Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-09-2014, 06:42 PM (This post was last modified: 02-09-2014 09:49 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  You mix together two different concepts, validity and truth.

Once again you expose your philosophical naïveté. The two concepts are validity and soundness, truth ain't got fuck to do with it. ... You are a dim one deluding yourself into thinking you are bright because you got a moth problem in your dorm room.

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
02-09-2014, 06:49 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 06:09 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(02-09-2014 05:31 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
"Incidentally, this is why the will needs to be moved by an agent. The will is an immaterial power and as such, has no parts. But if an outside agent can move my will, then my act of the will is no longer mine, but the agent’s, which is contradictory. That is why no external finite agent can move the will of man. Only God, who is infinite, can move the will of man without determining it. Free-choice is precisely the ability to determine oneself. God moves the will of man towards the good in general, that is, the good without qualification. The will of man needs to be moved by God, because nothing moves itself from potency to actuality except by something already in act. Man cannot move his own will from the state of potentially willing to actually willing, for a thing cannot give to itself a perfection that it does not have."

Laugh out load

Oh, and the acronym "ycdsb" in the URL means "York Catholic District School Board."
As I know the people here, you see the G-word and that is enough evidence it's false. Fair enough, even though you have no arguments, just one smillie. So what if I replaced God with Big Bang, which is the causal source of all energy and therefore all human behavior? I think then it would pass under the radar of many people here. I could shred this paragraph to pieces even like that, but I doubt many people here would get the nuances.
Other than this footnote, I think the text is a good explanation of the first principles of thinking. At least the Catholics aren't nihilists, radical skeptics, relativists, consequentialists, post-modernists and other vermin. Catholics seem better debaters than most people here.

No, we see unsubstantiated, unevidenced arguments and call them out.

And don't you see there is refutation of an argument and disproving an idea are not the same thing.

An argument for the existence of God get obliterated - all that does is refute the argument, or refute that particular formulation of a god,
it does not refute the idea that a god may exist.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
02-09-2014, 10:38 PM (This post was last modified: 02-09-2014 10:43 PM by cjlr.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't have much philosophical hopes about Chas, about nobody here, actually. The very best result I'd expect to see here is when someone would honestly say something like... "I haven't seen this stuff in a long time, this might be something that you know and I don't and it's not like I shit my pants out of envy, boo hoo. If I ever get envious enough, I learn this stuff myself and kick your ass in your own game." Fair enough! That's right, you guys who failed the Turing test. I don't mind that you know or don't know something, I despise you for moral reasons of your dishonesty and insultfest. I have never started calling names anyone who didn't start first. People who do that are douchebags. Name calling is a deal breaker in any kind of relationship, including philosophical debate.

Right - literally nobody here has any hope. Not Chas, not GirlyMan, not Revenant, not me, not DLJ, not morondog, not Vosur, not evenheathen, not adrianime, not Moms, not PKJoe, not ClydeLee, not EK, not earmuffs, not Smurf, not anyone.
cjlr's sincerest apologies to anyone else who posted in this thread - everyone who posted in the thread disagrees with ol' Lumi - and wasn't named

And you literally despise every last one of us.

Interesting. Let me just check something here...
(07-07-2014 09:19 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  List of people who hate both cjlr and myself

Frankksj: troll, fled the forum
Pleasejesus: troll, fled the forum
Theword: troll, fled the forum
Jeremy E Walker: troll, banned
Egor: troll, left the forum
Taqiyya Mockingbird: troll [edit: fled the forum]
Yep. Ol' Lumi, you've earned a place of honour among the great heroes of our age.

But bear with me for a moment, dear ol' Lumi. I've got an idea:
Why don't you fuck right off?

