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.

That is the subterfuge. — Prishon

There is no subterfuge beacuse I am not excusing my actions and ethics in anything.

Not believing in god is superstition. It is an irrational belief. — Prishon

No. Not believing in God is is just a normal state. I do not need any celestial subterfuge to praise or interpret my life. I want to live it with my own self and responsibility.

That is just a belief. — Prishon

The same belief as believing in God itself :wink:

Because they put themselves in his place.
7m — Prishon

Or just accept there is not God at all and then start believing in humanity as subject responsible of both rights and duties. There is not place because there never been a God previously.

But then they are no gods anymore. — Prishon

Why do they need to be like God? What is your concept of "God"?
Probably the humanists want to live more according to pragmatic life instead of searching forever an unknown answer.

A true humanist should accept gods too as there are a lot of humans who belive in god. — Prishon

It is literally the opposite. Humanism is put ourselves in "God's" place. A true humanist does not need a subterfuge to understand or interpret their beliefs or ideas. They just have another point of view in aspects as morality, ethics, peace, behavior, metaphysics, etc...
For example: if I do an action (buying alcohol when I am not adult) I do not really care about what God could think about me. It is me and my own decisions as Ortega y Gasset explained.

Be careful, a humanist doesn't mean necessarily putting a "human in the top", according to Cambridge dictionary this is the the meaning of humanist:

a person who believes in humanism (= the idea that people do not need a god or religion to satisfy their spiritual and emotional needs)

humanist. Cambridge dictionary.

Artificial societies are like Pakistan. — frank

I don't think Pakistan is an artificial society. What happens today in Asia comes from all the mess the British empire did back in the day mixing all the tribes and ethnics each other. I guess they were forced to create a state because it was impossible to belong to India due to religion and cultural facts and issues. The Nobel prize winner Abdus Salam, explained so well what happened in their construction as a nation. He was born as a "British Indian" but his identity belonged to Punjabi Muslims. Thus, an ethnic which was important to the creation of Pakistan.
So, I guess UK was guilty here of mixing them all in an unique colony when they always were been so different from each other. Result? Civil wars due to territory issues and a big mess when UK left.

That news completely pissed me off... When public workers or representatives are so damn useless they tend to spread their incompetency to others and even make risky actions which put people's or animal's lives in dager. This time was a poor humble dog which are the most honourable animals ever. Australia should punish so hard that NSW council as a pay back for the poor dog!

What should the state be responsible for? And why? — frank

I think furthermore Healthcare or basic needs, the State is responsible for not teaching the citizens how to live properly. It is interesting your example: "pregnant teens." this is an issue which are the states have to deal with. It is not about to provide a good health care service to avoid a pregnancy or even promote "free" abortion due to no consent (or promiscuous) sex but a better biology/ethical/sexual education system.
When a citizen goes to a hospital demanding health care because he or she had irresponsible relationships or took drugs, is also a fail of the State.
But, if you keep promoting a better system, then you will have less situations like those.

Note: I am not want to make negative prejudices. I do understand that probably someone could take drugs or been promiscuous without bad faith. I do believe everybody deserves an opportunity to be cured and rehab. What I want to say is that the state has to be responsible to avoid all these dramatic at all costs.

Investigation of alleged Australian war crimes could be hindered by fall of Afghan government

The long-running Brereton inquiry found “credible information” to implicate 25 current or former Australian Defence Force personnel in the alleged unlawful killing of 39 individuals and the cruel treatment of two others in Afghanistan.

Brereton said that the circumstances of each, were they to be eventually accepted by a jury, would constitute the war crime of murder.

Let's see what is going on with this issue in the following months...

I know another one:

"How the tables have turned" it doesn't mean that literally a table has turned their side but how a situation changed so drastically in comparison to it was before.

No doubt the English, Germans, Swedes, et al are 100% as capable of corruption as anyone else. — Bitter Crank

Agreed. It is true that corruption is along all the countries but at the same time there are some countries which tend to be more corrupt than others. I personally believe that the issue of corruption depends on the educational system.
All of those countries which encourage a better education tend to be "less" corrupt in terms that see it as a misery. On the other hand, we have countries which sadly they are already used to live among corrupt politicians and the common thought is: "well, everybody is corrupt in politics so vote whatever you want"

Favoring friends goes on in the highest circles of business and government everywhere. Why would it not? What distinguishes favoring one's friends from outright corruption may only be how crudely the favoring is done. — Bitter Crank

Yes, you are right and I guess this is one of the basic principles of politics. All the governors or senates have to be ready to make a lot of favors to the lobbies: trade unions, church, urbanism issues, promoters, etc... To keep being in the power or controlling the city/state/town etc...
We are both agree here that these "favors" could be "accepted" if do not affect people that much. But the ambition of the people is so big and they only want more, more and more... Yet at the end of the day, you see that due to their unstoppable ambition the public resources are gone...

