• Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    All things of creation are children of the Father and thus brothers of man. ... God wants us to help animals, if they need help. Every creature in distress has the same right to be protected. — Francis of Assisi
  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    And now— the biology of self, and the selfless organism.

  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    ↪Moliere
    Here's a hair-raising tale for you.

  • The dismal state of economics.
    In the long run, one dies. What is rational about self interest? It is like betting on a legless horse that cannot even finish, never mind win.

    Self interest is always naked, and the clothes of rationality cannot be made to fit.

    I believe we are living in an age of syndicalism. You can see it with the banking sector, pharmaceutical industry, and insurance companies, alongside with their push for laws protecting their interests with special-interest groups and lobbying in congress. I actually believe this is a natural tendency of competitive markets — Shawn

    Markets are fundamentally cooperative in the first place; we trade instead of fighting and robbing. We have always lived there. The aristocracy has always understood that the fundamental unit of a population is the dynasty, not the individual. The sensible poor understand that the transformation of their fortunes takes generations and can be achieved if at all, through education and social cohesion.

    I think what you are seeing in the US is the slow death of the American Dream of the self-made, self interested man, which has always been a fantasy. The rage of MAGA is against the end of that dream that has kept the poor in line for so long, and at the same time the use of that rage to destroy the institutions that gave the poor some semblance of power.
  • US Election 2024 (All general discussion)
    Oh dear, I was completely wrong. My deep commiserations! Your government cannot make life much better, but it sure can make it worse.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    You are pointing the finger at me.

    Any contradicting proves me right.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    I don't accept that you can blame everything on CC/GW. When "scientists" blame CC/GW for something it is often hard to prove or disprove it. Many people accept everything that "scientists" say about CC/GW without questioning it.

    I think that the way that "scientists" blame everything on CC/GW has made many people skeptical about CC/GW. This probably partly explains why more is not being done about CC/GW.     — Agree-to-Disagree

    Climate scientists have been saying for many many years in response to questions as to whether this or that weather event is caused by climate change, that it is impossible to say on a day to day scale what is or is not the result of climate change. This is obviously so because weather is chaotic and climate is the generalisation of weather. For example, climate talks about prevailing winds, whereas weather talks about the wind today, or tomorrow.

    But this careful talk has not persuaded you, because you have not been listening charitably to understand, but uncharitably to find fault. This is because you are unwilling to face the facts, or are unable to admit you have mistaken things, or you just like to be contrary, or some other motive.

    Your criticisms are without merit and serve no function in this discussion but to divert, confuse and impede the understanding of the readers.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    https://www.thelancet.com/countdown-health-climate

    Another lamentation for you to download. Or just watch Sir Issac Newton and his pal Paul Beckwith break it all down for you below.


  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    ↪Moliere
    Looks interesting. Alas for the disenchanted, they have lost the song and are left with only noise.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    “No doubt about it, these explosive downpours were intensified by climate change,” said Dr Friederike Otto, from Imperial College London, who leads an international group of scientists who try to understand the role that warming plays in these type of events. — Matt McGrath - BBC

    And there is no doubt about it. The sea is warmer, so more moisture evaporates. There is no doubt. That doesn't mean that every disaster is a record breaker, or else climate change isn't happening. :roll:
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    I gave plenty of evidence to support my view. — Agree-to-Disagree

    You gave none.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    My point is that "scientists" are not justified in saying that climate change made the 2024 Spanish floods worse. — Agree-to-Disagree

    You are not justified in such a blanket criticism of a rather fulsome explanation of why the area is prone to such floods and a further explanation of how the higher sea temperatures in the mediterranean have made the flood even worse than previously. There is a whole fucking video of justification, you complete cockwomble.
  • In praise of anarchy
    This is true and would be meaningful if there were some way for people to choose not to be part of society — T Clark

    There's no rule that says you get a choice, either. In fact you don't get a choice; you live in an anarchy and people set up governments and mafias everywhere. And they will do it on Mars too as soon as two or three are gathered together there, because that's just the kind of arseholes we are.

