|
| Thread: HC Olympics: Quoting Wars |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted August 25, 2008 04:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I wasn't talking about religion in the sense that it is true or not, but that what those people say is "efficient" is subjective, just like any other opinion.Quote:
religion suxxorz
subjective 
Irrelevent.
No, it's relevant because that's what we were talking about, not religion 
Religion was only an example.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 04:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
See bold part.
lol, they don't think that they're the geographical center of the universe.
Quote:
And?
Are you going to sacrifice your firstborn to the unicorns then? After all, you can't discount their existence.
Quote:
We're talking about philosophy here, not science!
It doesn't do you much good if you think that this is a virtual world, then, if it doesn't make any difference.
Quote:
Who makes this "purpose"?
The guy who invented it.
Quote:
Besides, the one who invented it is a guy that MANIPULATED some stuff nature has made (you can't create nature), thus he used the "purpose" of Nature itself.
Nature is not a sentinent being - it's an abstract concept. The rudder was created through the focused actions of a sentinent being. There's the critical difference.
Quote:
Energy can't be created nor destroyed.
Hey, I though that was a claim! But we're not talking about energy - we're talking about useful energy.
Quote:
I want, is subjective.
We've already had this discussion. What people want is not subjective - it's objective. When a beggar chooses $100 dollars over $10 dollars, it means that the $100 dollars are more useful for him - and that's objective.
Quote:
Nature's point of view is objective.
Claims without backups.
Quote:
So are they objective?
If you think that there is a heaven, then it may indeed be so.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 04:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
lol, they don't think that they're the geographical center of the universe.
No, because geography only deals with the Earth, while the Universe contains too many to count.
Also, the "center" also applies to time (relativity) so geography is not the best term used.
Quote:
Are you going to sacrifice your firstborn to the unicorns then? After all, you can't discount their existence.
No. I can't discount their existence. But what stops me from discussing about it?
Besides, the unicorns have absolutely no arguments, my idea has. It was also the Matrix philosophy somewhat (virtual world) or based on relativity. So we can discuss it.
Quote:
It doesn't do you much good if you think that this is a virtual world, then, if it doesn't make any difference.
"much good"? By that logic, philosophy doesn't do much good, does it?
Quote:
The guy who invented it.
And the guy used natural pieces, what's their purpose? Things that human define are only models -- they are not objective. Of course, the thing they are supposed to represent is. Take the atom model for example. It is not objective, there are many available. However, the atom itself is, which is what the model tries to "represent", albeit understandable to us.
Giving a purpose to an object is like a model. Not objective.
Quote:
Nature is not a sentinent being - it's an abstract concept.
Replace it with universe then if you feel more comfortable.
Quote:
The rudder was created through the focused actions of a sentinent being. There's the critical difference.
Sentience is subjective, I mean, everyone "thinks" and "imagines", but that's subjective. Only the Universe may be absolute, in your view, although you actually have no proof (it's impossible) due to relativity.
Quote:
Hey, I though that was a claim! But we're not talking about energy - we're talking about useful energy.
That's subjective. What you consider useful, I may not.
Quote:
We've already had this discussion. What people want is not subjective - it's objective. When a beggar chooses $100 dollars over $10 dollars, it means that the $100 dollars are more useful for him - and that's objective.
This is the definition of subjectiveness -- something that is objective only for a CERTAIN person. Doh.
Quote:
Claims without backups.
Hmm, so the Universe is not objective? Then what is?
Quote:
If you think that there is a heaven, then it may indeed be so.
Ok, so my idea is objective, since I indeed think it is true (for example)
Even though it contradicts your ideas -- objectiveness is only one I'm afraid. So there's a hole somewhere. Maybe in yours?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
No, because geography only deals with the Earth, while the Universe contains too many to count.
You know what I meant.
Quote:
But what stops me from discussing about it?
Nothing. We're discussing them right now!
Quote:
Besides, the unicorns have absolutely no arguments, my idea has.
Such as?
Quote:
By that logic, philosophy doesn't do much good, does it?
Yes, it does. Just look at what the philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment have done.
Quote:
And the guy used natural pieces, what's their purpose?
None, since they weren't created through anybody's purposeful action.
Quote:
This is the definition of subjectiveness -- something that is objective only for a CERTAIN person.
No, it's not. What I'm saying is that the beggar obviously thinks that for him the $100 would be more useful. He thinks this objectively.
Quote:
Hmm, so the Universe is not objective? Then what is?
Maybe nothing?
Quote:
Ok, so my idea is objective, since I indeed think it is true (for example)
That's not what I meant. I meant that if you think that there is a heaven, then it may certainly be more efficient to try to get there instead of trying to improve your life on Earth.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You know what I meant.