No, no, hear me out! I really think it would save you a lot of trouble, ol' Lumi. You can go hang out with your pre-sup buddies in la-la land, and the rest of us can carry on engaging with external reality. You don't need to worry about the big evil horde of Commie Fascist Reptiloid monsters we so clearly represent in your paranoid delusion commendably active imagination. You don't need to worry about why so many intelligent dishonest (!?) and educated brainwashed people neurotic abuse victims so comprehensively fail to vacuously echo understand and endorse your ever-so-hapless-self-evidently-superior trolltacular nonsense philosophy.

Oh - but, no. That'd never work. You'd miss the chance to work and stroke your massive, tumid, swollen intellect so vigourously, and how would you ever get through life without that regular opportunity for spraying forth such hot and heavy and self-satisfying release?

PS read a book.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like cjlr's post
02-09-2014, 10:58 PM (This post was last modified: 02-09-2014 11:01 PM by Chas.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't have much philosophical hopes about Chas, about nobody here, actually.

Really. I just schooled you in Mathematical Philosophy of which you have only fractional understanding. Have you yet read anything of Kleene, Hofstadter, or Quine yet?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
02-09-2014, 11:05 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 10:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't have much philosophical hopes about Chas, about nobody here, actually. The very best result I'd expect to see here is when someone would honestly say something like... "I haven't seen this stuff in a long time, this might be something that you know and I don't and it's not like I shit my pants out of envy, boo hoo. If I ever get envious enough, I learn this stuff myself and kick your ass in your own game." Fair enough! That's right, you guys who failed the Turing test. I don't mind that you know or don't know something, I despise you for moral reasons of your dishonesty and insultfest. I have never started calling names anyone who didn't start first. People who do that are douchebags. Name calling is a deal breaker in any kind of relationship, including philosophical debate.

Right - literally nobody here has any hope. Not Chas, not GirlyMan, not Revenant, not me, not DLJ, not morondog, not Vosur, not evenheathen, not adrianime, not Moms, not PKJoe, not ClydeLee, not EK, not earmuffs, not Smurf, not anyone.
cjlr's sincerest apologies to anyone else who posted in this thread - everyone who posted in the thread disagrees with ol' Lumi - and wasn't named

And you literally despise every last one of us.

Interesting. Let me just check something here...
(07-07-2014 09:19 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  List of people who hate both cjlr and myself

Frankksj: troll, fled the forum
Pleasejesus: troll, fled the forum
Theword: troll, fled the forum
Jeremy E Walker: troll, banned
Egor: troll, left the forum
Taqiyya Mockingbird: troll [edit: fled the forum]
Yep. Ol' Lumi, you've earned a place of honour among the great heroes of our age.

But bear with me for a moment, dear ol' Lumi. I've got an idea:
Why don't you fuck right off?

No, no, hear me out! I really think it would save you a lot of trouble, ol' Lumi. You can go hang out with your pre-sup buddies in la-la land, and the rest of us can carry on engaging with external reality. You don't need to worry about the big evil horde of Commie Fascist Reptiloid monsters we so clearly represent in your paranoid delusion commendably active imagination. You don't need to worry about why so many intelligent dishonest (!?) and educated brainwashed people neurotic abuse victims so comprehensively fail to vacuously echo understand and endorse your ever-so-hapless-self-evidently-superior trolltacular nonsense philosophy.

Oh - but, no. That'd never work. You'd miss the chance to work and stroke your massive, tumid, swollen intellect so vigourously, and how would you ever get through life without that regular opportunity for spraying forth such hot and heavy and self-satisfying release?

PS read a book.

[Image: came.jpg]

/Lumi

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2014, 12:21 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 10:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  ...
Right - literally nobody here has any hope.
..., not DLJ,
...

Oi!

Speak for yourself! I have no hope. I am hopelessly hopeless and will always be... hopefully Dodgy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2014, 02:01 AM (This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 02:15 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 10:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  And you literally despise every last one of us.
Nope, only those who called me names and I declared them as failing the Turing test.

