

GOD's son turned out to be a clone of himself.

Hey, he was good at genetic engineering.

Why wouldn't he be.

He knew how to do stuff.

Though I'm surprised that he didn't give Joe and Mary a Tesla.

Save them having to traipse all the way to Bethlehem on a donkey.

Or just teleport them.

Or just clone himself in his laboratory.

GOD seemed to enjoy a lot of faff.

Yes, I've already put forward the idea of comparative adulthood to BK.

And Mary was travelling hundreds of miles to visit her aunty.

Poor donkey.

Commentators for sure.

Commentators all.

And I also put forward to BK the idea that the bible neglects to mention everything else that happened between then and now.

Not to mention everything else that happened before then, and also then but elsewhere.

Funny how MR Omni only handed down tablets of stone relative to social and religious ideology.

Funny how Mr Omni didn't have a pencil and paper.

Poor old Moses having to lug lumps of rock around.

Could have said far more in a big book.

The Bible sure is comprehensive though.

Because we know for certain that Mary was off to visit her aunty.

Truth becomes Strawman.

Easy way of ignoring truth.

The reality of of a pregnant teenager is either consensual sex or rape.

Holy spirits are just mythological fluff.

And you would prefer to believe mythological fluff, rather than accept the harsh reality of the human condition.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

And funny how there is no intelligent life out there....Just wild speculation and no evidence.

That's more than a bit like comparing the bible with any ET based sci-fi novel.

All speculative stuff made up by speculative people.

So I will concede that there is currently no more chance of meeting ET than there is of meeting a Christian GOD.

Though this doesn't negate the fact that there is more chance of ET, than there is of an actual Christian GOD.

Spatial probability rather than 2000 year old Middle Eastern Mythology.

And for every intelligent life form that might exist out there, there will more than likely be an associated GOD myth.

Which certainly won't be a MANGOD from Bethlehem.

Ok, so I am an exponent of the idea that everything that occurs within a universe is real.

Then there is thinking man who possesses the power of differentiation.

Which inevitably results in contradiction.....Something that we are all inevitably guilty of.

So differentiating for a moment, I still hold that morals are "made up stuff" and not biologically inherent.

But nonetheless real within a social data context and therefore socially inherent, but also variable relative to social sub-groups.

Though, we have strayed from the philosophical proposition regarding antinatalism and theoretical correctness.

Which I would suggest are just more made up stuff, necessitated not by morality but by the necessity of philosophical differentiation.

Nonetheless, the idea of antinatalism is slowly becoming more mainstream and will perhaps evolve into some new capitalist venture, rather like transsexual ideology has done.

Overthinking kids suing overthinking parents, adding to the crock of gold that is the litigation industry.

Though I'm not sure what kids will do if they win their case.

Spend their compensation on assisted suicide in Switzerland perhaps.....Moral dilemma me thinks.

The jury is out on trees, they are certainly more social creatures than we gave them credit for.

Nope, theory is theory and correct is correct....In my opinion

If one is repeating theory, then it might be considered correct, but only if it was repeated correctly.

If you firebombed my house and bashed my children, then that is what you would do. The abstract concept of morality would be a tad irrelevant.

And I'm not sure where me inflicting wanton pain fits into the argument. It's you who's the wannabe firebomber and child basher.

Very true.

My dad left school at fourteen and went to work in an abbatoir.

That was 1934, and 6 years later he went to fight in a war.

And today if you so much as say boo to kids they become psychological wrecks......Well you know what I mean.

I guessed as much.

Please stick to the topic.

Persons over here under the age of 16 are considered  to be stupid to think for themselves and are at it like rabbits

And younger people under and over the age of 16 think that adults are stupid.

And some people will f**k anything that moves.

A bit like GODDO and his penchant for raping virgins.

And Jesus's propensity for boys only clubs.

How old was Mary by the way?

Does other life exist elsewhere?

Maybe, maybe not.

Is Christianity necessary?

It is for some.

Are you aware of  just how vast the universe is?

 We haven't even got past the Moon yet.

Give ET a chance.

And this proves the Christian God and disproves evolution.

Sound theory for sure.......LOL.

What was it you just stated?

"Merely speculation and wild theory".....That was it.

Just a bit like a MANGOD who fucks virgins.

And then 33 years later nails his son to a post for our sins.

Sound f**king theory Trade.

Sound.

Newer research may have cast doubt on older theory.

That's the way it goes, isn't it.

Theoretically correct is a contradiction.

A theory is an unproven proposition and therefore is neither correct nor incorrect.

Nonetheless, morals are just made up stuff

Rather like antinatalism.

Whereas procreation is about as real as the species gets.

Do you think that trees worry about antinatalism after a good pollenating.

For sure.

Any living being that has mastered inter-stellar space travel is far superior to us.

