neeeel
-
Posts
826 -
Joined
-
Days Won
12
Posts posted by neeeel
-
-
On 9/24/2018 at 12:05 PM, MahtiSonni said:
I love my family and my nation. That love is not intellectually based; it is moral and instictive.
How is it moral to love your nation? How is it moral to love your family, especially if ones family arent that nice as people?
Quoteedit: I forgot to add that I have absolutely no faith in the fairy tales of St. Darwin of Galapagos Islands.
Throwing words like "fairy tales" around is not an argument
-
58 minutes ago, MahtiSonni said:
Hell wasn't made for people. Everyone who goes to hell chooses it themselves. The thing, though, is, that either one says to God: "thy will be done", or God says to said one: "thy will be done". It's really reaping what one sows. You're acting as if someone was torching you when an actual analogy would be insisting on jumping off a cliff to a great fall onto sharp rocks and then blaming the only one who says you really shouldn't.
nope. Jumping off a cliff, you can see the rocks, you know what will happen, in that sense you are choosing to insist on jumping off a cliff. No one has ever seen hell, or heard god. Theres no proof that any of it is actually real. You are framing it as if god has no agency, doesnt choose anything, or if he does choose something, whatever he chooses is perfectly moral. He has set up a system where you burn for eternity simply for not believing that he exists. You cant choose to believe in something you dont believe in.
Your analogy is awful.
-
2 minutes ago, MahtiSonni said:
Another lying by omission. Too many times to be an accident. That's all I needed. Bye.
Nope, not lying at all.
Did you, or did you not, say "Our will is free in the sense that we make our decisions". Did you agree that this implies that you believe in a ghost in the machine, or soul?
How is it lying to ask you for proof? ASK you. Asking you for proof is not a claim that you have proof, or that you said you had proof.
Its becoming clear that you are the passive aggressive dishonest one.
-
3 minutes ago, MahtiSonni said:
I mean that unless my English is absolutely worthless, "I can't wait to see the proof" implies two things: i) that the proof mentioned isn't introduced to the subject by that sentence and ii) a claim to having proof has been made.
I did neither. You tried to make it sound like I did, which is dishonest. Lying about other people having made claims they have not made is lying, obviously. There are very few things I despise more than people trying to put words in my mouth.
you made a statement. How is that different from "making a claim"? Why can I say "I cant wait to see proof" when you make a claim, but not say it when you make a statement?
saying "I cant wait to see proof" is not the same as saying "You said you had proof, now show me it" , I have never claimed that you SAID you had proof, I ASKED you for proof. Do you see how they are different?
I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt that it is actually a language issue
-
2 hours ago, MahtiSonni said:
Like I said in no uncertain terms, sure, I believe we are souls, and that our operating system is the body we have. I never claimed any proof for it. I don't have any inclination to even begin justifying that belief to you, as you're still lying about not making a proof claim you expect me to back up.
Im not sure what you mean. You are saying that I made a proof claim? Or that I said that you were making a proof claim? its not clear. I think calling me a liar is extreme, did you, or did you not, say "Our will is free in the sense that we make our decisions", and was I not correct in logically deducing from that that you believe in free will, and therefore a soul?
If your issue is that you werent making a claim, whats the difference between making a statement ( "Our will is free in the sense that we make our decisions") and making a claim? If you make a statement, can I not ask for proof that your statement is true, and how does asking for proof suddenly make me a liar?
Sure, you can say that you dont have proof, in which case I can dismiss your statement. None of this makes me a liar.
-
5 hours ago, Azrael Rand said:
This is why I prefer framing it as a culture of self-ownership rather than free will, which is factually incorrect.
How can you have a culture of self-ownership if there is no self and nothing to own. If determinism is true, a culture of self ownership would be similar to saying that a PC owns its keyboard and mouse
-
3 hours ago, MahtiSonni said:
...if you discount a nonexistent proof claim concerning something you made up.
as donnadogsoth pointed out, a soul, a ghost in the machine, is the logical conclusion of belief in free will. So I didnt make anything up, but as you appear to believe in free will, it follows that you must believe in something resembling a soul.
-
5 minutes ago, Donnadogsoth said:
If we believe in free will then we must also believe in a soul.
Yes, that is what logically follows from the belief in free will, as I understand it.
-
On 9/20/2018 at 2:29 AM, PillPuppetPoet said:
I honestly do not think enough of UPB to even have a serious philosophical interest in it
you have spent I dont know how long typing out very long posts critiquing UPB ( a philosophical work), but you have no serious philosophical interest in it?
QuoteI feel the whole theory is baseless, illogical and amounts to spinning sophistical words together in thin air
This isnt an argument. I suppose you might claim that you have already supported this statement in previous posts, but I havent been able to determine exactly what your problems with UPB are from reading your posts.
-
9 hours ago, MahtiSonni said:
I do not think so.
Sure, I believe we are souls, inhabiting a body. I will give proof when I claim to have such and will not comply with strawmen you try to get me to defend. I tolerate fools better than I tolerate dishonesty.
how is it dishonest to ask you for proof, especially as I just echoed your own words back to you? There is nothing dishonest about anything I said.
If something non-physical has an input into decisions ( and sure, I may have misunderstood or misread what you are saying, in which case, you are free to point it out, rather than do what you actually did), then the only other possibility is non-physical, ie ghost in the machine/soul
-
On 9/20/2018 at 7:21 AM, MahtiSonni said:
Firstly, God is consistent. What He has claimed has so far also happened.
