For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Perhaps it's sinking in.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:41 amWhat empirical data do you have that makes your view more plausible than George Berkeley's idealism, for example?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:53 pm... no other theory has anything close to the empirical data to make it reasonable to suppose at all.
Correct! There is no empirical data that makes your theory more plausible than many others. You just happen to prefer it for personal reasons.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:41 amWhat empirical data do you have that makes your view more plausible than George Berkeley's idealism, for example?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:53 pm... no other theory has anything close to the empirical data to make it reasonable to suppose at all.
Did you break IC?Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 12:02 pmCorrect! There is no empirical data that makes your theory more plausible than many others. You just happen to prefer it for personal reasons.Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2024 8:41 amWhat empirical data do you have that makes your view more plausible than George Berkeley's idealism, for example?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 3:53 pm... no other theory has anything close to the empirical data to make it reasonable to suppose at all.
Wasn't me, guv.
Harbal could have misread and misunderstood Age absolutely, or he could have done so completely, but no, he had to do it absolutely completely. We are all speechless..
Wait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
How can they be the same things when there are different words with different definitions?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 6:36 pmWait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
We need to check Ken in case he got one of those Kennedy brain worms and it ate his third-same-thing-lobe.
Or at least unnecessary, or unessential, or needless, or dispensable.Age wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 7:47 pmHow can they be the same things when there are different words with different definitions?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 6:36 pmWait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
We need to check Ken in case he got one of those Kennedy brain worms and it ate his third-same-thing-lobe.
If different words have the exact same definitions, then some of those human being made up words are completely and utterly redundant, right?
Not only completely and utterly redundant, but also totally and thoroughly unnecessary, also fully and unconditionally inessential, and altogether and ultimately superfluous.Age wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 7:47 pmHow can they be the same things when there are different words with different definitions?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 6:36 pmWait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
We need to check Ken in case he got one of those Kennedy brain worms and it ate his third-same-thing-lobe.
If different words have the exact same definitions, then some of those human being made up words are completely and utterly redundant, right?
Yes thank you. At least them, indeed.Harbal wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 8:17 pmOr at least unnecessary, or unessential, or needless, or dispensable.Age wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 7:47 pmHow can they be the same things when there are different words with different definitions?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 6:36 pm
Wait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
We need to check Ken in case he got one of those Kennedy brain worms and it ate his third-same-thing-lobe.
If different words have the exact same definitions, then some of those human being made up words are completely and utterly redundant, right?
Yes, this is why different words with different meaning actually exist.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 8:54 pmNot only completely and utterly redundant, but also totally and thoroughly unnecessary, also fully and unconditionally inessential, and altogether and ultimately superfluous.Age wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 7:47 pmHow can they be the same things when there are different words with different definitions?FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 6:36 pm
Wait, that's only two of the same things. Ken always does three of the same thing. It should be absolutely, completely, and fully
We need to check Ken in case he got one of those Kennedy brain worms and it ate his third-same-thing-lobe.
If different words have the exact same definitions, then some of those human being made up words are completely and utterly redundant, right?
Spare, in a final and limitless sense.
It's totally, entirely, perfectly, wholly, 100% true that I did press some keyboard buttons, but is that really speaking?