Pissing off the atheists/naturalists

[Skepdick]

So what fucking fence are you on, liar?

Well, it was a toss up as to whether you are a bit dim, or slightly bonkers. Now I know it's both. Thank you for the laughs, but I feel I shouldn't mock the afflicted.

Contradiction. I am neither dim nor bonkers. That's a false dichotomy.

You left out at least one plausible hypothesis: I may be right; and you may be wrong.

Stop lying, Will. It's conduct unbecoming for a "philosopher".

You know what, I am reporting you. Whatever happens happens.

[Gary Childress]

SAVE THE INSANE!!!!!!!!

[Will Bouwman]

You know what, I am reporting you. Whatever happens happens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdhAfMor9BM

[Skepdick]

You know what, I am reporting you. Whatever happens happens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdhAfMor9BM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

[Skepdick]

SAVE THE INSANE!!!!!!!!

We are trying, Gary. We are trying.

But some philosophers would really prefer for the insanity to continue.

[Gary Childress]

SAVE THE INSANE!!!!!!!!

We are trying, Gary. We are trying.

But some philosophers would really prefer for the insanity to continue.

OK. I will do my best. Can you give me an ETA on when that sanity will come?

[Skepdick]

OK. I will do my best. Can you give me an ETA on when that sanity will come?

I can't promise anything, but I am definitely less insane today than I was 5 years ago.

[Gary Childress]

OK. I will do my best. Can you give me an ETA on when that sanity will come?

I can't promise anything, but I am definitely less insane today than I was 5 years ago.

OK. No worries. Take your time. I'll be working on my own sanity in the meantime.

[commonsense]

Wasn’t this supposed to be a philosophy forum?

[Skepdick]

Wasn’t this supposed to be a philosophy forum?

Isn't it a philosophy forum?

The entire discourse is computationally reducible to identity politics.

A says: X is Y
B says: X isn't Y

Either ( X≡Y, ¬(X≡Y))

It's the Either monad in Computer Science; which is exactly the same thing as "choice" In English and in Mathematics.

Philosophers might as well start learning Mathematics because identity is provable.

Univalence Axiom: (A = B) ≃ (A ≃ B). In other words, identity is equivalent to equivalence.

https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/univalence+axiom

[Will Bouwman]

OK. I will do my best. Can you give me an ETA on when that sanity will come?

I can't promise anything, but I am definitely less insane today than I was 5 years ago.

You mean when you were writing this sort of stuff?

I am a wanker.

Can't see the improvement myself.
Anyway, have you reported me yet?

[Skepdick]

OK. I will do my best. Can you give me an ETA on when that sanity will come?

I can't promise anything, but I am definitely less insane today than I was 5 years ago.

You mean when you were writing this sort of stuff?

I am a wanker.

Can't see the improvement myself.
Anyway, have you reported me yet?

Has it come down to quoting me out of context to craft a character assasination; instead of addressing the problems with your epistemology?

You can't see anything. Not even a bowling bowl the weight of a galaxy swaying your judgment 49/51.
Can you even tell us what your alternative hypothsis (the one which you rank with 49) is?

Shame. You've lost all sense of objectivity...I mean you can't even tell I was arguing against the identity axiom then and for it now.

What other significant factors are you incapable of detecting?

[Will Bouwman]

I am a wanker.

Has it come down to quoting me out of context to craft a character assasination?

Yep. Anyway, have you reported me yet?

[Skepdick]

I am a wanker.

Has it come down to quoting me out of context to craft a character assasination?

Yep. Anyway, have you reported me yet?

You can be either 50/50 certain or 49/51 certain... It's just a beefart of a difference.

[Will Bouwman]

Anyway, have you reported me yet?

You can be either 50/50 certain or 49/51 certain... It's just a beefart of a difference.

I am a wanker and I live in my mum's basement.