(Based on a true story) Suppose you have an uninsulated hardwood floor that acts as a uniform heat sink for the room. You also have a blanket with an area \(A\) equal to the area of the floor. Will you keep the room warmer by laying the blanket flat across the whole floor, or folding it to double t...

Everything is a guess, but you have to put faith in something. Put faith in the right thing, and you know it.

Anomaly654 wrote:

Affectance Ontology is actually pretty simple.

Having admitted I struggle with it, thanks for building up my self image. I think I'll just go drink some poison now.

Oh geeezzz..

I freely admit that tend to make things seem more complicated than they are.

I can't go to sleep at 5am? I'm not engaging you unless I start a new thread? James, be real. Respond to the post and stop making it about me. You're better than this. Your constant blame-shifting efforts don't work with me. You made a claim that I was wrong about something. I merely asked you to e...

That is an abuse, an incorrect use, of the word "reality". The word "reality" refers ONLY to that which is objective, not subjective. You have substituted "my perspective" with "my reality", forming a fictitious entity posing as a real entity ("my realit...

That's what I thought. You never actually engage in debate, do you. Hit n Run.

You can draw all the diagrams that you want, and you can write out all the formulas in the world, and you can quantify everything under the sun and at the end of the day the proof as to whether there is or isn't a god just simply doesn't rest on those things. Well, that would be BS, but is that the...

I am sure that you're trying to get me to put something fourth, so that I can be at a rhetorical disadvantage as the one who's forced to induct. You're no Socrates James. I know these tricks. Oh, that is just a BS trick of your own. Afraid to commit to anything? Just tell me how you get from an abs...

Mr Reasonable wrote:Let's talk about symbols and referents on your side, and evidence contained in private mental states on his side. I mean, I technically think that you're both wrong.

I'm not sure what you are trying to put forth, but still, get it onto a clean thread so we can make sense of it.

I'm seeing a lot of talking, no walking.

Prism isn't going to be able to justify his arguments to you.

And why are you afraid to start threads?

And Mr R, if you want to take up his case for him, go for it. He needs serious help with it. What side to you want me to do? Am I arguing that there's no god? Let's get on a clean thread if that is the debate you want to take on. Start one. We can at least show someone what an actual debate should ...

Mr Reasonable wrote:Like, when James says it's mathematics, he ignores the distinction between symbols and referents. That's a big deal to a philosopher. James...you can't do that.

And you have no idea of what I was referring to. So who is really ignoring the referents?

And Mr R, if you want to take up his case for him, go for it. He needs serious help with it.

We have countered his claims over and over and over. He merely claims that we are "shallow", "naive", and "ignorant". Then he lies about how he has proven his case. No one at all has agreed with his case. Then, of course, he whines when I return his insults. Read the th...

How can you prove it is 100% certainty? There is no 100% absolute certainty within philosophy. It's called "mathematics". You wouldn't know anything about it. See, there is a problem with all of your sermons. You can't comprehend how much more other people know about things than you. The ...

Prismatic567 wrote:I have demonstrated the "idea" of a God is an empirical impossibility

That is a bold faced lie.

And in fact, the logical probability of aliens existing somewhere in the universe is 100%.

Propaganda has made a comeback in the United States in the advent of the Internet. Partially to blame is the internet itself, which provides the ability for illegitimate, uneducated wanna-be journalists to present information in an extremely biased nature, changing the facts slightly to make the ou...

As Anomaly said it, nothing but a sea of linguistic ambiguity.

Once again, my friend, I have managed to reduce you down to retorts. It's easy to, as you put it, "reduce me to retorts". Merely ask a question that I answer, then reply with your typical BS. After such, I really couldn't care less what you say or think. Yappy New Here to one and all! :ob...

One has to be careful when using objectivity in relation to science. For something to be objective or objectively true means it is absolutely true and therefore can not be falsified since it can be proven. "Falsifiable" means that there is an experiment that can only fail if the hypothesi...

My "comfort zone"? I take comfort in being entangled in my dilmma embedded in what I construe to be an essentially absurd and meaningingless world that will end for me with the obliteration of "I" for all time to come?!!!! Obviously you have no idea how such works. If you run ou...

The above view is relatively kindergarten type, Says the typical kindergartner who things Einstein an idiot. Note Philosophical Realists claim their theories represent reality-is but their theories are never realistic. According to the kindergartner. Anyone can make claims but merely first to claim...

Yes, Philosophical Realists are solipsist because they believe in a reality they can never realize

This shows your inability to think and understand language.

note some specific examples. Why did you ignore the ones that I gave? You thought one thing and then others come along able to persuade you to think something else instead. That's why I "verify" until there is nothing left to question or change. Note particular instances of this: Not the ...