nickhk

Here's a mirror on yahoo news. At least, I think it is. Oh boy.

Your link is broken STer. Yan, you keep saying it's a belief like it aught to be some self-evident thing. It's not for me. Will you explain it?

My preference is that you talk about what bothers you about atheism, and what you see and how you perceive that.I'd much rather read that than about how the forum is set up wrong, how everyone should be thinking differently, and all that.It's kinda like you walked into an internet cafe, and started telling people they were wrong for using the wifi, the seating is laid out poorly, and being there in the first place is wrong. People are just going to look at you funny.The rest of your post, and my replies, are just making jokes I find funny. In general, I'm doing it for my own amusement. You might feel annoyed, but I am not setting a goal to annoy you. If I was setting that as a goal, then great success, I guess.For example: If you are an atheist and you do not know that, you are in deep waters my friend. Actually, I'm about 120' above sea level, on land. Although I appreciate your concern for my ability to swim.----Jokes aside, I ask a question, you take that to mean I don't know/have an answer to it, and that the absence of having an answer is somehow bad for me. There's a lot going on in that first sentence. You claim to know what I believe, and we've never spoken before, to my knowledge. Then, you say there's nothing to explain. Are you serious?I don't get it, why are you here? Are you really saying we need to move this forum into a subtopic? Why?Why start arguing about whether atheism is a whatever, or a whatever else, in the atheism forum, when you want the forum moved?Apparently, this forum is well placed, because here you are, talking about atheism. My head is spinning.I feel pretty good though, this thread is kinda confusing in it's purpose, but whatever. I'm smiling.I hope this forum is productive for you Yan, feel free to let me know what you think.

Welcome to the internet, we're all godless on here. How is atheism a belief exactly?

I was amazed by all the caveates people had to use before they could say they like this, and what stef is putting forward. Apparently, you can't* go into /r/anarcho_capitalism and say you like stef's stuff. *Actually, you totally can. Most of the folks there wouldn't dare to say it without a 99% in front of whatever it is they like about this. Like stefbot's some kind of guilty pleasure.

The horror I felt during some scenes, wow. What a movie. Jesus. What a great find. Thanks!

Ok, but that fallacy doesn't appear to be present in SimonF's argument, as I understand it. Simply, if one does not reject all "power-over relationships," then their position on force (be it rape, murder, theft) is inconsistent, therefore they're a hypocrite. By advocating for agents of the state to murder and steal for you, while condeming rape as abhorent, except when done in state cages, is kinda-maybe-just-a-little-bit hypocritical. Maybe that's been laid out in the thread several times over at this point. It's a nifty way to analyze an ideology by checking for consistency of first principles. Very UPB.

If I am understanding this correctly, you really are suggesting extraordinary claims should not require extraordinary evidence. Alright, well... I didn't want to say this earlier, but I've got this invisible unicorn friend of mine, beyond space and time, and he needs your money. He says he'll get you double-plus good karma if you mail him a cashiers check. You can send it to me, though, because my friend has moral objections to the post office. Just take my word for it.

No, your logic is faulty. It goes something like this rape is "power-over relationship", therefore every "power-over relationship" is rape. It's like saying: A door opens, therefore everything that opens is a door. But a window also opens. You can be a statist and be against rape, simply because not every act of coercion is rape. Your logic may actually be faulty. Rape would be one type of "power-over relationship" Statism another type of "power-over relationship" Murder as well. Suggesting that all "power-over relationships" are therefore rape is fallacious. It's Affirming the Consequent.

So, extraordinary claims shouldn't require extraordinary evidence? All that time spent verifying Relativity was wasted time then. It's odd that you come in here for discussion with skeptical people, and when they're skeptical, it seems you're kinda surprised by that and think they shouldn't be skeptical.

As far as I understand Judaism and Christianity, they're descendants of a polytheistic religion. Prior to Yahweh being the one true God, he or it was a warrior god of some ancient polytheist cult. Does that fit? Else, it could be an editing or translation error. Probably enough of those in there already. But, what do I know? I'm no philosopher, just a guy who is interested in philosophy, among other things.

I'm going back to the regularly scheduled topic, Income inequality vs Income Mobility. Join me if you like. After all, it's why I came here to begin with, maybe the same for you fine folks. Short story to get the ball rolling, if you'll indulge me. So, here's the question: Do other people recognize income mobility? Everybody can see the inequality, but do they think it is static? Why? What do you folks think? I see mobility, and want to find my way into the 1%, if only to fall down from it a month later because something. And, a hypothesis: Socialists, Anarcho or otherwise, do not think the individual has any mobility of income. Does that resonate, and/or make sense? Am I being Capt. Obvious?

If I'm understanding this correctly, you're describing the a state(s) that governs things like gravity, the speed of light, atomic interactions, erosion, bacteria, blood circulation, how fire burns, migratory patterns of geese, and everything, practically. If that is the case, then the state you're talking about isn't equivalent to the state as conventionally talked about at FDR. You're talking about every kind of state, and saying it's exactly the same as a bunch of humans pointing guns at other humans. Why use such a broad definition?

How?

Well, this sounds familiar. Thanks for posting this.

Given this definition, I "Statism" sounds like a zombie idea.. thoughts? Brilliant. I may be misusing political here, but... Statism would be the premiere zombie idea, because it is political purpose. Patient Zero, I believe it is called.

I find Typhon Blue's stuff to be really enlightening on Male gender, and how Alpha-Beta works. Apexual males. Then, there's the Zeta. Sort of an Objectivist male personality. Blog post on aVoiceForMen. Something I recorded earlier today, because I'm trying to figure out masculinity myself. First Rule of being a man. With that rule, creepy doesn't matter. This is just a quick link dump for those of you interested in these things. I think it will add information for you fine board members, and I hope this is helpful.

May the tinfoil be with you, always. Considering the top story on that site today is Alien Body on Mars or similar, common let's be real. The site is so fringe it makes you wonder if it's even connected to reality. David L, do you believe contrails are actually chemtrails, and they're causing weather change? Why?

Not that new, Post on it from last year. It's not really that people aren't smart enough, but that they don't have the knowledge and expertise to make an informed choice... which would inevitably be none.

Postcount is a record of posts made on the forums. Postcount is a variable that is updated for individual users each time they post. Postcount does not create anything. I understand that you mean something like "Users may form ideas or be skeptical about a new user." I could be mistaken about that. Is that what you're getting at, or is this exclusively about postcount? Do you suppose that username and avatar may also cause other users to form preconceptions about a user? Should those also be removed? Aside: There's agun in the room.

Hey thanks, it's neat to see my dream filtered through someone's mind. It shows omissions of my life that would have been helpful, and whatever preconceptions the other person brings. It's fascinating. As for assault weapons debate, I'm not sure that has much to do with it, if anything. I don't think I was aware that was a thing. And the bit about the president, where I drop the weapon, I had the thought then "I've got a gun in my hands within range of the president. I am going to be shot to death." I wasn't lucid in the dream, I thought it was real. I get the metaphor of powerful philosophy against the state and power though. My parents are not in my life. If this is related to tangible reality, then it's probably got more to do with college then anything else. "Surrounded by empty people whom I share little in common" That sounds like the people I share classes with, but little else. I appreciate you taking the time, because that is right on point with my life.

Like it. Like it a lot.

Last night, Dreaming. Open, We are standing on a second floor catwalk, overlooking a square or small park. It's mid day, and I'm having a conversation with a friend, nondescript dream friend. He is interested in a purchase I made recently, a dream purchase, apparently I'd bought a rifle of some kind. It had a scope on it. I would show it to him. I pulled it out from behind the door to the catwalk, glancing down at it as I held it. He thinks it looks cool, or badass. I look up, smile and tell him I think so too. I look out and down to the park. There are people sitting on bleachers listening to a standing man in a suit. They are very close to me, less than 50 feet. The man is addressing the crowd, they are so close he doesn't need a mic. He stops. The man looks behind him, over his shoulder, and looks up at me. His expression is neutral. I recognize him as President Obama. I drop the rifle immediately. It clatters on the patio floor. I look down the catwalk, my friend is gone. I verbalize an apology or explanation, and I expect a charge of Secret Service agents rounding the corner to tackle me. Nothing. I am now sitting in a grand-stand of 20-30 people, near to where I was, and watching the President address the crowd. The grandstand is behind him, and I am behind him. A middle aged or older woman behind me says to me that I am moron, or prone to mistakes or something. Insulting me. I look at her, think, and tell her she's a small person. I keep my gaze on her for another second, then turn forward again. The President is no longer addressing the crowd, and he's not in front of them either. I look around, and am startled as I find him sitting right next to me. His tone is neutral. He says "You're rather loud" He says. "You should keep it down" He says. I reply that I do project my voice. My gaze lingers on him another second, and I turn forward again. End. Not sure I'm looking for interpretations, but if you'd like to have a go, go for it. Life details: New semester of college started Monday. Yesterday: Got a non-committal reply for an internship Read the first act of Hamlet. Posted something about taxation being wrong on a discussion board for an online college course I'm taking. Played some first person shooter video games. Mostly, I wanted to share it. The title alone makes me laugh. I'm interested to hear what you think of this dream.