Total posts: 13,987
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
So.
Once again in a roundabout way you admit that Ebuc-speak is not necessarily representative of anything factually representative of something.
And for sure, your givens are as presented......Which is a truism......Or an obviousism
Good.
So we have concluded that we are still as uncertain as we always have been.
But we have some ideas.
Graviton-Darkion may be, and if so, will have a structure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Yep. The obvious is the obvious.
And so you agree that Ebuc-speak isn't obviously true.
Or necessarily true at all.
Good.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@charlescanderson10
Money is a symbolic representation of social hierarchy.
And social hierarchy will occur irrespective of a nominal system.
Communism in name only, but unachievable in reality.
Carrot or big stick?
Donkeys probably prefer carrots.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
A Zedku for ADreamOfLiberty
Everything that happened did.
And we arrived at now.
And everything that will happen, will.
And we will arrive at then.
Everything now will be perfect relative to it's design.
And everything will be redesigned and continue to be perfect.
Though the perfection of ongoing reality
May never match the perfection of desire.
Created:
-->
@TWS1405_2
A Zedku for TWS1405_2
Who are they?
They are the enemy of conspiracy theorists.
They are at the forefront.
And conspiracy theorists trail in their wake.
Hurling futile confetti-mutter into the face of their flatulence.
So.
Decriminalising stuff that will occur irrespectively of criminality
Maybe a kick in the balls of old ethicality
Though ethics are made up stuff.
Whereas, stuff that irrespectively occurs isn't.
And will continue to be so, irrespective of criminalisation.
Woke is the new ethics, don't you know.
Or did you miss the flight.
Eventually, and more likely than not
Techno-orgasm will simulate all desires.
Doing away with all the mental and physical faff
That bogged us down in the penis-vagina quag.
That or the desexualisation of the species.
Or both in turn.
And we will be grateful to they for rescuing us from our sins.
For they are progress.
And progress achieves GOD.
Created:
Well, the United Nations Flag would be appropriate.
But that would be the first lie we told ET.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Ipso facto
Not free
Tee hee
I agree.
We always do stuff
After
Rather than
Before.
Not eating one's cake
Before having it
As it were.
As it were.
In a nutshell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
@John_C_87
If something remains theoretical, then it does so.
If a theory is proven, then it is no longer a theory.
Intellectually moving forwards where applicable.
Nonetheless, if we understood everything then we would understand everything.
But we do not.
Neither me, nor John_C_87 nor Ebuc.
Nor anyone else for that matter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Thanks for considering my contention.
I take Ebuc seriously, but they are firmly stuck inside their theoretical bubble.
Which to me, seems contradictory to theoretical thinking.
Be honest, have you ever fully understood their symbolic narratives.
The best that I can do, is take snippets of data that seem to correspond with basic language and attempt to develop a discourse.
I often wonder how they conduct a conversation at a domestic level.
Nonetheless, I am happy to keep plugging away.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Only eternal transformation of cyclic phase states of existence.
Yep, another way of saying sequential universes....An idea that I have suggested to you many times in the past.....But because this doesn't correspond with Ebuc-speak you dismiss it.
Which nonetheless, still doesn't account for the basic conundrum of a beginning, aka something from nothing...The overwhelming question that you refuse to consider because you cannot account for it.
So you cannot prove the 1st law of conversion.
The point at which theory fails then.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Prove the first Law of conservation.
The theoretical first Law of conservation is only relative to what you think you know.
But may not be relative to what you don't know.
That's the thing with theory....It may not be correct.....Or may just be relatively compatible with something you perhaps know.
The fact is, that we know very little if nothing about Universal creation, and what might have preceded it.
We rely largely upon theory.
Theory which will almost certainly be modified.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
@TheApprentice
Solipsism is a philosophical concept.
Within that context it is neither likely nor unlikely nor confusing as such.
It is simply what it is.
Whether or not one agrees with the concept is a separate contention relative to the wider context of the self as a part of everything or something.
I would simply suggest that it is reasonable to conclude that we are actually aware of an external reality.
Working on the assumption that sensory perception, signal conversion and data storage and assessment is an accurate process.
Which is not to say that everything that we do perceive, convert and assess and store can be utilised as anything other than an internally projected simulation of an externality.
Nonetheless, do or don't we manipulate externality and then perceive a validatable result via sensory processing?
I would therefore also suggest that acquired knowledge is proof, and that agreement is consolidatory rather than coincidental.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
@John_C_87
So as far as we are able to know, everything that occurs in a Universe is real.
Couldn't be more definitively clear, even if it came and smacked you in the face with a wet fish.
GOD principle.
Such a simple concept, yet two imaginative theorists can't grapple with it.
Would time and space have any less potential?
Of course not.
Because the potential of Time and Space preceded thinking species by aeons.
How did we occur without the potential to do so.
Let's be honest.
Is there anything more definitively unclear than theory.
The clue is in the word theory.
Extravagant ideas, never proven.
Which might or might not be wholly or partially correct.
Or not correct at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
The point I am making is:
Whether or not humans do or don't agree is perhaps irrelevant.