You are welcome and thanks for the feedback about the painting :up:

Madrid. This oil was painted by Antonio López in 1994. It is so beautiful despite the city changed a lot since then because there are some towers that do not appear. They way this artist represents urbanism is so accurate. It is weird to express but this paint gives me sensations both of nostalgia and uncertainty because in a big city of Madrid you will not know what will happen but I promise you will remember it forever :flower:

This is the most interesting part! Gypsies were always been migrants walking through different states along the world. In the paper of the European Union, it says that despite the fact they are in EU for centuries they never founded a state or nation by their own, so this is why is difficult to put an order. The same reason that clearly a gypsy from Spain is not equal to a gypsy from Czech Republic.

I am worried if one day they achieve some parts of the State. Imagine these dudes as ministers of justice, economy, taxation, international affairs, etc...

This was so embarrassing... :groan:

I would sound quite platonist but yes, my bet goes to idealism as a theory of conciousness.

Agree! Somehow it was our fault to make them poor and ignorant. But it is now our duty and responsibility the inclusion of these citizens in jobs and institutions. It sounds so difficult but not impossible :up:

Interesting facts Bitter, thanks for sharing it. I guess when someone is an immigrant in a different country from own, the situation would be not so easy to live according to their context and culture. I knew Germans were also a big group of immigrants in USA but I do not know why they tend to hide it because they tend to think being an immigrant or immigration is related to poor people... and Germany is no longer poor as much as back in WWI and WWII right? But it is interesting how they occult their past in this situation.

Here in Europe the situation is so different from yours. It is Germany, Nordic countries and UK which are full of immigration. They tend to be racist even if you are European too but you know we come from the south and this label makes a lot of negative prejudices. It is true that the situation has changed and I bet money that the youngest are more open minded but... We still have two stereotypes: We are lazy and "corrupt" (if corruption would only occur in Mediterranean countries!). For this reason, when we have to negotiate about to the European funds, the North European countries do not have a clear trust on south ones due to these prejudices. Even the PM of Netherlands and Austria wanted to put over Spain an administrator to keep the money clean because they think Spain is full of corruption and is a untrustworthy country... It is so sad when you have to carry with this heaviness...

I don't know if Spanish Gypsies call themselves "Roma" instead of "gitanos", but apparently they call their language "calo" or "cale".

Good question. No, in Spain they do not call themselves as "Roma", they just say "gitano" because sadly they are pretty ignorant to understand and know where they come from... It is true that they do understand "caló" and they even speak this variation of Spanish. For example, pestañi means police in caló.
It is all confused because most of them tend to not go to school neither college so the percentage of illiteracy is so high

Spanish “gitano” from egiptano (“Egyptian”), from Ancient Greek Αἴγυπτος (Aíguptos). — Apollodorus

It is true that here in Spain is used the word "gitano" because of the popular thought that they came from Egypt. Nevertheless, there is also the negative prejudice of the same word. Cervantes, in his books, like Quixote or "Rinconete and Cortadillo" uses the word "gitano" as a really bad context or connotation. Also, I remember that the catholic kings (Ferdinand and Isabella) wanted kick all the gypsies out of Spain as the jews and Muslims, but they did not do it at the end beacuse it was so difficult to search them due to the wandering spirit they have.

I think it would make sense for Gypsies to be called "Gypsies" by others, but to call themselves "Romioi" or "Roma — Apollodorus

Interesting. Here we have now a lot of political parties that are developing tiny laws with the objective of removing the word" gitano" in all the possible areas. These political parties say is a racist and xenophobic word and is more appropriate to start calling them "Romaní"
But I guess this will not fix the big dilemma of their inclusion in society and works.

At one time, Scandinavian (or Norwegian, Swede, Finn, Dane) was not a very positive term in Minnesota — Bitter Crank

Interesting fact! This is why we should include this debate into philosophy of language. Here, the word Scandinavian is so positive. Most of the people tend to think that they are excellent workers and loyal citizens. Also, there is a general thought that those countries are better and more developed than ours. So this is why "Scandinavian" has a positive overall impact on our minds.

'Mexican' gets a positive or negative spin is (probably) related to whether the word-user views Mexican immigration (documented or not) as a positive or negative factor I their community. — Bitter Crank

Yes you are right. Here exactly happens the same but furthermore "Mexican" it is related with the word "Latino" and all the immigration stuff related to this word. It could be positive or negative depending on the people.

No, I am not Roma but it is interesting to me for two reasons: There are a lot of Romas living in Spain so I guess I should be concerned about the issue and probably take care of.
On the other hand, it surprised me the negative etymology of this word. I never thought until today that the negative prejudice of "gypsies" is around the world.

You are right. It should be in the way around. I meant to say "gypsy" but I do not why my paper only appears "gyp" as if it would be ancient English or something.

I promise I was thinking about Kierkegaard as a good example of individual and "being apart of the church" too. K was a very important philosopher, they way he changed the interpretation of the Bible in his books like "the concept of anxiety" impact me even when I am an atheist. It is completely worthy. I remember one phrase of Sartre: "Kierkegaard could have been the most complete philosopher if he wasn't so religious"
I am agree with you. It can be done but... We never had another philosopher as Kierkegaard again...