I'm sure no one here beats their wife. There's no reason to start fighting like this.

That's fine DingoJones. I still appreciate Praxis reply.

I appreciate you replying to my thread, but all I can say to your comment is I did not design this to troll.

I did not design this discussion to troll.

This is not designed to troll. It's an application of Cartesian and Solipsism-tian doubt to the issue of racism. (and Hume-ean doubt)

No, I'm not trying to troll.

That's a good point, but I'm considering this from a solipsism perspective.

Those are great arguments Michael. As you point out, GDP would have increased anyway. So, based on this argument, we were not better off economically if Hillary was elected. I guess the Trump side would say otherwise.

So it seems we are left with something like this for pro - trump side:
1) people solely support trump because he appears to be pro-white. (white nationalists)
2) people support trump because he is pro-white and creates a strong economy
3) people support trump just because they are republican.
4) people support trump only because of his strong economy
5) people support trump for all of his issues, including immigration

Anti - trump side:
1) the economy would have been the same or similar under Hiliary.
2) Trumps boasting of a strong stock market, employment rate, and economy is superfluous.
3) Trump is obviously racist.
4) Trump creates a lot of division in this country. Cultural civil war.
5) Trump wants to be an unquestionable president in regards to free press.
6) Trump creates a lot of hostility in international and domestic issues

(Michael you asked about illegal immigrants and less crime --> I heard this on the news, I just wanted to bring it up, I'm not for or against it, I just wanted to make a point for one side or the other, as a discussion point)


I guess my other point is this:
1) If it was undeniably true (like a natural law of gravity) that Trump was the ONLY politician in the next election to maintain a great economy (anyone else means bad economy, just as general terms), would you still vote for him, even if he had extremely racist views toward black people and other minorities? (let's not consider Covid-19 here and let's exclude Michael's GDP argument for the sake of this argument) --> what would be more important? money and job security or racial solidarity? (let's say both are not possible and also if you voted for Trump, it could mean a civil war in the long run) (let's also exclude the question about who gets the money. Let's just say in general for all population, the economy and job opportunity are much better)

2) On the other point, let's include Michael's GDP argument and Covid-19. Do you think if Biden is elected, our cultural civil wars would end. Perhaps living in less fear of war is more important than Trumps economics,

Thanks for your response Tim. What do you mean by he has killed?

I guess the whole thing with trump being a liar, narcissist, a traitor, etc ... I'm wondering if you could make the argument that every politician has somehow lied and maybe even took bribes and thereby betrayed his people.

Maybe Trump has lied more?

How would you compare Trump to Obama in this scenario?

Pro Trump:
1) America is going back to its core values. (i'm not sure what this means :) .. i just want to say it )
2) America is tougher on international stage.
3) American's are becoming more patriotic.
4) Lowest unemployment rate since '60s. (before Covid-19).
5) Stock market is extremely strong (before Covid-19).
6) Tough on illegal immigrants, resulting in less crime (or aiming for this)

Anti Trump:
1) Appears to be supported by or in collusion with Kremlin.
2) Appears to be extremely racist. ("good people on both sides" regarding Charlottesville)
3) Dismisses many reporters as "fake news"
4) Desires to be unquestionable. Or is attempting to project fear on people if they dare to question him about something.
5) America is extremely racially divided, on a brink of a cultural civil war (since Trump took office)
6) Appears to be a womanizer ("grab her by the p*ss*") (very likely cheated on his wife ... idk if that's still important to anyone)
7) Trump supporters are considered racist.

Idk whether I like trump like that or not, but I do want a strong economy in United States. What do you guys think? Is money and job security more important than a person's view on race?

Under obama, we had good racial solidarity, but a poor economy. Under Trump we have a strong economy (minus Covid-19), but poor racial solidarity.

Of course this whole argument fails if Trump is in collusion with Kremlin, because then it means he is somehow compromising American national security. However, if Kremlin is just supporting Trump without Trump being involved, then it can't be said he is supporting the Russians in "that" sense.

Trump is like a pandora's box to me, I literally am not sure what is inside.

I think to answer the question "What is the purpose of the Universe?" you ought to consider some possibilities of what is behind the curtain:

1) The universe created itself from nothingness. Big Bang led to an ever increasing expansion of the universe. Therefore, in this sense the universe is a non-living entity. A non-living entity cannot have a purpose. (unless you consider human beings who are inside the universe and assign themselves a purpose) Like Ree Zen said, a universe is nonetheless a great idea to study in terms of how something can come from nothing.

2) The universe had an intelligent designer. In this sense, the universe's purpose is whatever the ID assigned it. (or if the universe was created in a simulation)

3) The entire universe is "somehow" a living organism or part of a living organism (like a cell of a larger whole and we just can't see that far). Then it's initial purpose is to survive like all living things.

The matrix I think is silly in some sense. While a great presentation of a dream world based on our reality, I think it would take you years to truly unplug from your beliefs. Maybe even a decade or two. Yet Neo didn't even think about it, he just went with it. I think I would have to sit there and think a lot.

Yes that's why I tried to avoid this contradiction, TheMadFool, by setting in an unquestionable rule in this scenario that only 1 person is real while everyone else only mimics emotions but does not feel anything or think anything. (I think this is a huge problem on a philosophy forum, to create an unquestionable rule, because everyone here questions everything :smile: )

But in a way what you bring up would be a huge problem. You would be constantly torn between thinking that human AI can feel when in this scenario it is not a feeling or thinking thing. It would be a huge mental war.

This is a new discussion. My discussion involves only human AI that mimics but does not replicate humans.

The problem here is that human AI are not "replicating" but mimicking. In other words, they mimic emotions but they don't feel anything. They mimic thought, but they don't think anything. They don't replicate emotions comparable to a human. Behind the curtain there is nothing that feels anything.

Hope that makes sense

A human AI can say to you: "I think, therefore I am," but in reality it's only saying it, but not thinking it like a human.

I think the problem you would constantly face is letting go.
Whenever you go out into the world or wake up next to your spouse, you would have a huge headache.
On the one hand, you've known your family for almost your entire life.
On the other hand, based on this scenario, it is a fact that your family and everyone else is only a computer simulation.

I think that would be the biggest issue. Whenever you run into people, your learned instinct would tell you that they are real. When in reality, they are only a computer program.

So i think the biggest problem would be overriding your instincts about people.
The other problem would be a huge heartbreak about your family. That they are only computer programs.

You're making an assumption in this scenario that AI are people.
My discussion says AI are computer programs that can perfectly mimic humans.
Therefore, AI are not people in this scenario.

So when Neo found out he was 'The One' in the Matrix, it didn't mean he was the chosen one. It meant he was literally 'The Only' person in the Matrix.