What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-09-2012, 11:01 AM
What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
This thread was more interesting when we were being silly in honor of Douglas Adams. What's wrong with having a sense of humor about ones place in the universe?

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
21-09-2012, 01:27 PM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 01:24 AM)Luminon Wrote:  Not when you do it with your mouth and mind only, that's not science. Doubting or asking questions is a start, examining (alternative) possibilities is the basis of Socratic method. I doubt philosophers ever arranged a blind test with a placebo group, unless they were natural philosophers.
That should be covered in the study of Logic - necessary for the scientific method.

The problem is humanity has not developed the peer review process necessary, and the atheists blame the Christians for the inadequacy.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2012, 01:37 PM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 11:01 AM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  This thread was more interesting when we were being silly in honor of Douglas Adams. What's wrong with having a sense of humor about ones place in the universe?
It was being silly in honor of his memory? Damn, my condolences. I like humor, specially somewhat dry, dark and dirty one, but not silliness. Just because I'm not a Christian doesn't mean I'm not religious about some things. They say it is good to have a deep reverence for life and humanity, but what can I do when blasphemers and mockers appear? Then I flare up just like the fundie next door Big Grin

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2012, 02:00 PM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 01:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(21-09-2012 11:01 AM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  This thread was more interesting when we were being silly in honor of Douglas Adams. What's wrong with having a sense of humor about ones place in the universe?
It was being silly in honor of his memory? Damn, my condolences. I like humor, specially somewhat dry, dark and dirty one, but not silliness. Just because I'm not a Christian doesn't mean I'm not religious about some things. They say it is good to have a deep reverence for life and humanity, but what can I do when blasphemers and mockers appear? Then I flare up just like the fundie next door Big Grin

Maybe you should get over it. Drinking Beverage

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
21-09-2012, 03:44 PM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 01:27 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  The problem is humanity has not developed the peer review process necessary, and the atheists blame the Christians for the inadequacy.

The fuck we haven't. Try to get your bullshit published in any refereed journal in any discipline you like and then tell me we haven't developed a keen peer review process. The more prestigious the journal, the more rigorous the peer review. And all is right with the world. ... fucking TrainWreck just shittin' out words for the sake of being provocative. Big Grin

I am us and we is me. ... bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2012, 05:00 PM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 03:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-09-2012 01:27 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  The problem is humanity has not developed the peer review process necessary, and the atheists blame the Christians for the inadequacy.

The fuck we haven't. Try to get your bullshit published in any refereed journal in any discipline you like and then tell me we haven't developed a keen peer review process. The more prestigious the journal, the more rigorous the peer review. And all is right with the world. ... fucking TrainWreck just shittin' out words for the sake of being provocative. Big Grin

It seems like he is just bored and feels like poking at a beehive.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes fstratzero's post
22-09-2012, 12:53 AM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
[Image: 20120715.gif]

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Phaedrus's post
23-09-2012, 10:16 AM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 03:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-09-2012 01:27 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  The problem is humanity has not developed the peer review process necessary, and the atheists blame the Christians for the inadequacy.

The fuck we haven't. Try to get your bullshit published in any refereed journal in any discipline you like and then tell me we haven't developed a keen peer review process. The more prestigious the journal, the more rigorous the peer review. And all is right with the world. ... fucking TrainWreck just shittin' out words for the sake of being provocative. Big Grin
Without a doubt, I failed to provide the details necessary to justify the abridged version of my theory - you really don't think I understand the peer review you describe???
All you are describing there is a censureship proceedure concerning specific areas of scientific investigation that you believe to be competently organized by the contest of qualification credentials; and I agree that they are accurate to their goals of diseminating accurate information for the utility of Mankind - technology.

What I was referring to was the peer review process of assessing social organization, and the expanded inclusions of community and society.

Notice I made the distinction that "the atheists blame the Christians for the inadequacy." The proper argument would have been that atheists do not blame Christians for the lack of peer review for the areass of science that you believe that are adequately developed. And it would be a far streach of reason to argue that atheists have been the guardians of the organizations that you believed you were referring to - I would argue that the White Christians are responsible for the competent organizations.

It is with out any fucking doubt in the fucking world that atheists collectively argue that religion, or Church organization, is detrimental to the better evolution of Makind; and atheists further their argument by claiming that "religious" people neglect to adequately supervise the logic and reasoning of their social ideologies - peer review. Then atheists claim that the world events of suffering are because of the activities of religious organizations - do they not?

Isn't it the fault of the crazy batshit Tea Party Christian bigots leading the Republican Party the blame for our poor global economy, and that if atheists had the control of the fucking government, or at least, the Democrats unencumbered by the Republicans, that the world would be much better???

And ultimately what I was referring to was that atheists need to peer review their own organization of infinite tolerance for ideas and their implimaentation in social activities, such as macro-economic policy.

Republic government is supposed to do this, but for some reason it fails, if you haven't noticed.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TrainWreck's post
23-09-2012, 10:20 AM
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(21-09-2012 05:00 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  It seems like he is just bored and feels like poking at a beehive.

What beehive?

You make it sound like fucking atheists are just like the fucking stupid Christians - a big beehive of chaos???

You think atheists got things straightened-uot better than Christians when it comes to social organization, or not???

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-09-2012, 10:14 PM (This post was last modified: 23-09-2012 10:49 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: What is the ultimate Philosophy question?
(23-09-2012 10:16 AM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(21-09-2012 03:44 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  The fuck we haven't. Try to get your bullshit published in any refereed journal in any discipline you like and then tell me we haven't developed a keen peer review process. The more prestigious the journal, the more rigorous the peer review. And all is right with the world. ... fucking TrainWreck just shittin' out words for the sake of being provocative. Big Grin
...
It is with out any fucking doubt in the fucking world that atheists collectively argue that religion, or Church organization, is detrimental to the better evolution of Makind; and atheists further their argument by claiming that "religious" people neglect to adequately supervise the logic and reasoning of their social ideologies - peer review. Then atheists claim that the world events of suffering are because of the activities of religious organizations - do they not?

No, this atheist does not do any of that shit, motherfucker. Quite the opposite fuckturd.

Bring it if you can ....

I am us and we is me. ... bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: