Philosophy Now Forum

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:43 amMy claim: The Universe NEVER began and is NOT expanding. Thus is eternal and infinite.

Your claim: The Universe began and is expanding. Thus is transient and limited.

If this is correct, then let us begin.

Okie-dokie. Off you go then.

Oakley wrote: ↑Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:04 pm A question for all....

Which one are you?



My myself, I claim guy with the beard, he seems to be having a good time.

Jack N is my schitzophrenic brother. Same height similar face.
I'm the guy taking the picure

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:08 am I'm the guy taking the picure

Chief Broom narrated the original.

Jack took the pie cure as he got older.

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:01 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:08 am I'm the guy taking the picure

Chief Broom narrated the original.

Jack took the pie cure as he got older.

Nonsense.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:10 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:01 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:08 am I'm the guy taking the picure

Chief Broom narrated the original.

Jack took the pie cure as he got older.

Nonsense.

You wrote, "picure."

Pi cure

Pie cure

Jack got fat. Jack took the pie cure.

Get it? "same height, face, etc..."

Hee haw!

If anyone is interested in a grown-up's view of the hypothetical question of either men or women living in a world without the other, find and read, Philip Wylie's, 1951 novel, The Disappearance.

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:19 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:12 am
I now just AWAIT for your CHALLENGES and/or CLARIFYING QUESTIONS in regards to my ALREADY SUPPLIED 'evidence' and 'proofs'.

In principle, what constitutes acceptable proof?

In particular, for determining sex* it's probably a blood test.

Or, 'sex', is just a behavior.

It all depends on how one is LOOKING AT 'it'.

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:19 am The New Zealand weight lifter smashing all the female records seems to be skating by on hormone levels.

Changing definitions helps. For example, in the US, infrastructure now means everything.

Boudicca! was a gal all the tribes agreed on.


* sub-forum relevance

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:50 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:48 am The IMMATURITY of this speaks for itself.

Such is the belief of the "human" who calls himself age

But that is NOT "the belief" of ANY one.

And the rest of what 'you' wrote here is just completely False, Wrong, and Incorrect.

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:39 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 7:10 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:01 pm
Chief Broom narrated the original.

Jack took the pie cure as he got older.

Nonsense.

You wrote, "picure."

Pi cure

Pie cure

Jack got fat. Jack took the pie cure.

Get it? "same height, face, etc..."

Hee haw!

Highly amusing.
Fuck off!

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:55 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:12 am I have PROVIDED SOME PROOF.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:12 amI have, ALSO, ALREADY PROVIDED the 'evidence', and even the 'proof', for my CLAIMS

Age to Atla wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:19 am i do NOT provide NOR show the proof. i am just learning how to find the right words to explain to you HOW you can and will FIND and SEE the PROOF "your self".

So which is it?

But it is NOT a matter of "which one is it", because in what context I said and wrote them EACH INDIVIDUALLY in, and, in what way are you LOOKING AT EACH of them in, HAS TO BE taken into CONSIDERATION, otherwise the WHOLE MEANING and INTENTION can be TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT.

In other words, what I MEANT and INTENDED when I wrote those things may be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from what 'you' are THINKING what was MEANT and INTENDED.

Is this UNDERSTOOD?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:55 am And why can't you keep your story straight?

BEFORE you JUMP to ANY CONCLUSIONS I SUGGEST you CLARIFY FIRST.

For example, like asking CLARIFYING QUESTIONS LIKE:

WHAT story are you referring to? And,

WHY do you PRESUME I can NOT keep my story straight?

THEN, I would ACTUALLY KNOW what 'it' (your story) is that you are talking about and referring to here. Otherwise, UNTIL THEN I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what you are GOING ON ABOUT.

Which, this NOT KNOWING what I am GOING ON ABOUT, is the EXACT SAME THING you are portraying here, correct?

Now, to CLEAR things up for you here, at least somewhat, HOPEFULLY, in the last one of my quoted sayings above:

COULD I have NOT been showing NOR providing the 'proof', in the context of ' it is ONLY 'you' who can SEE 'proofs', for "yourselves"? ' Or, in other words, I can NOT show NOR provide you ANY proofs because it is ONLY 'you' DECIDES what are ACTUAL 'proofs' or are 'NOT proofs'.

I did, AFTER ALL, CLEARLY STATE;
i am just learning how to find the right words to explain to you HOW you can and will FIND and SEE the PROOF "your self".

So, in that CONTEXT and with that MEANING could I have just MEANT that ANY ACTUAL 'proof', which is ALREADY PRESENTED BEFORE you ANYWAY, can ONLY ever be accepted as 'proof', BY 'you', and BY 'you' ALONE?

(Which does NOT mean that "others" can NOT do it, but that ONLY 'you' ALONE can and WILL ONLY accept 'proofs', for "your self", as 'you' SEE things.)

For example, I can NOT show NOR provide to 'proof' of some 'thing' to ANY one while they are BELIEVING otherwise. This is for the VERY FACT that they, OBVIOUSLY, ALREADY HAVE the 'proof' they NEED and NEEDED for the BELIEF, which they are CURRENTLY holding onto and BELIEVING IS TRUE.

'Proofs' can NOT be shown NOR provided to those who BELIEVE OTHERWISE. For example, have you EVER 'tried to' show OR provide ACTUAL 'proof' of some 'thing', to some one who BELIEVED OTHERWISE? If yes, then could they SEE thee ACTUAL 'proof' you PRESENTED for them?

But as for the first two of my quoted sayings above, I have ACTUALLY ALREADY PROVIDED SOME PROOF and SOME EVIDENCE for SOME of my CLAIMS.

WHEN "others" will this 'evidence' and/or 'proof', is ANOTHER MATTER. And, even IF what I have ALREADY PROVIDED is ACTUAL 'evidence' and/or 'proof' is STILL in CONTENTION, with some of 'you'.

IF, and WHEN, what I have ALREADY PROVIDED is SHOWN to be False, Wrong, and/or Incorrect, then VIEWS and PERCEPTIONS will CHANGE.

But, as I was saying, and ACTUALLY MEANT, I do NOT provide NOR show proof, TO YOU. I just PROVIDE proof, as I SEE 'it', for my CLAIMS, and then it is up TO YOU to DECIDE to SEE 'it' as PROOF, or NOT PROOF.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 9:44 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:50 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:48 am The IMMATURITY of this speaks for itself.

Such is the belief of the "human" who calls himself age

But that is NOT "the belief" of ANY one.

And the rest of what 'you' wrote here is just completely False, Wrong, and Incorrect.

It is your belief that it is false.

Apparently it is some seperate belief that is also wrong.

Then, for some reason you need a third belief that it is also incorrect, besides being wrong and false.

Three seperate identical beliefs all in one. You must be a character from a Lewis Carroll book.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:32 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 5:55 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:12 am I have PROVIDED SOME PROOF.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:12 amI have, ALSO, ALREADY PROVIDED the 'evidence', and even the 'proof', for my CLAIMS

Age to Atla wrote: ↑Tue Jun 22, 2021 1:19 am i do NOT provide NOR show the proof. i am just learning how to find the right words to explain to you HOW you can and will FIND and SEE the PROOF "your self".

So which is it?

But it is NOT a matter of "which one is it", because in what context I said and wrote them

The context is provided in the link -- you can click on the up-arrows to see it.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:32 pm I can NOT show NOR provide to 'proof' of some 'thing' to ANY one while they are BELIEVING otherwise.

That makes no sense. Rather, it is a lame excuse for your inability to provide proof. Obviously people may believe all kinds of things until such things are proven otherwise -- it is the new proof that helps them change their minds.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:32 pm This is for the VERY FACT that they, OBVIOUSLY, ALREADY HAVE the 'proof' they NEED and NEEDED for the BELIEF, which they are CURRENTLY holding onto and BELIEVING IS TRUE.

Look at how you've constructed this entire line of baloney to explain/justify your inability to offer proof of what you claim. You put the responsibility and lack onto other people, when it belongs to you.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:32 pm But as for the first two of my quoted sayings above, I have ACTUALLY ALREADY PROVIDED SOME PROOF and SOME EVIDENCE for SOME of my CLAIMS.

What kind of proof do you think you've provided for anything?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 10:32 pm I just PROVIDE proof, as I SEE 'it', for my CLAIMS

If women refused to have sex with capitalist warlords, there'd be no capitalism or war.
The truth is most women love warfare, if not intrinsically than extrinsically, it makes them wet, they just don't want to break a nail, which sort of makes them chickenhawks.
Last I checked, most capitalist warlords aren't incels, the healthiest and most beautiful women are lining up by the thousands to have their babies.

Women have a lot of power in our society.
The state favors mothers over fathers.
Mothers get to brainwash girls, and boys into adopting a gynocentric worldview.
And the vast majority of teachers are women.

And it's not like we're living in medieval times where women couldn't choose whom they married or to remain single.