(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  That's right, you guys who failed the Turing test. I don't mind that you know or don't know something, I despise you for moral reasons of your dishonesty and insultfest. I have never started calling names anyone who didn't start first. People who do that are douchebags. Name calling is a deal breaker in any kind of relationship, including philosophical debate.

(02-09-2014 06:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  There is not just one geometry as there is not just one system of logic.
For starters, there are geometries as defined by changing Euclid's 5th axiom - The Parallel Postulate. Lobachevsky developed hyperbolic geometry by changing it one way, Riemann created elliptic geometry by changing it another.

There is tri-valued logic as developed by S.C. Kleene and others.
Do you really think everything is two-valued? Do you not understand that most things are on a continuum?

You don't see the extent of your ignorance.
No, not everything is two-valued, but existence is common to all reality and existence is two-valued. If it wasn't, it would be humanly incomprehensible, thus not a part of our reality. We could not even think of it, define it with reason or science, and I think we can't. We can string together words like "partial existence", but they have no meaning.

I don't see how any developed logics disprove the on and off basic logic of existence and non-existence, truth and falsehood. These are all built on top of the axioms, with language. They are not the basics of thinking and language, they are products, subject to the two-valued existence and non-existence of the concept itself. Yes, we can build all sorts of fancy logics, mental instruments and empirical measurable attributes. But first these concepts either exist, or they don't. That's how basic this stuff is!

A top floor of a building does not disprove the foundations.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2014, 02:06 AM
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 10:38 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(02-09-2014 05:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't have much philosophical hopes about Chas, about nobody here, actually. The very best result I'd expect to see here is when someone would honestly say something like... "I haven't seen this stuff in a long time, this might be something that you know and I don't and it's not like I shit my pants out of envy, boo hoo. If I ever get envious enough, I learn this stuff myself and kick your ass in your own game." Fair enough! That's right, you guys who failed the Turing test. I don't mind that you know or don't know something, I despise you for moral reasons of your dishonesty and insultfest. I have never started calling names anyone who didn't start first. People who do that are douchebags. Name calling is a deal breaker in any kind of relationship, including philosophical debate.

Right - literally nobody here has any hope. Not Chas, not GirlyMan, not Revenant, not me, not DLJ, not morondog, not Vosur, not evenheathen, not adrianime, not Moms, not PKJoe, not ClydeLee, not EK, not earmuffs, not Smurf, not anyone.
cjlr's sincerest apologies to anyone else who posted in this thread - everyone who posted in the thread disagrees with ol' Lumi - and wasn't named

And you literally despise every last one of us.

Interesting. Let me just check something here...
(07-07-2014 09:19 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  List of people who hate both cjlr and myself

Frankksj: troll, fled the forum
Pleasejesus: troll, fled the forum
Theword: troll, fled the forum
Jeremy E Walker: troll, banned
Egor: troll, left the forum
Taqiyya Mockingbird: troll [edit: fled the forum]
Yep. Ol' Lumi, you've earned a place of honour among the great heroes of our age.

But bear with me for a moment, dear ol' Lumi. I've got an idea:
Why don't you fuck right off?

No, no, hear me out! I really think it would save you a lot of trouble, ol' Lumi. You can go hang out with your pre-sup buddies in la-la land, and the rest of us can carry on engaging with external reality. You don't need to worry about the big evil horde of Commie Fascist Reptiloid monsters we so clearly represent in your paranoid delusion commendably active imagination. You don't need to worry about why so many intelligent dishonest (!?) and educated brainwashed people neurotic abuse victims so comprehensively fail to vacuously echo understand and endorse your ever-so-hapless-self-evidently-superior trolltacular nonsense philosophy.

Oh - but, no. That'd never work. You'd miss the chance to work and stroke your massive, tumid, swollen intellect so vigourously, and how would you ever get through life without that regular opportunity for spraying forth such hot and heavy and self-satisfying release?

PS read a book.