    And if you think Musk is something other than a wannabe Mafia Godfather and divine emperor of Mars, you must be already living on the dark side of the moon.
  • In praise of anarchy
    What is anarchy and where has it worked before? — Tom Storm

    I would say that anarchy is the state of no rules, and it is the universal social condition. There are not, nor can there be, any rules that forbid the setting up of any government, and you do not have to obey any governments that set themselves up.

    A slightly more interesting question Is "what is the difference between a government and a mafia?"

    The answer is sometimes, 'little or nothing', but to the extent that there is a difference, it is that in governments, power itself is limited and tempered by justice, by bureaucratic tradition, by honour and moral fibre, and by democratic limitations. And possibly there can be other features - you tell me...
  • A -> not-A
    ↪Count Timothy von Icarus


    Fair point. Ok, I concede; "obviously" was a misspoken epithet on my part.
  • A -> not-A
    The first premise isn't actually a contradiction — Michael

    Nor is my first premise. I think my argument is valid and sound, and expresses the principle of explosion. Similar nonsense results when you divide by zero, and you can disguise that division in a similar way with a bit of algebra. Obviously the universe is the result of God accidentally contradicting Himself by making a mistake, which He cannot do, being infallible. Explains everything!
  • A -> not-A
    ↪Benkei


    If contradiction, then anything.
    contradiction.
    therefore anything.
  • A -> not-A
    Valid, but unsound.

    1. is a conditional contradiction.
    2. fulfils the condition'

    And from a contradiction, anything and everything follows. This is the principle of explosion.

    That is to say, "1. A -> not-A" is impossible; when the impossible can happen, anything can happen.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    When are "scientists" going to start reducing the rate at which they are increasing CO2 levels? COP29, the taxpayer funded annual holiday for climate scientists, is about to start. How many plane flights and private jet trips will this entail? — Agree-to-Disagree

    This is a very feeble ad hominem, even by your low standards. Some scientists do more than others. They need to communicate with the world and with governments because one cannot do much alone, without changing the infrastructure and regulatory system.

    ↪javi2541997
    Here is Paul Beckwith again talking about the tragedy in Spain.

  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    ↪Nils Loc
    They're rather jolly. Such extravagant displays can only evolve in an environment of plenty where the quality of the genes is all important and assistance with chick-rearing is not important. I guess the junior members of the troop are trainees the star of the show. Just another day of trying to work out what she wants...
  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    Completely off topic today, but we need cheering up.

  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    Paul Beckwith discusses the latest World Meteorological Organization Report on the atmosphere CO2 etc. levels. I'm sure politicians and economists are going to take measures to start reducing the rate at which we are increasing these levels really soon, and if they haven't actually committed to reducing our contribution to zero well I'm sure they will be doing that as well one of these days. But stopping increasing the rate is the first step to take, and we probably need to do that quite urgently now.

    Have a nice day, while you still can.

    https://library.wmo.int/records/item/69057-no-20-28-october-2024

    https://library.wmo.int/viewer/69057/download?file=GHG-20_en.pdf&type=pdf&navigator=1

  • Abortion - Why are people pro life?
    Seems like there has to be an answer. — Fire Ologist

    My argument is everything is arbitrary after you have a living organism with 46 chromosomes. — Fire Ologist

    And "46chromosomes" is not arbitrary?

    Suppose in fact there doesn't have to be an answer. Suppose we have to make decisions about the rights and wrongs and the life and death of our neighbours in peace and in war; for the saints and the murderers, for the unformed and the agonised. Suppose the difference between murder and justified killing is something we establish and disagree about arbitrarily without end?

    I'll tell you where I stand; I don't like abortion. But if a woman in society is in such a situation that her pregnancy is not wonderful news, or at least a bearable interruption, then the whole society is guilty. And I take the same stance about kids shooting their fellows in schools, and Trump, and Hitler, and Jews and Palestinians and Ukrainians and Russians.

    Perhaps this is what is unique about 46 chromosomes; our capacity for unlimited cruelty to ourselves; our propensity to condemn each other while taking no responsibility for each other.
  • Abortion - Why are people pro life?
    I don’t think it helps at all to have this conversation in religious terms. — Fire Ologist

    "The spirit of the law" is not a religious term. But I don't think it helps to have the conversation in purely physical terms either, and that is my point. Matter and cells - some we are made of, some we eat, What's the difference?
  • Immediate future exists since there is a change
    It's just one damn thing after another.
  • Abortion - Why are people pro life?
    I’m at least a collection of particles.