I'm guessing that there's a strong chance that ET is more likely to be A.I. and long since decided that creation wasn't the work of magical creatures.

What is "cramble"?

Though if ET got here first we would have to cede to it's intellectual authority.

And if it said that religion was a load of baloney we would have to agree.

Hey, but Universal Laws being what they are, ET would probably have it's own GOD, which would probably involve having to do all sorts of bizarre ritual sh*t.

Like whistling songs through it's arse.

That's assuming that arses are also a Universal Law of Organic Biology

"Going soft"

Refers to a softening of both muscular tissue and brain tissue.

Which leads to sentimentality and someone else having to organise......the toilet tissue.

Nope.

Mrs Penguin is a good girl.

Did you know that all Penguins talk with an American accent and really enjoy dancing.

I saw this documentary once.

Well, I think that it's fair to say that if penguins can do it then humans could do it.

Isn't it  just a case of, up until now there's been no real benefit in doing so.

Same applies to Mars really.

Though Mars is one step away from this Earthly prison.

Of course I don't know.

I merely suggest that because I don't know, it is therefore impossible to rule anything out.

You don't know that.

It's just an idea that you run with.

Meta-physics....Abstract theory....Interesting philosophical concept.

Isn't all theory abstract to a degree?

To theorise requires imagination.

That is, the assessment and modification of acquired and stored data, some factual and some not......Output is wholly suppositional, and may or may not be proven to be correct.

A biological function and process that seeks to further understanding....Purposeful even if it serves no greater necessity.

Nope. No faith

I accept equally, the idea that everything could be purposeless.

In so much as everything that occurs has no greater purpose.

Though I am as aware as I can be, that matter from an unknown beginning has developed and progressed rather than remaining in stasis, which in itself could be regarded as purposeful.

Ok, so this doesn't necessarily provide an argument for a greater purpose, which is to say a beginning to an end with a final goal.

A goal which I propose might simply be the re-initiation of the universal process.

Why indeed.

Isn't that just what we do, especially here on Debateart.

Though 95% of my time is spent either  thinking about mundane day to day stuff or asleep.

As for life.

Well, I would suggest that biological function generally provides us with purpose whether we like it or not.

As I clearly stated, I do not believe.

I Run with Ideas.

And I can run with both ideas....Purpose or No purpose

GOD principle represents a purpose relative to material development.

GOD principle could still be applicable in a non-purposeful material development scenario.

"Because I feel like it".

Is for sure a well worn epithet.

But is a rather inaccurate epithet....In my opinion.

Coming to a conclusion, or conclusions, or variable conclusions is just an internal electro-chemical processing trait.

Nonetheless I am currently of the opinion that it is not possible to affirmatively conclude anything about everything.

So Kaitlyn appears to affirmatively conclude that everything has no purpose....So how do they come by this conclusion?

Other than having air to breathe 

One would still have to spend most of one's time cooped up indoors.

And eating Penguins.

Oh yeah....No Penguins on Mars either.

You're getting repetitive Doc.

First sign of dementia.

Nice self control Deb.

Dr Nigel Biggar

AKA

G.R. Bigdangler.

Geoffrey Robert Bigdangler.

Doctor of Philosoffy and a Angular Priest.

Geoffrey Robert Erectangular Bigdanglar Priest.

Coincidentally I took a look and listen  at a Jordan Peterson discussion just the other day.

And his nauseating whining eventually got me down.

I came to the conclusion that he was an institutionalised academic with a persecution complex.

What I was saying was.

GOD is a metaphor.

And so is MOTHER NATURE.

Surely an easily graspable bit of data?

The bible is a man made book that was once sort of relevant.

So what is the point of this topic.

If you're not comparing biblical standards with modern social standards.

I would suggest that BK is either very straightforward and honest or deliberately obtuse.

I'm inclined to think the former.

True.

But you were making comparisons between then and now.

So I was making a similar comparison to indicate the absurdity of using the bible as a modern user guide.

So, 2000 years ago life expectancy was very short.

Therefore breeding had to start much earlier.

Post-pubescent females were probably not considered to be children.

GOD is that which might give purpose to everything.

Nature is everything that might occur within a universe.....Or without.

Mother Nature is seemingly an appropriate phrase.

Two fat ladies 88.

A group of fat ladies 88,888,888.

Bingo.

It doesn't say anything in the bible about a lot of things.

Where does it mention the ethicality of guns or computer technology for example.

Fact is that blokes wrote the bible about bloke stuff,  relative to 2000 or so years ago.

If an omni-GOD compiled a user manual,  it would need to include instructions for every aspect of existence from  start to finish.

Which just goes to prove that the bible is bunkum and GOD is a tall tale made up by ignorant blokes.

And believed by the gullible.

Good old Joe.

I would suggest that he doesn't stand for another term though.

It would probably be better if he sat for it.