Philosophy Now Forum

You are moving to conservative countries where women lack the economic freedoms you enjoy. You don't know what you are talking about. These women can own land and houses over here. As a foreigner, I cannot. They can get government jobs over here. As a foreigner, I cannot. And so on. Having local ci...

Yeah, but when women anywhere (West or East - doesn't matter) demand equal rights What exactly is it that a man is allowed to do that a woman is not? Is there really even one law that favors men over women? On your world-view? Put family second to economic freedom, apparently. Everybody can work, t...

So in summary - you like being a free rider. All upside - no downside. Reward without risk. Sounds like the West has figured out where to ditch its incompetent gamblers I guess that everybody was a free rider in the 1950ies in the West when most of these risks did not even exist. There's even an in...

How's that any different to Western alimony? Alimony is something for nothing. I do not have unconditional obligations. They don't exist here. https://www.foxnews.com/media/passport-bro-growing-number-men-ditching-american-women-overseas What is a passport bro? Growing number of men are ditching Am...

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 9:40 am You are a sex tourist who rents wives. Of course you pay for everything.

How's that any different to Western alimony?

You are too pedantic in this case. As I had stated there are two senses of 'proof' i.e. 1. strictly mathematical 2. ordinary sense. what is wrong with you? How do you prove the liguid in the glass is really water i.e. not anything else. Surely you have to refer to science and there is no need for p...

I'll take that as a yes. I'll take that as utter mathematical incompetence. On the plus side, I can speak English. In which English dialect is a part of the whole identical with the whole? You're officially dumber than a language model... In which English dialect is a part of the whole identical wi...

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 4:17 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 3:32 pm

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 3:01 pm Do you not think a fraction of a change is a change?

Do you think a fraction of 1 is still 1?

I'll take that as a yes.

I'll take that as utter mathematical incompetence.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 3:01 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:58 am

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:35 am All you need for time is one change.

A whole change? A half, a quarter, a third, or an infinitesimal part of a change won't do?

Do you not think a fraction of a change is a change?

Do you think a fraction of change is still a change?

How many changes is a change made of?

You always have to explain everything to IC twice because he likes to leave the first explanation out of what he quotes and pretend it wasn't written. I don't think I've ever seen himn argue in good faith. Since you don't buy into objective morality, I don't understand what your gripe is. Good fait...

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 7:35 am All you need for time is one change.

A whole change? A half, a quarter, a third, or an infinitesimal part of a change won't do?

P1 If X is morally wrong, then X is morally wrong. P2 X is morally wrong. C Therefore, X is morally wrong. That's a slam-dunk. I agree! This is so banal it doesn't even need saying. It's just the first law of thought - identity. So why do you keep rejecting it? Why do you keep saying that the argum...

cos it's the premises and arguments that count, regardless of who makes them. How many times do you need me to demonstrate that you are lying about believing that? If premises and arguments counted you'd have conceded the objectivity of morality by now. You know, given the sound/valid argument pres...

Your understanding of ' critical thinking ' in confining it to communism is so shallow; So lets remove all confinements. Is critique of critical thinking itself critical thinking or not? What sort of thinking is non-critical thinking? Is critical thinking better than non-critical thinking; or is no...

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 7:52 am Despite being valid, Godel's proof is not sound to be realistic as I had demonstrated.

Dumb empiricist.

The necessary conditions for the existence of reality are necessarily NOT real.