And? Every kid knows that he is above others -- they bully etc.. They think they're special, because of that "I" and first-person perspective they have. They think they're the center of the universe, in their way.
Quote:
Nothing. We're discussing them right now!
Hmm, I was talking about the Unicorns
Quote:
Such as?
It's not my fault you don't read my previous points. But anyway:
1) Relativity
2) Virtual worlds
3) "What is real? How do you define real? Is it all your senses perceive? Then everything is around you."
4) We never experience things that are not relative to us.
Quote:
Yes, it does. Just look at what the philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment have done.
Hmm, that's more like the philosophy of "how to do practical stuff" -- and btw how do you define "good"??? Knowledge is good regardless of practical applications, well at least for some of us. Thus it's subjectiveness.
Quote:
None, since they weren't created through anybody's purposeful action.
Hmm, "anybody" is subjective, hell, people are subjective. Or do you deny that?
Quote:
No, it's not. What I'm saying is that the beggar obviously thinks that for him the $100 would be more useful. He thinks this objectively.
That's the definition of subjective: what one THINKS is objective. There is no such thing as "objective for some people" because that's the definition of subjective.
If some people say the Earth is flat, then it is not objective for THEM -- that's the definition of subjective. There is no such thing as "objective for someone else contradicts the objective for me" because objectiveness can't contradict itself, regardless of perspective.
Quote:
Quote:
Hmm, so the Universe is not objective? Then what is?
Maybe nothing?
Well seeing as how this goes, I'm inclined to agree with you
Quote:
That's not what I meant. I meant that if you think that there is a heaven, then it may certainly be more efficient to try to get there instead of trying to improve your life on Earth.
No, I wasn't talking about religion or Heaven, but about my "Consensus reality" idea. BTW: most of your questions are answered in the article I linked (wikipedia on Consensus reality)
I meant that, if I think my idea is true (so it is ehm: "objective for me"), just like the beggar thinks that 100$ are better than 10$ (and you call that objective), am I objective? Is my idea objective?
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And? Every kid knows that he is above others -- they bully etc.. They think they're special, because of that "I" and first-person perspective they have. They think they're the center of the universe, in their way.
There's this word: immature. You know, it has an interesting definition
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There's this word: immature. You know, it has an interesting definition
Precise one?
There was also the word once, you know, infidel... you were killed to be it, now seems ok though. 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:28 PM |
|
|
Immature:
lacking wisdom, insight, or stability because of youth
So I guess you lack wisdom and insight if you want to discuss such immature things
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
They think they're special, because of that "I" and first-person perspective they have. They think they're the center of the universe, in their way.
They don't think that they're the physical center of the universe, though. They don't think that wherever they are, they are in the middle of the universe. They may indeed think that they are the most important being in the universe, but that's different.
Quote:
1) Relativity
Don't see what it has to do with your idea.
Quote:
2) Virtual worlds
Your argument in that area doesn't make any sense.
Quote:
What is real? How do you define real? Is it all your senses perceive?
???
Quote:
4) We never experience things that are not relative to us.
So?
Quote:
Hmm, that's more like the philosophy of "how to do practical stuff" -- and btw how do you define "good"???
Something that most people like.
Quote:
There is no such thing as "objective for some people" because that's the definition of subjective.
No, it's not. The difference can be demonstrated by the example of the $100 vs. $10. The beggar knows objectively that the $100 are better. The "anti-materialist" religious zealot would choose the $10, since that is a lesser amount. Whether $100 is better than $10 is subjective. Whether the beggar prefers $100 over $10 is not.
Quote:
Is my idea objective?
Ideas can't be thought of in the same way, though.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:29 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 17:29, 25 Aug 2008.
|
@Asheera: I'm sorry to disappoint you. Give me a precise definition why these things are immature? Cause you say so? Cause other people say so? Sure! 
On the contrary, I think you don't want to discuss them, too much for your wisdom I'm afraid, it can't handle it
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@Asheera: I'm sorry to disappoint you. Give me a precise definition why these things are immature? Cause you say so? Cause other people say so? Sure!
On the contrary, I think you don't want to discuss them, too much for your wisdom I'm afraid, it can't handle it
Sorry, I'm not in the mood to discuss about (example) Invisible Pink Unicorns. If you really don't see what's the problem with this and why it's immature, you really need some help
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If you really don't see what's the problem with this and why it's immature, you really need some help
This. 
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:38 PM |
|
|
@mvassilev:Quote:
They don't think that they're the physical center of the universe, though. They don't think that wherever they are, they are in the middle of the universe. They may indeed think that they are the most important being in the universe, but that's different.
"Physical"??? what's 'physical'? Time is related to space, but i bet you don't call it 'physical'.
Quote:
Don't see what it has to do with your idea.
Read up on Consensus reality. My idea means that, every person controls everything around him -- hence relative. In a way, it INCLUDES relativity as part of it.
Of course, people before relativity called it a "stupidity". Eh, how I like when new things pop out and old timers say "but still, this doesn't prove it" -- of course it doesn't YET, but don't you learn from mistakes?
Quote:
Your argument in that area doesn't make any sense.
Did you watch the Matrix and how "uber" Neo was? Ever wondered why? (in the movie of course)
Quote:
???
You can't answer the question?
Quote:
So?
So you cannot say that there is an absolute law that we all follow and that you have more BASIS than mine, because it is IMPOSSIBLE to find out due to relativity.
What I'm saying is that, you dismiss my arguments because they are not very "solid". See above, yours aren't either
That's like, for example, us being on the surface of a balloon, but a 3D surface. We won't experience the 4th dimensions, even though it might be the absolute one. Thus, the "absolute" idea lacks as much arguments as mine.
Quote:
Something that most people like.
most people like, well if most people say the Earth is flat, is that objective? Majority has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with "absolute truth" (if it does exist).
on the other hand, in my ideas, they might "shape" the Earth with that though.
Quote:
No, it's not. The difference can be demonstrated by the example of the $100 vs. $10. The beggar knows objectively that the $100 are better. The "anti-materialist" religious zealot would choose the $10, since that is a lesser amount. Whether $100 is better than $10 is subjective. Whether the beggar prefers $100 over $10 is not.
Whether I prefer my idea over yours is not subjective, it's objective then. Good.
But what has this got to do with anything?
@Asheera:Quote:
Sorry, I'm not in the mood to discuss about (example) Invisible Pink Unicorns. If you really don't see what's the problem with this and why it's immature, you really need some help
Thank you for your insight. Brilliant. If you can't see how God is the only TRUE way, you need some help. Is that better?
Well it isn't because it comes from me, right?
It once came from the majority though... people like you never learn from mistakes.
If you are not in the mood to discuss, then please stay out of it. Do you think you do much good with "you are a delusional weirdo, you need help"? I can say the same, where will that get us?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:39 PM |
|
Edited by Asheera at 17:40, 25 Aug 2008.
|
Quote:
Do you think you do much good with "you are a delusional weirdo, you need help"?
Do you think you do much good with your immature ideas nobody wants to discuss?
Ask ANY philosopher about your ideas and see if they want to discuss them
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:42 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 17:43, 25 Aug 2008.
|
Quote:
Do you think you do much good with your immature ideas nobody wants to discuss?
Then why do you reply?
Quote:
Ask ANY philosopher about your ideas and see if they want to discuss them
So basically you're telling me that I alone have wrote that Consensus reality article, all over the net, and every "person" there is made up.
Wake up. Not all people share your views. And just because you find it silly (you as in majority) doesn't mean you have to SPAM it.
Also you selectively ignored my point:
Quote:
Thank you for your insight. Brilliant. If you can't see how God is the only TRUE way, you need some help. Is that better?
Well it isn't because it comes from me, right?
It once came from the majority though... people like you never learn from mistakes.
Of course now you find it "stupid", but meh, what will we find stupid 1000 years in the future?
pay some attention to history mistakes, will ya?
BTW: you are close-minded with such statements
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:43 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Then why do you reply?
Why do you start with your silly ideas in the first place?
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Why do you start with your silly ideas in the first place?
Why do YOU start with your silly ideas as well?
It's called free speech. YOU are not the judge of what someone can "start". You can start, I can start.
btw read my previous "edit" when you selectively ignored what I said
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:46 PM |
|
Edited by Asheera at 17:46, 25 Aug 2008.
|
Quote:
Why do YOU start with your silly ideas as well?
Because you're the only one on this forum saying that MY ideas are stupid and yours not.
Thus, I start to talk with the others.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Because you're the only one on this forum saying that MY ideas are stupid and yours not.
Thank you very much for AGAIN ignoring my previous point.
And btw, drop the freaking majority talk. Unless you think might makes right. and stop spamming if you can't find anything constructive to mine (why do you reply to them anyway?).
Example:
"Why wouldn't I be an atheist?"
"Because you're the only one here that is. Now die infidel"
today it seems atheists are common
How is this possible, with your flawed logic?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
antipaladin
Promising
Legendary Hero
of Ooohs and Aaahs
|
|
posted August 25, 2008 05:49 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Why do you start with your silly ideas in the first place?
Why do YOU start with your silly ideas as well?
It's called free speech. YOU are not the judge of what someone can "start". You can start, I can start.
btw read my previous "edit" when you selectively ignored what I said
You dont really have a 100% free speech,you have CoC,and rules
____________
types in obscure english
|
| |
|
|
