Search found 3940 matches

by Harbal
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:23 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Scientism
Replies: 69
Views: 580

Re: Scientism

philosopher wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:15 pm

Why are you against me?
Because the three posts of yours that I've read indicate you have a very simplistic view of the World. You appear to see only in black and white.
by Harbal
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:19 pm
Forum: Ethical Theory
Topic: Humans are fundamentally evil
Replies: 63
Views: 533

Re: Humans are fundamentally evil

philosopher wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:13 pm
Please provide an argument against this definition, if you disagree.
I don't disagree with the existing definition. I'm saying let's give it a new definition so it no longer applies to us.
by Harbal
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:13 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Scientism
Replies: 69
Views: 580

Re: Scientism

philosopher wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:43 pm
I've noticed the lack of scientistics (adherents of Scientism, that is reductionist at core) on this forum. Why is it that Scientism is frown upon here?
I don't know what scientism is but if you are advocating it, that's a good enough reason to frown on it.
by Harbal
Sun Sep 02, 2018 9:08 pm
Forum: Ethical Theory
Topic: Humans are fundamentally evil
Replies: 63
Views: 533

Re: Humans are fundamentally evil

philosopher wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 8:09 pm
Humans are evil. No doubt about it.
Well humans invented the word along with it's definition. We could always change the definition so the description doesn't apply to most of us. Fixed.
by Harbal
Mon Aug 20, 2018 10:08 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Religion
Topic: Constructing a God Type Table
Replies: 132
Views: 1063

Re: Constructing a God Type Table

Dontaskme wrote:
Mon Aug 20, 2018 10:06 pm

I have an apple for you dearest teacher...🍎...bite me.
:D
by Harbal
Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:56 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Religion
Topic: Constructing a God Type Table
Replies: 132
Views: 1063

Re: Constructing a God Type Table

Dontaskme wrote:
Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:46 pm

I have no idea what I’m talking about....it’s all but sound just bubbling up from the silence.
:wink:
by Harbal
Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:36 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Religion
Topic: Constructing a God Type Table
Replies: 132
Views: 1063

Re: Constructing a God Type Table

Dontaskme wrote:
Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:04 pm

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
That makes a change; you usually have no idea of what you are talking about.
by Harbal
Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:48 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Orwell vs. Huxley
Replies: 120
Views: 1064

Re: Orwell vs. Huxley

Well the unmoved life living itself doesn't have to move or do anything, but when it does move and do something, it will be because it was meant to move and do something, and it will not move or do something one nano second before it is meant to do it. And that movement will be known as knowledge. ...
by Harbal
Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:29 am
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Orwell vs. Huxley
Replies: 120
Views: 1064

Re: Orwell vs. Huxley

Dontaskme wrote:
Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:22 am

The only reason I am not a brain surgeon right now is because life has not yet evolved that skill in me.
If you are saying that life hasn't sent you to medical school in order to be educated in the skills of brain surgery, then I suppose you could look at it that way.
by Harbal
Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:50 am
Forum: Philosophy of Religion
Topic: Do you think it odd that your God never acknowledges you? Is that rude?
Replies: 79
Views: 774

Re: Do you think it odd that your God never acknowledges you? Is that rude?

-1- wrote:
Sun Jul 29, 2018 12:19 am

Not me. I'll kick him in the nuts for this.
You'd have to find him first. Greatest I am is always getting worked up over the actions of a God he doesn't believe exists, seems like a waste of energy, to me.
by Harbal
Sat Jul 28, 2018 10:23 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Orwell vs. Huxley
Replies: 120
Views: 1064

Re: Orwell vs. Huxley

What is normally referred to as education is actually indoctrination. Most just accept its impartiality as fact. Those like Orwell, Einstein, Mark Twain and others saw it for what it is. Unless Orwell, Einstein, Mark Twain and others didn't have any education, it appears they managed to get through...
by Harbal
Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:18 pm
Forum: General Philosophical Discussion
Topic: Orwell vs. Huxley
Replies: 120
Views: 1064

Re: Orwell vs. Huxley

Dontaskme wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 8:14 pm

I never let any schooling(prison) - (artificial programming) get in the way of my education ~ DAM
So what did get in the way of it?
by Harbal
Thu Jul 26, 2018 5:53 am
Forum: Philosophy of Mind
Topic: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains
Replies: 158
Views: 10779

Re: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains

Consciousness is not measured by the ability to form sentences (computers and socialists can do that), but by the conceptual content within the sentences. And the example you provided: In the real world, consciousness is determined implicitly, in context measured in the favor of consciousness by th...
by Harbal
Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:53 pm
Forum: Philosophy of Mind
Topic: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains
Replies: 158
Views: 10779

Re: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains

Greylorn Ell wrote:
Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:13 pm
No computer I've constructed or programmed has greeted me upon a morning's fire-up with the message, Cogito ergo sum.
And how many people do you know who greet you like that? How long have you been suffering from this Descartes obsession of yours.
by Harbal
Wed Jul 25, 2018 6:01 am
Forum: Philosophy of Mind
Topic: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains
Replies: 158
Views: 10779

Re: Proof for Consciousness existing outside our brains

Greylorn Ell wrote:
Tue Jul 24, 2018 11:17 pm
You give Hairball more credit than he warrants. He's clearly not studied Descartes,
Any idiot can study Descartes, but that would just make him an idiot who knows something about Descartes. I'm assuming that you have studied Descartes, in which case you prove my point.