Duart

The knowledge is limited, limited by the fact that it/the intelligence can't deduce past knowledge.

Happy to debate that point but first i think it's fair to query the change in goal posts from Omniscient (the term you first used to define an aspect of god) to Omniscience (the one used in your counter argument). omniscient - having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things. (is the definition first provided, and i'd maintain successfully rebutted...) omniscience - infinite knowledge (i.e is well tailored/selected to fit your counter argument) to quote your initial argument for reference, "Would not this mind be omnipresent with all parts of itself, omniscient in knowing all parts of itself, and omnipotent in having control over itself aka the whole universe?Would not this mind be omnipresent with all parts of itself, omniscient in knowing all parts of itself, and omnipotent in having control over itself aka the whole universe?"

If an intelligence were to arise/ascend at some mid-point of the universe then it would lack the knowledge of what went on prior to it's awareness preventing it from being omniscient. You could then propose that it could retrospectively deduce what want on before but this would be to assume that everything that went on before was deterministically determined which implies this new godly intelligence is too lacking in free will and therefore not omnipotent.

so like a Phillip Defranco for philosophy lol? The no add stuff is important to me but then a peek into total donation contributions may change that position. As an alternative a debate/interview on a stage setting etc would be interesting or send Mike out into BLM territory wearing Trump apparel for laughs, and journalism, but mainly laughs

Nice, if this were a poster i'd buy one. The video on the link is comical, How to Speak Without Bias.... - Caucasian People => European-American Individuals - His or Her => Hir - Poor people => People living at or below the poverty line I think the second one is still heavily misogynistic, why should the second letter be from 'His' and the LAST letter from 'Her' (It should be "HES"). How terribly offensive

Aha, hadn't noticed How can the show improve... pay for it...?

I hear VHEM are just the subgroup of MGTOW with long-term goals

Really great quote. Having spent the last hour arguing with people on YouTube comments I think I'll take up this advise and save the effort! If re-contextualising scripture helps stop a parent from abusing a child then why not. It may be impossible to make someone rational but, 'spare the advice to save the methodology' seems equally damaging.

As a deeply religious Christian I feel that Stef has made the right move in accepting what value my community and god can bring. I'm joking of course, actually an atheist anarcho. Stef hasn't given any more ground to Christian's or theism than he is to the state when he recommends paying your taxes. These institutions exist and whilst the pressure to conform may be ostracism in the case of religion as opposed to prison this doesn't diminish the damage they can cause, especially to a family with no better place to go. "Out of the frying pan and into the fire" sums up the result of your expectations.

Presuming the more socialist countries have less responsible central banking systems to 'fund' them then the claim may be true in some capacity. A family might report being happier with the 'state' of things if they choose to ignore the credit card bills stacking up.

His nights are spent recruiting a militia armed with reason against the existing financial and political systems. And the days... they are spent manufacturing soap. The first rule of FDR is... you do not join a fight club.

I think speed reading is possible but not without the effort of comprehension. Most books, let alone chapters, have a few central ideas to them. Without already having the starting schema in mind for what each chapter is referring to it's difficult to build up a mental picture of what is being said. It's like reading a description on the features of a penguin. If you miss the third word in a chapter 'penguin' you'll spend a good amount of time thinking "what the fk is this about" before going back and it suddenly making sense. I define speed reading as reading without saying each word aloud in your head. In my experience it's significantly quicker (2-3 X) if the content is limited, i.e a description of a person or location, but pointless for anything detailed like character conversation or a physics text book.

Thanks for your thoughts! Yeah, I see the problem of degrees of responsibility when voting (minimal when diluted by the number of votes and the limited options available). And as you pointed out Jer, someone might vote republican/conservative for a reduction in government size but wind up with the opposite result when they come to power. The thought behind this followed from the struggles of starting up a business. I've been an FDR, libertarian and anarchist supporter for years but never realised the full extent of the difficulties that the state creates. It seems like literally everything has some arbitrary, usually expensive bar to entry or control imposed. What makes it worse is that everyone I know either agrees or benefits in the case of professional accountants for example. Running a business with a good moral ethic in this climate seems impossible. I struggle to find any respect for the assumed property rights of people who support and benefit from it.

Is voting the initiation of force through proxy? If voting makes you complicit to the governments immoral actions, (taxation at the point of a gun for example), then does an individual who votes have any 'right' to property rights. As an example, a lifetime government employee who votes has a savings account. The source of this accounts value is made entirely through the support and subsequent payment of and from government, a gang with a monopoly on violence. Does this person have property rights over the money or does it belong to the tax payers that it was stolen from (impossible to redistribute back). I guess the question follows, if you flipped the anarchy switch tomorrow, would this person have any moral claim over their cash?

Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell The Ayn Rand novels, Atlas and The Fountainhead Pretty sure Debt by David Graeber was mentioned