Second, God has given us the best morality known to man. Adhering to them leads to a fruitful and a good life.
Third, God's game, God's rules. Ignore them at your peril. On both personal and civilizational level.
He isnt consistent, in the sense of giving us a morality, and then ignoring it himself ( by killing off millions in the bible).
My game, My rules is not in any way moral
-
3 hours ago, MahtiSonni said:
Remove the qualifier and the answer is no. Our will is free in the sense that we make our decisions, but it can't be absolute, as that would require, for example, freedom from our constraints concerning our knowledge, situation et alia.
I've read Haidt's book years ago. It was ok.
Is it possible our decisions are also down to "robotic circuits" , to steal Donnadogsoth's term? There is nothing else, no other entity or thing that has input into decisions. Otherwise, you are suggesting a ghost in the machine, a soul. Now there's an extraordinary claim. I can't wait to see the proof.
-
my question would be, why?
Sure, in a free market, you could start up a company that offered this, I suppose. Not sure how you would make your money though. Harvesting organs , blood, etc?
Why is it my job , or our job, or someones job, to provide a blissful life to people? How is this different from a welfare state, for example?
-
On 2/25/2018 at 6:34 PM, ofd said:
Sure, you can force yourself to feel differently, but that takes a lot of energy and eventually, it will fail.
You cant even force yourself to feel differently. Emotions are involuntary responses to thoughts and events. I suppose you could recognise what thoughts were linked to the emotions, and then whenever that thought came up, think a happy thought, but you are still experiencing the negative thought, and the emotion linked with it. You also dont get to choose what thoughts come up, so that likely wont work anyway.
If what you said was the case, then it would follow that depressed/anxious/negative people were choosing to be that way, or at least not choosing to change to being positive. I suppose thats possible, but not very likely.
-
57 minutes ago, RichardY said:
Even an Atheist believes in the idea of God.
So if Atheists are delusional, some part of their thinking is. If Atheists are not delusional(they can't be, if God is a delusion), and Theists are, then some of their thinking is still delusional, as they hold the idea of God.
Another option is that God is an illusion. If so, how does one resolve an illusion?
----------------------------------
Typically I think conservatives are dogmatists.
------------------------------
Haven't paid any attention to "memes" on Atheism and leftism, sounds more like SPAM.
Huh? How does understanding an idea mean that you believe in the idea? What does it mean to "believe in the idea of god" anyway?
-
13 minutes ago, ofd said:
This. What I meant by that is that our brain functions (including consciousness) consist of very specific processes that only do one job. There is a process for recognizing shapes, a function for the feeling of self, one to motivate you and so on.
consciousness does no motivation whatsoever
-
On 7/19/2018 at 10:43 PM, barn said:
Would you say 'living down in memory lane' is part of linearity?
Of course it is. You dont suddenly go back in time. You are experiencing thoughts and sensations in the now.
-
repeat offending might be part of it. Are blacks more likely than whites to repeat offend? Do you get a longer sentence if its your 2nd, 3rd, crime? I dont know but its one possibility
-
It doesnt follow that, because we can observe near identical patterns in the family unit, the cultural realm, and society, that human existence is a mixture of linear time and "bogged down ness".
You would have to logically show how you get from
P) We observe near identical patterns in the family unit, the cultural realm, and society
to
therefore C) human existence is a mixture of linear time and "bogged down ness".
You would also have to define "bogged down ness".
-
23 hours ago, soundwave86 said:
Back in therapy
Im glad to hear it. I think they will be able to help you much better than a random person on the internet (me). Keep us up to date with what is happening.
-
https://www.fdrpodcasts.com/#/4010/life-long-failure-call-in-show-february-21st-2018
If you click on Podcasts in the top bar, you can search on key words. I searched on sister asian abuse and found it
-
1 hour ago, oleom said:
Thanks for this, most arguments given here seems very reasonable to me.
I do think at a CERTAIN AGE, removal of care and attention will USUALLY lead to independency (even though it might not the best method).
Sure theres a big difference between sleep training when they are 6 months, and helping them to move to their own room when they are 10. Depends what you mean by care and attention. Im not sure you can ever remove those. Caring and being attentive doesnt necessarily come with any actions.
-
Quote
Is human existence linear?
Its not clear what this means
QuoteI have changed the material reality of it in one direction
What does this mean?
QuoteIsn't it possible that the human mind though it's part of the body, exists in non-linear time, defined solely by the individual's decisions, willed curiosity?
I dont know what it means to "exist in non-linear time". Linear time, as in the webpage you linked to, is a measure of the time taken to complete a task. a computer program doesnt "exist in linear time", whatever that means. I think you are confusing two different concepts, "existing in time" and "the time taken to do a task". The fact that you think about things for a long ( or short) time, does not mean that you somehow exist "outside of time", or that time is wibbly wobbly for humans, rather than a progression from one moment to the next, or whatever it is you are trying to say.
Of course, I may have totally misunderstood what you are trying to say, you havent made it very clear.
-
I didnt know you had been on meds previously.
Is it possible that coming off meds has triggered all of this?
Trying to think of one of Stefan's shows. Can't remember.
in General Messages
Posted
possibly 3911 - Baby Boomers: The Selfish Generation - Call In Show - November 22nd, 2017 ?