Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-12-2015, 06:47 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
471 words (with quotes). Either I'm slipping or I've misunderestimated the LD50 of Pachomius' word salad.

(22-12-2015 01:17 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Here is my example of evidence;

In the scene of an explosion in a hotel room, fire investigators found a piece of a human nose, almost the whole nose, that remains of a nose is the evidence of the presence of a human in the room when the explosion occurred; so they told the security agencies of the country to stop anyone leaving the country who has a mangled nose, and also to contact every hospital to be on the look out for anyone coming for treatment of a mangled nose in his face.

They theorize that the man with what remains of a nose in his face must have been working on a self-improvised explosive device, but the device accidentally blew up as he was working on it.

Impressively bad unsupported supposition. Don't quit your day job Inspector Pachomius. You'll be handing out parking tickets until the sun burns out given how thoroughly you've buggered this case up. You had the Department of Homeland Security raise the terror alert, comb the hospitals and lock down the airports looking for a noseless mad bomber when you should have simply checked the wreckage for the rest of the mangled remains of the maid who was cleaning that room when the gas main ruptured. Tell me, is there anybody's shit list you didn't just make?

A nose is evidence of a nose. And at least one sheep in this valley is black on one side some of the time.

The abuse of language quoted above is evidence that:
  1. Your capacity for critical self-examination is dangerously subpar.
  2. Your pehchant for seamless narrative militates against a career as an author of anything more demanding than grafitti.
  3. You haven't managed to make a point in 13 pages, even when I made it for you.


Quote:Evidence is one of the means to prove the existence of something.

What other means is there? Wishful thinking?

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Paleophyte's post
22-12-2015, 07:19 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 01:17 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Everyone, please present your own self-thought out concept of evidence

Please present your own self-thought out concept of "bacon".
And while you're at it, you can also try "idiocy".

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like undergroundp's post
22-12-2015, 07:34 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
Let us now work together to concur with Pachomius on how to herd cats.
He will never be an investigator or lawyer, or a logician, so maybe he can be a pussy rancher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/why-c...l-evidence
http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publication...dence.html

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
22-12-2015, 07:59 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Is there someone who is interested in exchange of thoughts with me, at this point on what is evidence.
Been doing it for pages now you dishonest shit.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  You see, I read your insistence that it is not acceptable to you, but you do not produce your own....
Not only are you lying you ass off as MULTIPLE people have done exactly that, myself included, we have even explained in depth WHY your definition is shit, unless in ambiguity, and just a further example of how you have no idea what you are talking about.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  So, we are into an impasse.
No we are not. YOU and you alone are at an impasse. You can continue being a repetitive dishonest cunt repeating your nonsense definition that is not real, or you can drop it and use the ACTUAL definition of the word which has been explained to you dozens of times now. Or you could just fuck off.

WE aren't at an impasse because we are using the actual definition of the word. We don't have to do shit, especially when you just ignore what we say like a fucking 8 year old.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Tell you what, in -- forgive me -- just 50 words tell me what you care to talk with me about, anything at all.
Sure, I'd like to talk to you about getting to your mother fucking point.
I'd like to talk to you about why pretending liek you have a deep incite into what is and is not evidence when you don't even understand the bloody basics of reason and logic makes you look fuuuuuuckin' stoooopid.
I'd like to talk to you about why you should fellate a Mossburg until you get a buckshot bukkake.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
22-12-2015, 08:06 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 06:47 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
  • Your pehchant for seamless narrative militates against a career as an author of anything more demanding than grafitti.
  • You haven't managed to make a point in 13 pages, even when I made it for you.

These are fucking awesome!Laugh out loadThumbsup

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
22-12-2015, 08:33 PM (This post was last modified: 22-12-2015 08:37 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 01:17 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  In the scene of an explosion in a hotel room, fire investigators found a piece of a human nose, almost the whole nose, that remains of a nose is the evidence of the presence of a human in the room when the explosion occurred; ....

No. Just no. Did they find any human pieces other than a nose? You'd suck as a serial killer.




There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:43 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Is there someone who is interested in exchange of thoughts with me, at this point on what is evidence.

Multiple posters have tried. You are only interested in your own thoughts.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  My concept of evidence is the following which I already set forth, namely, that it is anything at all existing that leads man to know another thing to be existing.
Yet again, to restate, your definition means nothing. It is too vague.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  You see, I read your insistence that it is not acceptable to you, but you do not produce your own from your personal thinking and also with a concrete example.
That is a fucking lie.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  So, we are into an impasse.
No, you are at an impasse. The rest of us are just fine.

(22-12-2015 06:25 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Tell you what, in -- forgive me -- just 50 words tell me what you care to talk with me about, anything at all.
Fuck off. You are wasting everyone's time. You are not interested in a sincere debate or exchange of ideas. You are only hear to post your incomprehensible babbling.

And as for what we'd like to discuss? Your absence.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
22-12-2015, 10:48 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
(22-12-2015 02:33 PM)Pachomius Wrote:  Bucky Ball, I invite you and me to exchange thoughts on what is evidence.

Here is again my definition of evidence, it is anything existing leading man to know another thing to be existing.

Now, you give your concise definition of what is evidence, from your own thinking on your stock knowledge and experience.

I gave you the definition pages ago. If you can only prove your god's existence by changing word definitions, perhaps your god does not exist?

How about we debate north vs south? Why is north north and south south?

You have proven yourself an idiot.

Idiot.

Please go away. You are less informed than Q and Alla put together. And twice as stupid.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Banjo's post
23-12-2015, 12:40 AM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
I'm so sad that I wasted 30 minutes reading this thread. I can't believe it even existsHuh

Reminds me of 'Cuil Theory' Laughat



Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grassy Knoll's post
23-12-2015, 05:48 PM
RE: Let us work together to concur on how to prove that something exists.
Dear Girly, I am so glad that you have connected with me, you see I always hope that someone will actually connect with me, in particular with the end message I put at the bottom of my posts -- instead dodging everywhere, saying things which are to my observation not apropos to my invitation to everyone to work together, you and I toward achieving a common idea of what or how it is to prove something exists.


So, you want to know what is my idea of existence.

You say. "I am far more interested in your concept of existence. Can you describe that for me in a non-circular fashion which doesn't necessitate the presumption of your very existence in the first place?"

Have you read my first posts here?

You see, existence is the broadest of concepts, it embraces all concepts whatever, without it there is no understanding of any concepts at all, and therefore you will not be able to locate something in reality outside your mind, to correspond to a concept in your mind if you do not master the concept of existence.

And the first experience of a conscious entity like us humans, it is the experience of existence, so that if you are not a conscious entity there cannot be any experience at all of anything, and first and foremost not the experience of existence itself.

I will dare to say that experience of consciousness is the permeating medium of our human existence; this experience of consciousness itself is insofar as conscious entities like us humans are concerned, it is in effect equivalent to existence.

When you are in a fainted spell, or in deep profound dreamless sleep, or in a coma, or in complete total anesthesia, you in effect do not exist while you are in those conditions, by which you are no different from a lump of meat the cells of which are animate, but there is no longer any entity that is you a human, and also no longer you a person.

Twice in my lifetime I was in total anesthesia, when I got back to consciousness I could recall only that I was somewhat like talkative with the two doctors, the surgeon and the anesthesiologist, and the nurses, imagining myself to be such an absorbing speaker or err talker – and then I blanked out until I came back to consciousness again many hours later.

You see, I mentioned the experience of touching your nose and the nose of your partner in conversation and (s)he doing the same act, to come to know with certainty the existence of the nose in our face; and also I mentioned my eating corn grits and coming to the experience of the eating of corn grits and wherefore the existence of corn grits, and also the non-existence of corn grits in my home, when I have depleted my stock of corn grits; and I likewise mentioned how kids come to know the difference between existence and non-existence, when they finished all the ice cream in the freezer.

I think I also mentioned my own eventual dying as is the lot of all living things, which is the last experience of an event in process, which I will no longer be around to know that it has been completed, namely, the course of dying – although while in that process I know from experience in seeing how people die, that it will be like that.

So, for us humans, existence is in effect the experience of consciousness, which consciousness is the status in which we can experience everything like eating, drinking, pain in our abdomen, etc., like love and also sex, and very important the existence of other humans and of anything at all existing, even mental things i.e. thoughts in our mind.

Sounds like a tautology?

I was trying to tell someone here that what he thinks about a tautology is altogether to miss the purpose of what to him is a just a useless tautology.

Forgive me, tell me why according to that someone, I don't recall his name here, "Paco is Francisco" is a tautology, and also "The default status of things in the world is existence" is a tautology.

It is because according to him the subject and the predicate of such sentences are identical. Well, that is pretty smart of him, but not really of any genuine insight into things, which would be if he were into the habit and skill of seeing the bigger picture of things.

I said folks usually read a lot of things wrongly and it is because writers do not know any better, and they writers like their readers are also into rote recall of rote learning.

Forgive me, suppose as you are also I am sure of the idea that "Paco is Francisco" and "The default status of things in the world is existence" are tautology, and you are so intelligent to state that there isn't anything new to know from tautologies: suppose you do some really genuine and productive thinking, going beyond your self-routinized path of seeing into things, by asking yourself, whether there are people who come to know something new from "Paco is Francisco" and "The default status of things in the world is existence."

I like very much to exchange thoughts with you, and I look forward with excitement to read your answer to my question above.


Cheers!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Pachomius's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: