Comments

  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    ↪bert1
    Don’t you see that you and your frienss could go to some untamed bit of land and make something of it of your own determination? Even with people at odds on this Forum, we could all just decide to get up and move somewhere... but States have us by the balls. We are little more than domesticated tools for its disposal. States monopolize power away from its constituents.
  • Dreams and Waking States: An Analogy with Removable Discontinuity
    ↪Deep Kumar Trivedi
    You're welcome. I think it's an interesting idea because I've always been interested in the undefined and asymtotes of functions. Especially since the identity of a number, say for this example we use 5 and 4.9999999999... repeated are the same in math... yet we can not ever reach an asymtote at 5. However, we can achieve 4.9999999999... repeated infinitly... it's odd to me that they're the same identity, yet one can not be reached when there is the asymtote at 5.

    Furthermore I think this concept could make for an excellent story because it's creative. Like say through some scanning device it finds an algorithm of a persons sleeping mind, and they hack into the dreams of the sleeper through finding the undefined variables. Like oh, lets plug in nodes to the undefined socket and warp in.
  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    ↪javra
    lmao voting and fiat money isn't power...

    And on the contrary... I'm laughing at such a notion of power because you're capable of more, every human is.
  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    ↪bert1
    Well my man, that's what happen when a state steals everything from the people... the people look to the state to do everything... to solve their problems... I know I've said it before. And you're presenting the perfect person I was talking about, hence why you want to VOTE...

    Mighty big contribution of you towards the end you desire.

    Power relegated to voting and fiat money.
  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    ↪javra
    ↪bert1
    lol what world have you been living in where this already isn't the case?
  • Dreams and Waking States: An Analogy with Removable Discontinuity
    ↪Deep Kumar Trivedi
    Quidquid luce fuit, tenebris agit... "What goes on in the light occurs in the dark, and the otherway round as well."

    Though, I do like this conception of yours. The dream being the undefined part of the function. Also welcome aboard, an intriguing first post.
  • The case against suicide
    ↪Chisholm
    Most people aren't even functioning at 75% of their capabilities. Muted gene expression from a shit diet and lacking energy from allowing their sedentary BMR to rule them. The list goes on...
  • Quine: Reference and Modality
    ↪Banno
    Obervation sentences are stimulus-synonymous for a speaker if their stimulus meanings are the same for him. But whereas one’s stimulations and their ranges are a private affair, stimulus synonymy makes sense socially. Sentences are stimulus-synonymous for the community if stimulus-synonymous for each member. This still does not work between languages, unless the community is bilingual. — Quine, Pursuit of Truth
  • Epistemic Stances and Rational Obligation - Parts One and Two
    ↪J
    Well, I think this Pincock lives up to his name. That a stance may allow for the bridging of a gap in knowledge doesn't make it obligatory. Other stances can render the stance mutable imo, especially when theoretical lacks real-world relevance and practicality.

    A theoretical win may not be able to be scalable for several reasons which might take a HOW-to approach. Quine details that we can't ever know WHY a something failed in an experiment that should technically work — in theory.
  • A discussion on Denying the Antecedent
    ↪flannel jesus
    That's fine, you can pick up Quine any time to learn... you said keep it brief if someone agrees with you. I kept it brief.
  • Epistemic Stances and Rational Obligation - Parts One and Two
    ↪J
    I'm still curious, what this achieves? Pretty much seems like a reprhasing of Quine. IE plagiarism.
  • A discussion on Denying the Antecedent
    ↪flannel jesus
    Quine on modalities... modalities resist substitutivity for reasons like this... swapping the modality in this case brings a falsehood.

    ↪Mrinmoy Roy


    That was an excellent first post. I could learn a lot from you.
  • Do you wish you never existed?
    ↪Down The Rabbit Hole
    Interesting I wasn't aware, in fact, my father should have done this to his father, who had a few million to his name, via business, but he destroyed my father's dreams and family to go off with his secretary. But my father always was spineless in standing up to his pops.

    And so my father went on his way to become independent, but was ultimately torn to piecemeal by a cavern dwelling minotaur of consciousness... My father stopped eating and drinking a few weeks ago. I creamated my father last week, so no need to for me to do such a thing. My mother is sweet in all her ignorance, and doubly innocent due to it, even if she was peculiarly absent. She was there, but never really could fathom me, or even my sister. She doesn't even realize that sometimes her advice is so insulting, regardless, I can't bring myself to hate my parents, especially not my mom.
  • Epistemic Stances and Rational Obligation - Parts One and Two
    My question is what's even the appeal of this way of thinking? Seems more like a way of telling others how they ought to think... when it's generally those who think outside the box that press the envelope...

    I dont get why people even argue about this kinda shit... "because these epistemic receptors were triggered its obviously gotta be sameness of stimulation between people even though they don't share a homology of nerve endings between the two... to the point its oblogatory for everyone because we all share the same neurons and thought processes..."

    Sorry but we're not all one normal person who thinks all the same way...who are exact replicas of the next with the same genetic code and make up and same neurons...
  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    ↪Vera Mont


    A thousand goals have there been hitherto, for a thousand peoples have there been. Only the fetter for the thousand necks is still lacking; there is lacking the one goal. As yet humanity hath not a goal.

    But pray tell me, my brethren, if the goal of humanity be still lacking, is there not also still lacking—humanity itself?—

    Thus spake Zarathustra.
  • Do you wish you never existed?
    There are realities where I probably have committed suicide by now. But not this one, I've found a pathway out of my most abysmal hours.

    ↪Down The Rabbit Hole
    most likely, but even still, I prefered using antinatalism more as an argument against my ignorant parents when I was a kid, before I even knew what (anti)natalism was... it offended me that my parents would give birth to me with so little regard to me afterwards. Even though always present they were still, oddly enough, absentee parents. Never making an effort to ever know me. All while expecting me to live a certain way that I decided I never agreed to do so. To live to a way of life that made me feel sick to my stomach.

    I'm a bit of an antinatalist, but I still voted No.
  • Are International Human Rights useless because of the presence of National Constitutions?
    I dont think so. International law tends to be there for the same reason federal/state law exists in the US: Different jurisdictions. And perhaps in those cases of rebellion when a government is over thrown to the point of lawlessness... then international law will come in handy.
  • Artificial intelligence
    ↪David Beames
    You're allowed to discuss AI and perhaps even post some content, when discussing differences in output, the main take away I get from it is don't use AI to make low effort posts and try to pass it off as your own work.

    If you have an original piece, and want an AI to edit it then post, I'd probably go to a Mod and send them the original first and then the edited to see if it's okay.
  • Nietzsche's "There are no facts." Our needs define our senses.
    ↪tim wood
    Ah, did you mean AS misinterpreted? My fault. ^_^
  • Nietzsche's "There are no facts." Our needs define our senses.
    ↪Joshs
    putting that on the ole reading list. Appreciate you.
  • Nietzsche's "There are no facts." Our needs define our senses.
    ↪tim wood
    Facts are historical. — tim wood

    That's exactly the point of me pointing to the fact in Nietzsche's WtP 258

    My leading doctrine is this: there are no moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation of phenomena. The origin of this interpretation itself lies beyond the pale of morality.

    What is the meaning of the fact that we have imagined a contradiction in existence? This is of paramount importance: behind all other valuations those moral valuations stand commandingly. Supposing they disappear, according to what standard shall we then measure? And then of what value would knowledge be, etc. etc.???     — Nietzsche, WtP 258

    Leads directly into Nietzsche
    develop[ing] this idea further in Human All Too Human, again in Joyful Wisdom/Gay Science, in TSZ&BGE, and in Genealogy, all the way through to will to power. — DifferentiatingEgg

    From the second aphorism of HATH, and I explain this in the other post also (
    We can see Nietzsche discusses this very concept as early as HATH (Aphorism 2), all the way to Ecce Homo and Antichrist... Which even Peter Gast gets right in WtP... — DifferentiatingEgg
    ), had you read the aphorisms you'd see...

    Inherited Faults of Philosophers:...A lack of the historical sense is the hereditary fault of all philosophers...there are no eternal facts, as there are likewise no absolute truths. Therefore, historical philosophising is henceforth necessary, and with it the virtue of diffidence. — Nietzsche HATH § 2

    So you see, I did discuss it, just not directly point to it... but fact is, there wasn't a wrong interpretation in that other than you thinking you had me on a wrong interpretation...

    ↪Joshs
    Nice, thank you for that additional gradation. What book is that in?
  • Save as Draft
    ↪fdrake
    Some people ready many books, some people read a quality selection of books many times. For example, since January Ive read and listened to Quine's Pursuit of Truth like 6 times. Once is never enough for my methodology.
  • Save as Draft
    ↪T Clark
    regardless, thanks for the tip about the drafts section. :up:
  • Save as Draft
    ↪fdrake
    I implore you to actually read Nietzsche?
  • Save as Draft
    ↪Outlander
    T Clark brought me up to speed. Already mentioned I have a walking desk.
  • Save as Draft
    ↪fdrake
    that has nothing to do with Nietzsche... and I've been reading everything but Nietzsche lately... because I've already developed a careful mastery of Nietzsche.

    Besides, as T Clark says, the new discussions get saved as drafts in the drafts section.
  • Save as Draft
    ↪T Clark
    I'd wager you are, regardless. Especially since you attempt to throw around the foundation of their thought so readily... a quick search of a few key terms and yeah... you're knee deep homie... hence "Christian."
  • Save as Draft
    ↪T Clark
    Getting to the bottom of why TPF doesn't have a standard Save as Draft function is the point. There's one post I could find about drafts and Jamal said he would see about getting it implemented...

    So the only information I had to go off of was that Jamal could see if a save as draft feature could be implemented for the inbox... So I made the post to see if it could be implemented for the website.

    Questioning something isn't whining dumbass. But I can see how a "Christian" could confuse the two...
  • Save as Draft
    ↪T Clark
    Ah, well, I suppose that could help.
  • Save as Draft
    Well, thankfully, I remember the "form" of my post is like BGE 19, 24, 9, 19 something something BoT Through Will to P.

    ↪Outlander
    that is the stone age... and Im using my phone. Geesh, sitting at a desk pools the blood. And although I have a desk I can walk at and notes I can type in there on my phone... no... I think I'll raise the question as to why this place can't do save as draft functionality when comments are saved... I guess TFP is just hosted by a company not owned by the owner of TFP.

    Personally, my experience with hardcoded is that you can often figure a creative way around the hardcoded limitations.
  • POLL: Power of the state to look in and take money from bank accounts without a warrant
    ↪bert1
    Heh, well consider what a state does: presents pretty much a standard to live by while building a structure to govern people who can't govern themselves... that isn't to say that there aren't those that do... but by and large most fail at governing themselves. They look to the state to provide solutions.
  • Quine: Reference and Modality
    ↪J
    Intension is the total set of receptors intrinsic to the physical form of a word.

    One cannot use words without knowing the meanings — Corvus

    True, though, ultimately the meaning of a word is dependent upon the sentence it shows up in.
  • Quine: Reference and Modality
    ↪Banno
    Because I see that Quine has read Nietzsche and I see Quine attempting to overcome aspects Nietzsche would harp on doesn't mean I see everything through Nietzsche. That means I know Nietzsche's phrases and when I read it in another author, I'm like "ah, hes read Nietzsche." Because it's a stimulus that triggers a total set of receptors...

    Just as I realized Quines philosophy is based on Set Theory and Mathematics to inform him on linguistics... with hardly any ability in set theory none the less. I simply realized that what I was learning about Ordinals is how Quine orders linguistics from the top down. His "total set of receptors" was the same as the total set of nodes in which one can say this references that

    1. I'm going to throw shit on you vs. 2. I'm going to throw "shit" on you... what am I referring to by "shit" in number 2? I'll give you three guesses. If you can not get it right, then it's likely cause it's incoherent because I quoted shit... and thus, modality and reference do not trigger all the same set of receptors from De Re vs De Dicto.

    That I detail every language as its own quotational account... well, you cannot know wtf "hintegedanke" means without knowing it in German because there is no word for it in any other language, or even "Aristeuein" for that matter but for the Greek. Even without that... how many words are there for a Bird? In other languages? I don't know... and I dont even know 1/10th or probably 1/100ths of all the words for Bird... the different modality of a language can render something incoherent just as a quotational account...

    Unless you know the meaning within that modality... the same total set of receptors wont fire...

    And thus if I switch modalities from English to French w/ That oiseau is flying... the plane? the insects, ... what exactly is flying when I don't know what "oiseau" is? I can make an educated guess based on faith and "what I know that can fly?"

    Thus modalities have a certain resisting against identity when substituted...
    The modalities of necessity and possibility are not overtly mentalistic, but still they are intensional, in the sense of resisting substitutivity of identity. — Quine's Pursuit of Truth.

    If that's opaque then I can see why you take Russel's boneheaded criticism of Nietzsche. Because you're out here substituting your meanings and words for Nietzsche's own...

    And as Wittgenstein shows us, every philosopher has his own language, a language that you have to familiarize yourself with otherwise you wont know wtf they're saying.
  • POLL: Power of the state to look in and take money from bank accounts without a warrant
    ↪bert1
    by the nature of the question, it appears to me that you're thinking I'm saying they're already stealing all the money. What I'm saying is the state loves to take the excess of power and productivity of a person and turns it into fiat money that represents a style of power and productivity within a given post-phenomenalist structure.

