Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:33 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:01 pmWe aren't here to bicker over what we call it. We acknowledge THAT it exists first; and then we can call it whatever we want.

Nature. Spinoza's God. Will Bouwman's shorts. It's just a name.

You cannot piss of an atheist or a naturalist. No more than you can look at the name ''Atheist'' and say to yourself, that name is pissed off for being a name, because it's just a name.

Names have no power to show emotion, like being pissed off.

And if the name were vacuous (like all other names) it wouldn't matter.

But to atheists the name isn't vacuous.
Any more than the name "god" is vacuous to theists.

All these symbol-worshipers.... they get so upset when you try to upgrade their favourite symbol.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:45 pm And if the name were vacuous (like all other names) it wouldn't matter.

But to atheists the name isn't vacuous.
Any more than the name "god" is vacuous to theists.

All these symbol-worshipers.... they get so upset when you try to upgrade their favourite symbol.

Names cannot worship themselves either. Names have no brains.

A name is just an idea. And even my conception of death is only possible through the idea that I'm alive. Ultimately I have no way to know that I'm breathing, or if my heart beats because only names are known, and names that are known, know nothing.

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 11:41 am This is fundamentally the same mistake you made with your understanding of 'impossible':

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 2:37 pm"Impossible" simply means NOT possible. And I say that it's NOT possible because I haven't seen anybody do it.

the one you had to:

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:55 amEdit 2: Recant on using my own definition of "impossible" and default to Oxford definition.

See, this is your error. You are holding onto your stupid unfalsifiable philosopher axiom that everybody else is always wrong. No. it's you this time.

You don't even understand what my error was.
There was no error in my understanding of "impossible". It means exactly what it means when English people use it, and that's exactly what I meant when I used it.

What I got wrong was thinking I was using my own definition, when I was intuitively using the Oxford meaning of the word.
The underlying meaning/understanding was 100% correct - all that changed was the definition I claimed to be using.

You are being very silly. You are attacking me for calling it "7+1" instead of "9-1". It's still pointing to the exact same meaning. You are confusing the language with the meaning of the language.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 7:47 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:49 pm I already responded how I saw fit. You tried to cram that into your categories.

You seem to have chosen to play the victim card, and you even found me to blame for victimising you.

Victim? Wow... you are so far out in left field. Your efforts to cram everyone's responses into the unaccepted categories you've given only shows what a self-indulgent and stubborn whack-job you are.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 3:06 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 7:47 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:49 pm I already responded how I saw fit. You tried to cram that into your categories.

You seem to have chosen to play the victim card, and you even found me to blame for victimising you.

Victim? Wow... you are so far out in left field. Your efforts to cram everyone's responses into the unaccepted categories categories you've given only shows what a self-indulgent and stubborn whack-job you are.

Justify this claim, you petulant child.

I have not crammed you into any categories that are not broadly and widely accepted by the English-speaking world.

If you think linguistic and semantic social boundaries are such an inconvenience to you, tell me again what you think morality is? Because you seem to be arguing for the exact opposite of that! Society is oppressing you with the meaning of words, whaaaaaaa!

I am not your problem. The English language is your problem - stop fucking whining and fix it. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/contact-us

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 3:24 pm stop fucking whining and fix it.

Do you have to use that sort of language, you foul mouthed twat?

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 6:55 pm Do you have to use that sort of language, you foul mouthed twat?

Profanity is the crutch of inarticulate motherfcuckers.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:01 pmNature IS supernatural

Well there's a turn up.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 7:42 pmProfanity is the crutch of inarticulate motherfcuckers.

Is that why you live in her basement?

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:15 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:01 pmNature IS supernatural

Well there's a turn up.

It’s more of a turn down.

The current understanding of nature is Ex Nihilo.

Unless you have something true to say about nothing, maybe you want to check on that definition again…

Will Bouwman wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:15 pm Is that why you live in her basement?

I figured I could raise the table-stakes on the loaded questions by bringing your daughter into the equation.

And then my better judgment kicked in...

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 3:24 pm categories... broadly and widely accepted by the English-speaking world

I guess your problem is that you don't know how to work with the concepts in a realistic and sensible way -- and that's why so many responses in this thread are disagreeing with you.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:57 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 3:24 pm categories... broadly and widely accepted by the English-speaking world

I guess your problem is that you don't know how to work with the concepts in a realistic and sensible way -- and that's why so many responses in this thread are disagreeing with you.

I guess you missed the fucking point.

Your disagreement is NOT with me. Your disagreement is with the English language. Your are barking up the wrong tree.

The argument is sound and valid. If you feel oppressed and wronged by the English language - change the language.

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/contact-us

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:07 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:57 pm I guess your problem is that you don't know how to work with the concepts in a realistic and sensible way -- and that's why so many responses in this thread are disagreeing with you.

I guess you missed the fucking point.

You are the one repeatedly missing the points: Your thread makes no sense to anyone. You criticize everyone who has disagreed with you. You've made it clear that you are not as intelligent as you want to believe you are. You are the only one getting pissed off.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:32 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 10:07 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 9:57 pm I guess your problem is that you don't know how to work with the concepts in a realistic and sensible way -- and that's why so many responses in this thread are disagreeing with you.

I guess you missed the fucking point.

You are the one repeatedly missing the points: Your thread makes no sense to anyone. You criticize everyone who has disagreed with you. You've made it clear that you are not as intelligent as you want to believe you are. You are the only one getting pissed off.

It sounds like this is all about me.

Still barking up the wrong tree. Woof! Woof!

I can only explain it to you so many times before I am forced to conclude that I can’t understand it for you.