    That’s all I need to be to have this conversation.     — Fire Ologist

    The law is said to have its letter, and also its spirit. I don't see why you and I need to manage with less?
  • Abortion - Why are people pro life?
    Who speaks for the unborn? I don't know, but i know who sings for them.

  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    Another careful picking apart of a bullshitter who ought to know a lot better.



    And a new magic German feeling word to rival schadenfreude — "fremdschamen".
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    When I win the presidency, I'm going to nationalise McDonalds and put Trump in charge of it.

    In the meantime, I am calling it for the democrats in a not quite landslide, based on early voting and anecdotal evidence of registered republicans voting democrat.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    ↪Agree-to-Disagree
    Super powers.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I used not to think that Trump was evil. — Wayfarer

    Judge not, that ye be not judged. Condemn the sin, and not the sinner.

    That says more about us than it does about him honestly. — Mr Bee

    Yes. This is the hard lesson to learn; that it is plainly arguable where the most evil lies in American politics. Plainly, because people are arguing it here on this page in seeming good faith.

    If politics is characterised as an equal battle between good and evil, then necessarily, evil will triumph, because the good have scruples and the evil have none. Or else there is no difference and the analysis fails altogether.

    When the opposition has to be called evil, it is the failure of the good to maintain their own standards that has allowed it to happen. If there is a party of the good and a party of the evil, there is no question who to vote for; it is when one cannot tell them apart that evil can triumph.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    A quickie, something for the weekend, to make you me, anyway, smile.

  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    Ok, this is slightly off-topic, and the guy does a great imitation of the mad staring eyed mathematician.
    But it relates to any number of waffles threads over in the hard-nosed philosophy section. It goes right against my instincts on the abstract, but it does it well.

  • Backroads of Science. Whadyaknow?
    Now this is a backroad so scenic and unspoilt, you may want to stop for a picnic. Or, if you need to be somewhere urgently, probably avoid the area altogether.

  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
  • I've beat my procrastination through the use of spite
    Procrastination is the result of internal conflict, and hence of a divided mind. If I am single minded, there can be no conflict; I am doing what I am doing, wholeheartedly.

    I want the dishes clean and the kitchen tidy, but I want to go on sitting in my comfy chair dreaming. Such a conflict is uncomfortable, and there is no resolution, unless perhaps my wife will go and do the job. Procrastinating, I jump from one side to the other, arguing back and forth, and neither doing the job nor relaxing.

    It is fairly easy to see the whole conflict as I have just described it, and obviously, the solution is that since i cannot relax properly until the dishes are done, I want to get the dishes done, and then relax.

    But typically, the conflict is hard to see; perhaps I want to write a really good essay, but I am afraid I will not be able to, so I do not want to start and find out.

    Or I want to stop smoking, but I do not want to suffer the withdrawal symptoms, so I want to smoke.

    In such cases, it can be hard to see the whole conflict, and one is always on one side. and avoiding or ignoring the other. And until one can see the whole, there can be no resolution. There is a moment, possibly, though, when one becomes aware of the conflict as a whole, and in that instant, the conflict is ended. One writes the essay as best one can, or else one abandons the essay for good. One remains a contented smoker, or one stops smoking completely.
  • To what jazz, classical, or folk music are you listening?
  • Can this headline be answered by the word "no"?
    Yes, but falsely.
    — unenlightened

    But, also "No, but falsely."     — punos

    There is an asymmetry, I think. The answer "No." is a performative contradiction, while the answer "Yes." is not.

    It is a matter of interpretation, but i suggest that a yes/no question can always be answered by yes, or by no. Usually, one answer is true and the other false. So under this understanding the correct answer is "Yes, it can be answered by "No.", but that answer would necessarily be false.

    Pedants of the world unite, you have nothing.
  • Climate Change (General Discussion)
    When women can choose not to have children, a pretty high percentage of them don't. — frank

    Perhaps child-rearing is an undervalued contribution to the economy; a cost that individuals choose not to bear unaided in support of a society that does not reward it.

    In other news ...

  • Can this headline be answered by the word "no"?
    Yes, but falsely.
Home » unenlightened