Though I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that Humans can or cannot agree with universal necessity"
I'm suggesting that necessity exceeds human validation.
So as an advanced intellectual species we may have loosely concluded that human suffering is not such a good thing.
Even so we still have the ability to turn a blind eye, when human necessity dictates.
As for the relativity of everything.
To suggest that everything isn't relative is a tad ridiculous.
Perhaps you hold the notion that as a human you are separate to everything.
I would suggest that human importance resides within the very fragile and tenuous bubble of human importance.
"Existence isn't necessary".
Is a sweeping statement.
Existence of what?
Can you prove that the existence of a progressive universe is unnecessary.
All that I can say, is that existence might or might not be necessary.
And I would have to apply this to everything.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
@John_C_87
And in the beginning.
Of what?
And where was the water?
As far as we are able to know,
There cannot be a beginning.
Because how can something begin,
If there is nothing to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Path2Paradise
Human ideology is easily transferable.
But is often illogical and downright stupid.
As you clearly exhibit above.
If there were a sensible and clever GODMAN.
It would laugh it's socks off at such human comedy.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Exactly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Well,
The big unanswerable question,
Negates assertion.
Other than to assert that everything,
Is or isn't random.
Including a cause.
Though within a system of unknowable random non-random origin
Some sort of order persists.
Out of the Quantum foam,
And fundamental jus.
Came thinking person.
Did it have a choice?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@John_C_87
Hmmmm.
So as far as we are able to know, everything that occurs in a Universe is real.
And along came an intelligent species with a strong sense of memory and a constructive imagination.
And devised methodology that allowed them to understand and develop.
Now, notwithstanding a GOD principle.
And if we were to hypothetically remove the intelligent species from the equation.
Would Time and Space have any less potential?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@John_C_87
I would suggest that Time doesn't actually look like anything.
And neither does Space.
We only know what agglomerated matter looks like and we attribute dimension to it and it's function.
Less or more than that and we theorise, physically, mathematically and imaginatively.
Time does not look the same in all three dimensions of space when observed from a dimension of space.
Is imaginative thinking.
Though I suppose TIME, to a greater extent all depends upon the purity of word and how we might corrupt it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Isn't any noise or signal generated for a reason?
Even if not for a premeditated reason.
The door banging isn't random.
It bangs relative to airflow and all the physical elements of the door and it's environmental situation.
Doesn't necessarily require a disgruntled teenager.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
But if in ten years time things have changed.....Then something maybe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
If you accept existence, then everything is relative.
Pleasure pain and the innate, for starters.
So, what is your take on material evolution then Kaitlyn.
So why isn't fundamental matter still in it's primal state.
And why are human beings now developing Alternative Intelligence.....Or alternative data management systems, if you prefer.
Though any form of data management system must have the ability to develop.
So what I'm asking relative to the thread, is why do we do what we do, rather than the opposite.
Though some might point out that currently in some sub-societies, there is a slight move away from traditional sexuality.
But I don't think that this could be described as antinatalism.....Females are still driven to conceive....Even if social trend dictates less frequently.
I would suggest that we are driven to procreate, and that existence and suffering are ethically necessary for a reason.
The reason being, material evolution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
The growth as a movement.
Grows and moves because there are people growing and moving who grow and move it.
Which must tell you something about it.
If antinatalism was a seriously popular movement.
The human population would rapidly decline and perhaps become extinct.
Which should tell you something about human nature.
And must also tell you something about the futility of absurd philosophy.
David Benatar has to pay the bills somehow, I suppose.
And I also suppose that sitting around thinking up nonsense for a living, is somewhat easier than working for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Hey Deb.
1 x 1 = 1
1 divide 1 = 1
2 divide 2 = 1
What the f**k?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
You're thread is very fine.
And philosophically narrow, which seems contradictory to philosophy.
So how would you presume to gain consent.
As I suggested, consent occurs at conception.
And ethics are made up stuff, and are certainly not logically valid within the context of naturalism.....or are they.
In fact one would perhaps argue that everything that occurs within a universe is logical and natural and therefore not fallacious.
And therefore also relative.
And a definite "No" there, which must be indicative of something.
Would you care to elaborate?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
@Kaitlyn
Noise or Sound?
And causality for sure, which brought to mind Kaitlyn's discussion on Consent and Antinatalism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Critical-Tim
Yes, apologies.
But I couldn't resist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
Humans can agree intersubjectively on things, even if no one is the same.
An interestingly worded statement, which I think that I agree with.
Which I think that I agree with.
Actually, does this statement concur with your interestingly worded statement?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
You haven't shown this at all.
It's been showing itself for 300000 years or more.
And as far as I am aware disassembly follows death.
Purposeful creation which is not necessarily dependant upon a MANGOD, would suggest a greater purpose. In which humanity might be significant.
And chance creation would suggest a sequence of events with no purpose, in which humanity would be insignificant.
Or perhaps everything has existed forever......(But for some reason material evolution kicked off comparatively recently)
Take your pick.
Though material development does seem sequential and purposeful with or without a MANGOD.......Doesn't it?