...or...he could go to Hollywood with a script and make a movie based on his ideas. I'm picturing something along the lines of "What The $&@! Do We Know?" He'd make loads of money and have no time to mingle with us lowly peasants any more.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2014, 02:23 AM (This post was last modified: 03-09-2014 02:34 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(02-09-2014 06:37 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  Put it another way: it's like saying, if you're not for us, you are against us. That is usually not true and is a false dilemma to manipulate the person who is not agreeing with a groups stance to join them. For example, your constant strawman of political stances to 'supporting violent statism' and support of anarchism as 'no-wing' is trying to pigeon-hole everyone you disagree with into this fantasy of yours, Luminon. The Law of Excluded Middle does not apply here.

Excluded middle does not apply to everything and is debated about in epistemology. It works for circuits with ones and zeros, true and false; but in reality as a whole, it's not clear cut. Something that is not provably true does not mean it is false. There isn't always two positions. Everything isn't just black or white. You get the picture. This is where we get the need for something to be falsifiable. A claim of a supernatural agent is not falsifiable -- it cannot be proven true but doesn't mean it's false either. Skeptics ask for evidence of such, otherwise, we remain skeptical of such an agent.

To sum up: your twisted reasoning presented as 'logical' by yourself is a farce for black-or-white thinking with no evidence behind it besides magical thinking.

Stop trying to pretend as if you know everything and everyone else who brings up valid points are wrong.

Or not. More entertainment for a lot of people if you keep showing your ignorance.

I don't need to know everything, this is all Philosophy 101, a few basic properties commonly shared by everything.
Either unchosen positive obligations exist, in which case they exist for everyone, or they don't. If you can think of any nuances, you need to prove them with reason (you can't, reason applies to everyone) or scientific evidence (good luck with the is-ought dichotomy).

Evidence, such as in empiricism can not be proven reliable without its basis in first principles, principle of contradiction, rational method and the epistemological proof with methodological circle. Evidence is in top floors of a building, but proposals first must make sense in the foundations, first the concept must exist at all (zero one logic) ! Otherwise it's just a buzzword.
I don't apply the principle of excluded middle to everything, I apply it to existence of concepts. Yes, it's that dead-simple and trivial, sorry if you expected something more, but this is where everyone cheats the most, because nobody has any principles except a few of the philosophers. If people want to move the goalposts of truth and morality, they don't need to move the top floor with science and iPads, they only need to move the principles in foundations, which nobody notices because nobody can imagine and comprehend that something so simple might be true and obligatory.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2014, 02:30 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(03-09-2014 02:01 AM)Luminon Wrote:  No, not everything is two-valued, but existence is common to all reality and existence is two-valued. If it wasn't, it would be humanly incomprehensible, thus not a part of our reality. We could not even think of it, define it with reason or science, and I think we can't. We can string together words like "partial existence", but they have no meaning.

Invisible Elephants partially exist; because while we do have elephants, as far as we know we don't have invisible ones. It also exists as a concept, much like god is a concept. If you really think "partial existence" is a meaningless phrase, then everything Chas and cjlr said is true; you genuinely lack the ability to comprehend. Your black and white, binary thinking is serving you very poorly.


(03-09-2014 02:01 AM)Luminon Wrote:  I don't see how any developed logics disprove the on and off basic logic of existence and non-existence, truth and falsehood.

Hooray for personal incredulity.


(03-09-2014 02:01 AM)Luminon Wrote:  These are all built on top of the axioms, with language. They are not the basics of thinking and language, they are products, subject to the two-valued existence and non-existence of the concept itself. Yes, we can build all sorts of fancy logics, mental instruments and empirical measurable attributes. But first these concepts either exist, or they don't. That's how basic this stuff is!

A top floor of a building does not disprove the foundations.

And yet buildings have floors and walls between their foundation and the roof, imagine that.

Can you even make a single post without a terribly inadequate false analogy? Weeping

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: