Philosophy Now Forum

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:07 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:02 pm Let's be more specific here, doesn't seem like it to you.

Obviously to me. Was that ever in doubt?

You can't even formalize timelesness. And you are bragging about your academic studies, I imagine since you can't relate computer science to anything practical.

Says the guy who has absolutely no idea how to formalize timelessness.

Atla wrote:All I read is whining. Yes you are outclassed in almost every way, learn to deal with it already (and don't project your insecurity on me).

I don't think someone who attempts to bait someone with autism should be talking about class.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:08 pm

Atla wrote: Remember I actually studied computer sciences for years unlike you, take your word salads elsewhere.

'Computer sciences' is it? That explains a lot as if you'd studied Computer Science then none of those links should be word salads to you.

You would need to have some vague understanding of philosophy and computers to see how mixing them like that is not even wrong.

You just keep digging and digging that hole and no one is forcing you

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:01 pm Yes you are outclassed in almost every way, learn to deal with it already (and don't project your insecurity on me).

https://g.co/kgs/Ukdrji

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:12 pm You would need to have some vague understanding of philosophy and computers to see how mixing them like that is not even wrong.

Is that like mixing up science and philosophy?

"Not even wrong" is a pejorative applied to purported scientific arguments that are perceived to be based on invalid reasoning or speculative premises that can neither be proven correct nor falsified and thus cannot be discussed in a rigorous, scientific sense.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:12 pm

Atla wrote:All I read is whining. Yes you are outclassed in almost every way, learn to deal with it already (and don't project your insecurity on me).

I don't think someone who attempts to bait someone with autism should be talking about class.

That's because you don't care about harmful behaviour crossing a line. Luckily most people don't think like you.

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:15 pm That's because you don't care about harmful behaviour crossing a line. Luckily most people don't think like you.

Look! We have a non-dualist talking about drawing/crossing lines now!

I'll grab some popcorn, while you explain the harmful-harmless dualism to us!

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:14 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:12 pm You would need to have some vague understanding of philosophy and computers to see how mixing them like that is not even wrong.

Is that like mixing up science and philosophy?

"Not even wrong" is a pejorative applied to purported scientific arguments that are perceived to be based on invalid reasoning or speculative premises that can neither be proven correct nor falsified and thus cannot be discussed in a rigorous, scientific sense.

That's not the main meaning of "not even wrong".

Atla wrote:You would need to have some vague understanding of philosophy and computers to see how mixing them like that is not even wrong. ...

Is that right? Well best you tell Imperial College that as they let someone with a B.A.(Hons) in Philosophy study for an MSc in Foundation of Advanced I.T.

You just keep digging and digging that hole and no one is forcing you

And you keep displaying how far away you are from either Philosophy or Computing.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:16 pm

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:15 pm That's because you don't care about harmful behaviour crossing a line. Luckily most people don't think like you.

Look! We have a non-dualist talking about drawing/crossing lines now!

I'll grab some popcorn, while you explain the harmful-harmless dualism to us!

Your confusion is a thing to behold

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:17 pm That's not the main meaning of "not even wrong".

Via argumentum ad populum it is the MAIN meaning (according to 6 different search engines).

It may not be YOUR meaning.

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:20 pm Your confusion is a thing to behold

I'd rather behold my confusion than yours.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:17 pm

Atla wrote:You would need to have some vague understanding of philosophy and computers to see how mixing them like that is not even wrong. ...

Is that right? Well best you tell Imperial College that as they let someone with a B.A.(Hons) in Philosophy study for an MSc in Foundation of Advanced I.T.

You just keep digging and digging that hole and no one is forcing you

And you keep displaying how far away you are from either Philosophy or Computing.

Too bad you didn't understand any of it then

Atla wrote:That's because you don't care about harmful behaviour crossing a line. ...

LMFAO! "Harmful behaviour crossing a line ", you mean like asking you what you mean on a Philosophy forum? What a pitiful bag of insecurity you are, you have no willpower as you do not have to read or reply to Age's posts. You should ask for a refund for your studies in 'Computer Sciences' as apparently you can't even find the ignore function on a web-forum.

Luckily most people don't think like you.

"Most people"? So much for the nondualist. I give two shits what others think when it comes to pointing out the behaviour of nasty little minds like yours.

Atla wrote:Too bad you didn't understand any of it then

Best take it up with them then as I passed both. No don't tell me, it's all brainwashing.