Nonetheless, consent came to mean a female saying yes.
Was the egg hers to give up for fertilization?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@John_C_87
Theory is imagination and imagination is theory.
And imagination is an unlimited potential, which is analogical to the question.
Though it would seem that John_C_87's and Ebucs potential is analogical to their theory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
Species survival negates ethics.
Notwithstanding the indecision of the unconceived.
Perhaps something greater decides.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Yep.
I would say, 1 set relative to the host agent.
Like one bum has two cheeks.
Are you tit man?
I'm a bum man.
Let me clarify that:
There's nothing quite as aesthetically pleasing as a well formed female arse in a tight pair of leggings.
Obviously nothing below 16....For legal reasons.
Though driving up the High Street in the sunshine it's not easy to differentiate.
Unfortunately bigger females try to emulate but just don't cut the mustard, whatever Lizzo might think.
There's well formed and then there's over-developed....If you know what I mean.
Nor to old.....Just gets saggy....Unless they work out.
Not sure how old my next door neighbour is....certainly older than me.
But she's a regular gym goer and runner.....And certainly still cuts the mustard.
But don't tell Mrs Zed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Still about twice as many in the South.
And the North Korean birth rate is also decreasing.
Don't count your chickens yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Kaitlyn
All that an argument requires is two organic units that process data marginally differently.
Slight variations of electro-chemical brain activity, relative to the same stimulus but from a more or less dissimilar data base.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Apples, pears, bananas, mangoes, plums, peaches, nectarines, cherries, oranges, lemons, limes and kumquats.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
A Zedku for Math Enthusiast.
Hear.
Say.
Hear it
Say it.
Which is how stuff is perpetuated without proof,
And is an effective system,
Of mind control.
Though,
Not 100% efficient.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Math_Enthusiast
It all depends upon what 1 equals.
1 bag of apples and I bag of apples is 2 bags of apples.
Though there might be 3 apples in 1 bag and 2 apples in the other bag.
So therefore the 2 bags are not equal in either content or weight.
What you have is 5 relatively similar apples
A 2 relatively similar bags.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Belief is an internal electro-chemical process, and occurs as such.
Whether or not said process constitutes existence, is negotiable.
Do thoughts exist or just occur?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@John_C_87
As I see it, math is created by a thinker, and in that context math is just another representation or calibration of potential.
Time and Space are potential, and Matter creates observable potential.
Time and space are just descriptions of the potential we observe relative to matter.
So let me put questions to you in another way.
If our universe is limited by a finite space then what do you imagine beyond?
I think that Ebuc would say Infinite space....But unoccupied.
But why would Infinite space beyond our finite space necessarily be unoccupied.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Therefore I can accept everything or anything as unquestionable.
And I will continue to question the veracity of Middle Eastern folk tales.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
But that didn't answer my question.
Do you pay any attention to the readily available content on social media platforms?
Or do you just scroll and absorb without thinking?
Gay and transsexual etc, are the current super-hero's
Why wouldn't kids want to be like them.
Does Mr DeSantis have the power and influence to take back control?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Nicely stated.
Free from what?
Free from itself?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
You're starting to contradict your principle.
How can one read a bible that one cannot prove exists.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Because the greater education system that is social media, the thing that most people under the age of 50 pray and bow to on a daily basis.
Now dictates social policy.
I click on my laptop any time of day and there it all is, in full colour.
What else can a government do, other than keep up or ban social media?
Would you support a social media ban in order to prevent sexual grooming in society?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Which is why GOD tales get perpetuated so elaborately.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@John_C_87
Firstly, it wasn't I who proposed the concept of infinite unoccupied space
I merely questioned the concept, and asked how Ebuc could be certain that an infinite space would be unoccupied.
I based this question upon the fact that our universe occupies space.
So relative to another Ebuc in another universe, which would logically infer two universes.
How could the other Ebuc be certain that infinite space relative to their universe would be unoccupied, etc etc.
So let me ask you simple non-scientific, non-mathematical, non-trigonometric imaginative questions.
If space isn't an infinite potential then what happens?
What is beyond space if not more space?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
For sure.
Is any Government ever a good Government?
Which is one of the reasons why I never vote.
Of course, some people vote for the same party that their Dads and Mums did....Which is a bit mindless really.
Though, for as long as the moderates retain the casting vote, you should be OK.
But just remember, you've got all those lovely guns should democracy ever get too tyrannical.
But also, don't forget that everyone else has got them too.
MAD.............A bit like the debt limit.....Which is sort of limitless really.
There are only 5 nations that do not have a National debt, so who do we borrow it all from?
Some reportedly borrow it from China, but oddly China isn't one of the 5.
How can you be in debt and lend money?
MAD......Mutually Assured Debt.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
You cannot prove that any of this is real or exists.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Are we witnessing the typical rise and fall of a Russian regime.
If we can scrape through this one with no nukes, that will be good.
Though I would suggest, that the chances of the next one turning out any less corrupt and megalomaniacal are pretty slim.
It will also be interesting to see how governance and social order evolve in The Ukraine.
NB. Not that I can prove that any of this is real.
Created: