Sexily-dressed women

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Should add on that women wearing tight-fitting clothing also get looked down upon by other women. I think this is invasion of privacy.

PhilX 🇺🇸
Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Science Fan »

Veggie: New Zealand has been engaged in numerous wars of aggression against other countries who were not in any way threatening New Zealand. How were you forced to do such things? You weren't. You just can't admit that on a percentage basis, considering New Zealand's small size, that you are a citizen of one of the most militarily aggressive nations in history.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Go tell the Global Peace Index. How small do you think the NZ population is? 400? I see that Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan 'just happen' to be right at the bottom. Gosh. I wonder why that would be? You are also committing one of your beloved 'logical fallacies'. No one in their right might could call NZ an aggressive country. I suppose at least the little dump told the yanks to go fuck themselves when it tried to force them to welcome its nuclear submarines. Now it grovels to the cUntS over some butter.
You have also said on numerous occasions that few Americans have even heard of the place, and if they have they don't spend more than two seconds a decade thinking about it, so spare us your frantic and painfully transparent cherry-googling.
As I said, I couldn't care less what you say about any place, as long as it's true. I was never forced to worship a piece of rag. I'm the first to admit that the piece of rock I was born on is an unsophisticated dump that lost its soul years ago.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 10:23 pm Go tell the Global Peace Index. How small do you think the NZ population is? 400? I see that Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan 'just happen' to be right at the bottom. Gosh. I wonder why that would be? You are also committing one of your beloved 'logical fallacies'. No one in their right might could call NZ an aggressive country. I suppose at least the little dump told the yanks to go fuck themselves when it tried to force them to welcome its nuclear submarines. Now it grovels to the cUntS over some butter.
You have also said on numerous occasions that few Americans have even heard of the place, and if they have they don't spend more than two seconds a decade thinking about it, so spare us your frantic and painfully transparent cherry-googling.
As I said, I couldn't care less what you say about any place, as long as it's true. I was never forced to worship a piece of rag. I'm the first to admit that the piece of rock I was born on is an unsophisticated dump that lost its soul years ago.
Right might or right mind? There goes that darn computer again. :lol:

PhilX 🇺🇸
Serendipper
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:05 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Serendipper »

Science Fan wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:46 pm Veggie is obsessed with PC. PC folks hate the fact that science has shown there is a biological basis for human behavior, including a biological difference between men and women, especially when it comes to sexual desire. It rules out their unscientific claim that there is no such thing as human nature and one can simply come up with some PC culture that will magically mold people into citizens of an utopia.
Well said.
It also undermines their unscientific claim that they are smarter than conservatives, because if one's political orientation is based on evolution giving rise to political personality traits, then one's political orientation is not based on rational arguments, but on biologically driven feelings. PC folks like Veggie hate that fact, because how can they romp around social media claiming to be mentally superior to their opposition then?
I've made an argument that liberals are smarter (on average)... though maybe not that particular one lol

http://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.ph ... 0#p2697988

Essentially the left has no moral underpinning since they're tolerant of everything except intolerance (claim of an absolute right and wrong). So the left is anti-moral, as it were. This was a line of thought I took to theorize why the left is more prone to violence while banning guns and the right chooses to own guns, but are less violent. The right is more dogmatic since they accept that a right and wrong exists and it's not open for discussion; therefore they can't initiate force against someone as easily because it's impossible to justify it cognitively. The left is more open-minded and see the ends justifying the means, so they're more likely to resort to violence to achieve a higher goal that they perceive as righteous. Because they know that about themselves, they naturally want to ban guns to prevent violence (since they have no internal mechanism). The right doesn't seek to ban guns because they have a mechanism (unwavering dogma of right and wrong).

The left tends to be more educated due to the open-mindedness. The right tends to be "deplorable" due to the dogmatism. The right is trustworthy and the left is underhanded. So, pluses and minuses.

Every advantage has a disadvantage. Dogmatism has it's perks and prickles. The people who drive me crazy with bullheadedness are the most trustworthy I know: they hold themselves to high standards and always keep their word. But if they believe, for instance, that microwave ovens cause cancer, a whole stack of science books isn't going to change their mind.


I also endeavored to study the minimum wages laws of each state in relation to: median income, crime, poverty, taxes, etc and stumbled into the discovery that liberal states are: more educated, higher median income, less crime, less poverty, and marginally higher prices (not enough to offset the minimum wage increase or the median income increases). So yes, higher minimum wage correlates to higher prices, but only because people have more money to spend with which to bid-up prices. All that is on average, of course, since some conservative states (VA is a good one) did quite well. Others were outliers, such as WY, for having a small population and too heavily invested in oil.

Anyway, yeah, liberals are smarter on average, but not as trustworthy. I refer to the politic arena as Freddy Krueger vs Dunning-Kruger :lol:
Serendipper
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:05 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Serendipper »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:18 pm I simply pointed out that there has been no scientific evidence supplied by posters here for any of the claims.
Claim: there is no scientific evidence.
Substantiation: None.
If you think a yahoo survey is scientific then I feel sorry for you.

Because the company was named yahoo, all science performed is not science.
Women are actually quite a bit more complex than your blow-up dolls.

