Sure friend! :up: :100:

It could be but I think is not related to computers but minds. Our world and reality is built by us. The development of awareness give the patrons of the world or country we lice in. Keep in mind that we the humans are the only species which can think or make abstract situations that do not even exist at all.
So, all of these aspects about simulation depends a lot on our imagination. I think the question is not about it this world is simulated but how further our mind can go in the "real" and "imagined" one.

What actually happens to them is completely irrelevant because the money has already changed hands, and that was the only purpose of the Afghan business venture. — StreetlightX

Agreed. Now that Afghanistan failed as worldwide business nobody would care about women and kids living in Kabul. It is so disgusting how the "powerful" countries will leave a lot of citizens there dying or starving. What a failure.

Russia says:

Taliban have captured more than 100 military helicopters

I think Malebranch wanted to express another interpretation or idea about Bible. I am not religious but I do like his quote of "God does not grace to everyone" beacuse probably it is a metaphor meaning that the concept of "grace" is not automatic. I guess only the charitable or humble ones should be able and deserve such "power" of God.
I mean, I see his phrase as a positive commentary towards the Bible. I don't see anything negative.

giddy

Another word I learned today. I never read the word "giddy" until today. In my language means mareado.
Yes, I also feel giddy due to this meltdown press and media of Afghanistan when they did not care in the last 20 years.

they aren’t doing it “transactionally”. — Benj96

Yes, you are right. But we can have the risk that if those good heart people experience a lot of betray after their actions, they will no longer be charitable anymore and probably they would even regret all their past actions.

...American presence fucking up the region, and directly precipitating the rise of terrorism. — StreetlightX

True but I guess there are other countries who are guilty. Remember the "bros" relationship between Aznar and Bush? Well this lead us in the terrorist attack of March 11th 2004. Despite this fact, Spain was still being there and probably we are a target again...

I understand your point but trust me you have a real developed educational system. Very good universities as Yale, Harvard, Stanford,etc... And literally all of the science inventions come from the US or Germany/Nordic countries which surprise! They are all separate religion from schools.
It is true that ambitious politicians need the religious lobbies but just for some votes. Nothing special neither dangerous. Imagine a conflict in the US that Biden should resolve and then he asks the Pope Francis what is going on... That would be a big disappointment right?
Well I tell you this because in Hispanic countries religious lobbies are strong as hell. The conflict between Bolivia and Chile was "carried" by the catholic church :vomit: and the conflict we have in Spain about Catalonia independence where the Spanish Episcopalian organization took part too :vomit: :down:

I think Afghanistan was an issue that all the "powers" would not care at all but now it is important just because the security system is trembling due to the amount of money and presence the emirate, DAESH or whatever Islamic organization is winning.
I do not care at all about politics and governments but people. Imagine being hurt or even die due to a terrorist attack because some incompetent asses did not solve anything after 20 years.

Afghanistan: 20 years ago it was a terrorist haven, an attack at the airport would show it could be again

Ministers have been warning in recent days about the risk posed by Islamic State Khorasan - or ISIS-K - to British, US and other forces involved in evacuating tens of thousands of people.

Thoughts? Would we see terrorist attacks again in our cities? I wish not... But it is true that the victory of Taliban over Afghanistan could give a lot of force to ISIS or other Islamic terrorists cells.

We can’t all be charitable right? — Benj96

Quite difficult when we live in an era which the values are fading away. It is not the issue about be or not be charitable but promoting this attitude through education. Sometimes, when you see a very good person with a great soul making laborious acts to help people, he or she ends up cheated or disappointed of how ungrateful the people can be.

True, you are right that we are forced to go to school but probably this is due the objective of avoiding the lack of assistance by the youngest students.

I think not because schools are the temple of wisdom and development. The problem is not schools or universities at all but how the state manipulates those institutions. A real free and open minded school would lead us in a better society. Probably we could even improve in terms of science and justice.
You are so lucky of living in a country which separated the religion from the education in the perfect time. I do not live in a country like that and you feel how underdeveloped we are in terms of science and social issues.

But do you think the obligatory learning of the sciences shouldnt be banned too? — Prishon

What do you mean as "obligatory"? You are referring to school teachings or something related

Yes, absolutely. They should be separated because everything the State touches it becomes toxic and corrupt. Scientists and scientific researchers need to work completely separate from political interests.

How can this be achieved? — Prishon

I guess with the rule of law. It could be a good mechanism to avoid the presence of the State. Also, developing a market where it is so profitable to be a scientist in companies or businesses without depending on the government's approval.

You're barking up the wrong tree. — TheMadFool

I know it is off topic but I liked this phrase. Again, we can get into philosophy of language.
Barking up the wrong tree it is related to a dog who is wrongly breaking at something meaning that a person is saying arguments against the wrong listener or context.
I have in my language a similar phrase with the same meaning: ¡a otro perro con ese hueso!
(give that bone to another dog!)

Another thing we learned today. Cheers!

Lack of empathy as I expected...
Spanish government admits it will have to leave some Afghan refugees behind

“

We are going to get everyone possible out,” said Defense Minister Margarita Robles this morning, during an interview with the Cadena SER radio network. “There will be people that will have to stay for reasons that are beyond our control.” The minister added that it will be very difficult for those who are not already in Kabul to board a Spanish aircraft.

Control? What control minister? You don't have any kind of "control" anymore...

The faster they fuck right off, the better. — StreetlightX

:100: :up:

No, I mean concise in a context of discussions. Do not make one of those for everything that randomly appeared in your mind.
But again this is just a wisdom, I am not a moderator.

What has quantity to do with being a troll? — Prishon

I don't know if it is related but I am so sure that the moderators of this forum watch over the quality of the discussions. Next time try to be more concise. This is only a wisdom I want give you.

I guess you need to somehow "calm down" because you write a lot of discussions and posts (you already have more than 250) per day and this is why probably some people start thinking that you are a troll. This was what exactly happened to @hope some weeks before and he ended up banned...

I know this discussion is old but it is a good question indeed.

No. I personally drugs or pharmaceutical pills are not a problem. Society is. Most of us will end up consuming accepted and approved drugs as Prozac or melatonin. Probably some members are even already taking it. It is our duty to erase the old taboo about consuming those. Like how we do not do so? We are forced. Life is fulfilled of a weird existentialism. There is a lot of uncertainty out here. When Covid crisis would end? Will I pass my exams? This modern era is facing a lot of problems and dilemmas which do not have a quick solution. Keep living when you do not see the goal is difficult.
There are people who literally need some drugs to avoid dangerous acts as suicide. So, what if these drugs approved by pharmaceutical companies or organisations have the main goal to keep us moving forward? Probably without it, there will be less productive people. We even have a problem of shortage.
As of 2002, seven countries (USA, UK, Italy, Australia, France, Spain and Japan) use 77% of the world's morphine supplies, leaving many emerging countries lacking in pain relief medication.
I would sound so wacky but having drugs in your local pharmacy should be an international protected right.
This is the society context we have to face.

As far as philosophy goes-

You forgot important books about existentialism. For example, the concept of anxiety by Kierkegaard or studies in pessimism by Schopenhauer.

Politicians, lobbies and rich ambitious entrepreneurs. These three do not care anything about of climate change or if you die of cancer due to pollution. They calculate how many lives die due to their business. After making a calculation, they see is completely worthy to still destroying the world because it is so profitable.
The fight against climate change or Paris agreement only could be possible if it is interesting for the richest authorities of the world.
The money and economic affairs come first that health issues.

if the Taliban had free range in the U.S., who is going to disarm them? — James Riley

Are you really believing that Taliban has some chances to free range U. S.?
Well I do understand your perspective of living in a country which is threatened by more than a half of the world.

Who should be allowed to wear a gun (and use it)? — Prishon

No one. Not even the police officers or military officials. It is so dangerous and just for carrying more weapons do not mean that you will have more security at all.

I guess the following papers will answer what you are asking for. Karl Popper developed this Trilemma in his book called: The Logic of Scientific Discovery.

The Friesian Trilemma

I pay that every month to a health insurance company. — Prishon

OK, now I understand you better. My parents and my pay for a health insurance company too. The costs are around 129 €.
I thought you were referring to the State itself as the inversion from the taxes.

I pay, OBLIGATORY, 125 euros every month and must pay nevertheless 380 euro as my own contribution! And I have to pay a visit to a shaman myself. — Prishon

What? Why do you have to pay a shaman? Also I am interested, those 125 euros to what medical (or health care) assistance is related? Is like an insurance or something? I am European like you but never heard of that.

So this shit again? — 180 Proof

:rofl: :fire:

Probably you can experience this:

An actual encounter? — Prishon

Taking that: :death:

deliriums, drugs, visions, — Prishon

Sorry if my reply was not appropriate. I will not involve in debates nobody asked me to again.

The big question is though where the gods themselves came from and if we really need them .I don't. — Prishon

No, this is the big question here: is there really anything considered as God (s)?
I don't know if "we need them" I think as you I guess not but with this argument we lose faith in humanity and their behavior. To be honest, I understand it because I lost it too but I do not need "Gods" to explain what is going on.

I didn't say they couldn't. I said their existence is proof of God(s). — Prishon

According to this argument... Why the universe is not a proof of human's awareness?

The existence of it is proof. — Prishon

Universe and earth exist and can exist even without the human awareness. I mean, we are the ones responsible of giving them a "meaning" beacuse humans tend to search what is going on around us. But both Earth and Universe will be there without depending on humanity's existence.

God(s) created it and the universe being there is proof of that — Prishon

There is no proof that God created the universe.

It is impossible to be an atheist. — Corvus

It is impossible to be an atheist but in the other hand, it is "possible" to believe in something you do not have proofs about as God.
The world does not show us proofs or principles to believe in God at all... It is just our interpretation about life and beliefs about what could happen after death.

You should ask the moderators. Try here in the The Shoutbox

People themselves are the subterfuge in the humanist case. — Prishon

No. I guess subterfuge is not even related to humanism at all. I think it is about to put humanity in the center of progress and culture, avoiding the image of God.