    That fiat money isn't printed for public serivce is because your politicians aren't really giving a damn about that vs other interests.
  • POLL: Power of the state to look in and take money from bank accounts without a warrant
    The state literally already takes everything from the people, money is generally a superfluous representation of power, power and productivity stolen by the state.
  • Quine: Reference and Modality
    Not sure what's so hard to understand

    30 Modalities The modalities of necessity and possibility are not overtly mentalistic, but still they are intensional, in the sense of resisting substitutivity of identity. Here again we have the interplay between de dicto and de re. Thus ‘nec (7 < the number of the planets)’ is true de re, since nec (7 < 9), but false de dicto...

    28 Propositional Attitudes: (1) There are some whom Ralph believes to be spies, not just that (2) Ralph believes ‘∃x(x is a spy)’. If rendered quotationally, (1) goes incoherent. (3) ∃x(Ralph believes ‘x is a spy’). The quotation in (3) is just a name of a string of seven letters and three spaces; its ‘x’ has nothing to do with the outlying ‘∃x’. (1) ascribed belief de re; quotation ascribes it de dicto. Between (1) and (2) we sense the vital difference between spotting a suspect and merely believing, like all of us, that there are spies.     — Quine's Pursuit of Truth.

    Quite simple... de dicto is incoherent cause it's a quotational account, so who knows what exactly he's referencing...

    You cant tell which total set of receptors are triggered for the words in a quotational account... hence the popularity of disquotation. Apollonians flock to disquotation because of its form.

    But in truth, every language is a quotational account... what observation sentences are true for every person in the world are very few. Even science as its truths delve deeper and deeper. Overturning older ways for the newer, better, faster, stronger method...

    In reading Quine, there are times when the man will use phrases direct from Nietzsche, that trigger a total set of receptors (example "leading to strange new vistas") and it's my belief that Quine would consider his own perspective from his opposite under the mask of Nietzsche, to scrutinize his works. To overcome this problem of subjectivity from "Stimulus to Science."
  • The United States of America is not in the Bible
    There are no facts, there are only interpretations — Arcane Sandwich

    I dont give a fuck if AS(s) Boy isn't even here... heres the facts. WHO THE FUCK SAID THERE ARE NO FACTS ONLY INTERPRETATION? Nietzsche said there are no MORAL FACTS ONLY MORAL INTERPRETATION OF PHENOMENON...

    When you're a retard who doesn't read Nietzsche, perhaps you shouldn't comment on trying to refute Nietzsche. There's a reaaon Ole boy AS was posting 33 times a day... Nietzsche spells it out: Powerlessness.

    I swear, middling fuck wits thinking they know something...

    My leading doctrine is this: there are no moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation of phenomena. The origin of this interpretation itself lies beyond the pale of morality. — Nietzsche, WtP

    We can see Nietzsche discusses this very concept as early as HATH (Aphorism 2), all the way to Ecce Homo and Antichrist... Which even Peter Gast gets right in WtP...

    "I hate Nietzsche, so I want to try and refute something Nietzsche doesn't even say." 99% of "Bannos/Low calibre Russels" in the world.

    Though, I suppose if you fancy a shit interpretation... don't be surprised when you end up covered in the shit of your own poor interpretation.
  • Thoughts on Determinism
    ↪Banno
    pretty simple, the first law of Thermo Dynamics pretty much says everything can neither be created nor destroyed, but that what is changes form.
  • Thoughts on Determinism
    ↪flannel jesus
    Nothing to be sorry about.

    The law of conservation of humans

    Humans can neither be created or destroyed, but they can change forms.

    A baby isn't created, just a changing of forms of matter.

    The law of conservation of shit

    Shits can neither be created or destroyed, but they can change forms...

    "I'm eating this 'shit' so my body transforms it into that shit which I'll shit out as a pile of shit..."

    You can sub anyword for energy and it's more or less true.

    Better yet, Life is neither created or destroyed...

    Or light for that matter...

    But wait God does those things?

    So apparently energy can be created or destroyed. According to any true Christian perspective.
  • Thoughts on Determinism
    ↪flannel jesus
    I dont know the answer either. ALL that I'm getting at is it seems odd to make a very obvious law that says details the definition of limitless is to be without limits.
Home » DifferentiatingEgg

DifferentiatingEgg

Start FollowingSend a Message