Debate Topic

[FireArrow]

ftfy

That's really not how your post came across to me. I'm mostly just bitter that NO one in partiCular is allowed to run around being blatantly degrading and inflammatory to other members without even a warning. Then slow comes by and makes one rude post and the mods arise out of nowhere. The bitterness and tension NSM has isn't going to go away by "I'm watching you" and "Don't take this any further" unless you keep your promises and doll out punishments if it happens again.

[SlowPokemon]

That's really not how your post came across to me. I'm mostly just bitter that NO one in partiCular is allowed to run around being blatantly degrading and inflammatory to other members without even a warning. Then slow comes by and makes one rude post and the mods arise out of nowhere. The bitterness and tension NSM has isn't going to go away by "I'm watching you" and "Don't take this any further" unless you keep your promises and doll out punishments if it happens again.

wait I'm not denying the possibility that I made a rude post but what on earth are you talking about in particular (I'm actually confused haha)

Also this is not me being a dick but it should be "dole" not "doll" 

[Waddle Bro]

Ideas deserve respect only if they are tolerant of other ideas and haw valid points to be made. We don't "respect" the idea that 2+2=22, it simply isn't true. Also, what is the standard for an idea being rational? Purely hypothetical question.

can't tell if you're agreeing or trying to bring out my point more clearly or not xD
The 2+2=22 is a great example though. You respect 2+2=4 because it's a standard math equation that's globally used. But what really separates 2+2=4 and 2+2=22? You only believe 2+2=4 is true because people around the Earth have used numbers like that universally, but how was it originally decided? Someone or some people just decided to invent the idea of a number, but the numbers or the idea of how to count aren't based on anything substantial. So the idea of 2+2=4 is relative to us, and not objective knowledge. You don't have to respect the idea of 2+2=22, but if it was the universal standard on how to count on our planet, I think you'd respect it like you do 2+2=4. So respecting it is relative.

On the standard for an idea being rational though, first of all, there's the Deus Deceptor argument on what if the world you observe is the way it is because someone is in control of everything you observe, like a malicious demon or a god. That's why true knowledge can only come from pure reason. -plato
Cogito ergo sum("I think, therefore I am", meaning since you can think, there has to be a thinker to do it, meaning I have to exist) is the one confirmed piece of true knowledge so I think the idea of my existence can be considered as the standard of a rational idea. It's also one of the core notions of rationalism.
On a more conventional note, an idea that acknowledges its possibility to be wrong can also be rational, but for example most religions don't tend to acknowledge that chance. That's actually why I like Buddhism since it's willing to change if something about it is proven wrong. But science is also like that, since it's also based on logic and reason.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Someone being in control of everything? What about weather, tectonic plate shiftings?
And actually I agree with you on this Waddle, I just wanted to be more specific XD
Science though is an interesting case; it simultaneously is open to being wrong and is fundamentally opposed to it.
Take, for instance, gravity. Nobody debates gravity, we know it to be true for all the reasons described by modern science.
However, if someone took an extreme hypothetical gravity question (make one up for all it matters) and could only come to a conclusion by changing the theory of gravity, then as long as it is scientifically sound and passes all the checks and stuff it would be welcomed.

[Waddle Bro]

Someone being in control of everything? What about weather, tectonic plate shiftings?

It's a relevant theory when it comes to metaphysics and epistemology. Deus deceptor doesn't really mean it would be in control of everything, just that we would observe only the things the malicious demon would want us to observe, in order to manipulate us and play with our beliefs. It could be all-powerful and stuff like that could be done even if it seemed complex to us.

I don't question the chance of a higher entity like that or a god existing, denying that chance would also be up to faith.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

I don't question the chance of a higher entity like that or a god existing, denying that chance would also be up to faith.

I agree that there's definitely a chance. However, that doesn't automatically make it equally as likely that a God does exist (much less the gods of any religion we've had on Earth).
But then to actually weigh the chances of there being a God is purely speculation.

[FireArrow]

wait I'm not denying the possibility that I made a rude post but what on earth are you talking about in particular (I'm actually confused haha)

Also this is not me being a dick but it should be "dole" not "doll" 

I've never seen it spelled out so yeh 

Mostly talking about kefka being a binacle and that whole noc gay marriage thing that dude got all pissed off about.

[KefkaticFanatic]

That's really not how your post came across to me. I'm mostly just bitter that NO one in partiCular is allowed to run around being blatantly degrading and inflammatory to other members without even a warning. Then slow comes by and makes one rude post and the mods arise out of nowhere. The bitterness and tension NSM has isn't going to go away by "I'm watching you" and "Don't take this any further" unless you keep your promises and doll out punishments if it happens again.

If things happen, and you think they are not good, report them.  If something *that* bad is taking place and nothing happens, it's probably because I had no time to read the posts in the first place.

[Waddle Bro]

I agree that there's definitely a chance. However, that doesn't automatically make it equally as likely that a God does exist (much less the gods of any religion we've had on Earth).

Atheism isn't more or less likelier than theism

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

Atheism isn't more or less likelier than theism

I'm very curious how you came to that conclusion, given that it's extremely hard to speculate on things we know little about...

[Ruto]

I'm very curious how you came to that conclusion, given that it's extremely hard to speculate on things we know little about...

I read Timaeus and Plato seems to have some idea using only philosophy (deductive and inductive reasoning, etc) It doesn't describe the kosmos detailed enough for it to be considered science or for one to claim that it influenced science (don't do this for philosophical works), but still.

Not that many of you would study Greek philosophy, but I bothered to.

[Dude]

Mostly talking about kefka being a binacle and that whole noc gay marriage thing that dude got all pissed off about.

omfg I totally forgot about that.

Watching that was fun.

[SlowPokemon]

[FireArrow]

but your avatar tells a whole 'nother story

[JDMEK5]

Take, for instance, gravity. Nobody debates gravity, we know it to be true for all the reasons described by modern science.

I believe that gravity is only a result of the universe and everything therein moving upwards as they are given room by things being "up in the air". You guys are all bigots.

*In case it wasn't clear, I don't actually believe that. It was a joke.