Is that a scientific claim or just conjecture?
80 percent of yanks apparently believe in angels. Over 90 percent support their military. I think that's pretty good evidence for yanks being warmongering morons, so dislike of them is more than rational.
More science?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Where is it then? Why are you licking SF's arse and his bullshit claims that don't even have any relation to anything I've written? So much for critical thinking. You seem awfully familiar btw.
Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Science Fan »

Veggie: I'm not the only one here who sees your PC bullshit for what it is. Give it up already. Your PC bullshit may work in your social-media echo chambers, but it's not working here. That's the whole idea of a philosophy forum --- to encourage rational debate, not the normal idiocy on social media.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

The only reason for never using the quote function is to cover up lies and dishonest--not to mention hypocrisy and double standards.
Science Fan
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Science Fan »

Veggie: Here is your hypocrisy: You claim to only be interested in the truth, yet, whenever someone points out specific facts to you that contradict your claims, you ignore them. You are simply a product of PC running rampant on social media. PC prevents you from ever addressing the Syrian regime for being the main culprit in causing Syrian refugees, because, according to PC, only America can be blamed for the crisis. Not Russia, not Iran, not Britain, not Islam, not Syria, not the remnants of the Ottoman Empire, all of which have far greater impacts on the Middle East than the USA. In addition, you also deny basic science, which is in some ways even worse than your denial of ongoing world events and world history. That's just some of your hypocrisy.

If your arguments are so great, and so convincing, then how come no one else on this forum is blaming only the USA for all of the world's problems?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

As a matter of fact the PC say nothing of the sort, in fact they have been completely silent on the American genocide of arabs in their own ME countries. Silent on the genocide, but very vocal on what they call the 'Palestinian genocide'.
And all I asked for was scientific evidence on this thread, and y'all jumped down my throat. I wonder why.

I love your oh-so-carefully worded rhetorical 'questions' btw. Very smoothe :roll:

The best posters have left the building, unfortunately. Still, you never know when they might come back.
Serendipper
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:05 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Serendipper »

Science Fan wrote: Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:59 pm Veggie: I'm not the only one here who sees your PC bullshit for what it is. Give it up already. Your PC bullshit may work in your social-media echo chambers, but it's not working here. That's the whole idea of a philosophy forum --- to encourage rational debate, not the normal idiocy on social media.
Ann Coulter has often said that one can only punch up, not down, because the one you're criticizing has to be smart enough to understand the criticism, therefore you can never insult the stupid. The truth of that is obvious enough to see, but it begs the question if the corollary is also true: that those who can never be insulted are necessarily stupid.

Dunning-Kruger has actually gotten quite old (1999) and, as it turns out, there's been new research published in 2015, both confirming and adding-to:

Unskilled and Don't Want to Be Aware of It: The Effect of Self-Relevance on the Unskilled and Unaware Phenomenon

"We contend that the unskilled are motivated to ignore (be unaware of) their poor performance so that they can feel better about themselves. We tested this idea in an experiment in which we manipulated the perceived self-relevancy of the task to men and women after they had completed a visual pun task and before they estimated their performance on the task. As predicted, the unskilled and unaware effect was attenuated when the task was perceived to have low self-relevance."

So not only can one be too dumb to know they're dumb, but can also have a big ego about what they mistakenly know.

Of course, I'm sure this is not science either :roll:

I wouldn't worry about veggie. Imagine you're reading youtube comments, are you going to believe the facts posted or the irrational feelings?
User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2888
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by -1- »

Serendipper wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:15 amAnn Coulter has often said that one can only punch up, not down, because the one you're criticizing has to be smart enough to understand the criticism, therefore you can never insult the stupid. The truth of that is obvious enough to see, but it begs the question if the corollary is also true: that those who can never be insulted are necessarily stupid.
This presupposes that to be stupid, the only criteria is to not understand the criticism.

This is stupid.

Would Ann Coulter be smart enough to understand this? Or would she understand it and let it pass, and not be insulted. That would also only prove she was stupid.

I don't buy Ann Coulter's criteria of what constitutes stupidity.
Serendipper
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:05 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Serendipper »

-1- wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:10 am
Serendipper wrote: Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:15 amAnn Coulter has often said that one can only punch up, not down, because the one you're criticizing has to be smart enough to understand the criticism, therefore you can never insult the stupid. The truth of that is obvious enough to see, but it begs the question if the corollary is also true: that those who can never be insulted are necessarily stupid.
This presupposes that to be stupid, the only criteria is to not understand the criticism.
No, "stupid" is defined and not understanding the criticism is a consequence of the definition.
Serendipper
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 1:05 am

Re: Sexily-dressed women

Post by Serendipper »

Regarding the recent youtube terrorist, these comments reminded me of this thread:

NoDebt Tue, 04/03/2018 - 23:11 Permalink
If she doesn't turn out to be some crazy feminist SJW bitch, I'll eat my hat.

Jethro Tue, 04/03/2018 - 23:10 Permalink
She was able to make at least one clean shot! Hahahaha. California must be performing mental gymnastics over this one. Muslim, Vegan, Female....active shooter. HAHAHAHAHA.


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04- ... ng-witness

I just said it yesterday that the Left is like Freddy Krueger: smart but crazy!

The Right is like Dunning-Kruger: the "deplorables". Look at the user names: Nodebt and Jethro.
Post Reply