Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:51 am**

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 2:06 pm
Age wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:26 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
Are you yourself, now, "future generations" when used in some sentence you personally wrote a couple of year ago?
But there is NO "yourself". These words, together, is a misnomer, contradiction, and/or oxymoron.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
Well, you told me I don't know what "I" means
Well, because you do NOT YET know what thee 'I' ACTUALLY IS, this is WHY I told 'you' that.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm and your alternative is some whackadoodle crap about God.
And, because you ALREADY BELIEVE you KNOW what is true, ANY thing DIFFERENT is what you call "whackadoodle". Also, because you have ALREADY quickly JUMPED to ASSUMPTIONS and/or CONCLUSIONS, you lost the ability to CLARIFY here, FIRST.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm You've got some idea that beliefs are incontrovertible, which is absurd.
LOL That you ACTUALLY came to this False, Wrong, and Incorrect conclusion, IS ABSURD, in and of itself.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm Nobody knows why you say "thee" and it isn't even really worth bothering to ask.
But you found it 'bothersome' enough to mention it.

And, the FACT that, supposedly, NO body KNOWS WHY I say the 'thee' word speaks VOLUMES, in regards to what I have been CLEARLY SAYING and POINTING OUT here, in this forum, to 'you', human beings.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm And you have already boasted about speaking a private language that nobody else can understand.
Did I?

WHERE was this? Will 'you' link 'us' to 'it'? And, what did I ACTUALLY SAY about, supposedly, "boasting about speaking a private language"?
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm And you had just explained away your own lack of meaning by explaining that you communicate with us by picking words for what they mean TO YOU.... NOT US.
Here is ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE of HOW ASSUMING, BEFORE CLARIFYING, can, and has, lead one completely and utterly ASTRAY from what thee ACTUAL Truth of things IS.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
Dude, it's pretty clear to everyone that you also don't understand what you are on about.
LOL "to EVERYONE".

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm That's why you've spent years "searching for the right words".
And, if 'you', "flashdangerpants", are ANY thing to compare to, then I have MANY MORE YEARS to go.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
Are you taking the piss?
NO.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
Mate, we're at the point now where the thing to be established is whether that is ever possible with you.
MOST DEFINITELY it IS.

Those who can SEE, READ, or ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS from a Truly OPEN viewpoint will MOST DEFINITELY WILL.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm The terms you set for anyone to communicate with you aren't very reasonable, and the effort expended on your side to help anyone understand you is entirely lacking.
If you SAY and BELIEVE so, then it is so.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
In recent days you have used one specific prediction to justify that you can predict the future. What was it Ken? Tell the truth please.
You just made the CLAIM, so how about 'you' tell 'us' what 'it', supposedly, was.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm
But who are they?
ALL will come to KNOW.
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:50 pm Do you see how you receive those clarifying questions you insist on, but then you go out of your way not answer them? We do Ken.
Which CLARIFYING QUESTIONS are you referring to here, EXACTLY?

WHAT can be CLEARLY SEEN, when this is read, is that I have answered thee ACTUAL QUESTIONS posed to me.

Because you ASSUME and/or BELIEVE otherwise, this in itself does NOT necessarily make what you ASSUME or BELIEVE true AT ALL.
You didn't answer my claifying question Ken. You talk about us proving your points a lot, but you just keep proving ours.

And WHAT clarifying question is that meant to be, which I supposedly did NOT answer?

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:22 am**

I realise that the insane can't help it, but that doesn't make them any more likeable.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:51 am**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:51 am And WHAT clarifying question is that meant to be, which I supposedly did NOT answer?

I think we should start with the one from the other post that you have skipped.

Give us the list of words that have their own special meanings Ken. That's a request for clarification, I hope you can cope with the absence of a question mark this tim. There's only half a dozen of these words so it shouldn't be difficult toclarify if you want to.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:58 am**

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:22 am I realise that the insane can't help it, but that doesn't make them any more likeable.

If it isn’t somehow automated, all of age’s formatting and quoting takes energy, focused attention, and precious time. If the energy is uncontrollable then it’s a disorder, like OCD.

- I’ll take a big ration of OC, but please no D.
- OC is a great motive force but the D replaces peace-of-mind and thus defeats the purpose of action.

- If the energy and attention is controllable, then age is either a knowing or unknowing Dada Performance Artist (DPA.)

- A DPA will do something like cut the grass with the mower blades set too high to touch the grass.
- A DPA purposefully puts new, unanticipated meaning to “form follows function,” for philosophical consideration.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:01 am**

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:51 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:51 am And WHAT clarifying question is that meant to be, which I supposedly did NOT answer?
I think we should start with the one from the other post that you have skipped.
Give us the list of words that have their own special meanings Ken. That's a request for clarification, I hope you can cope with the absence of a question mark this tim. There's only half a dozen of these words so it shouldn't be difficult toclarify if you want to.

HOW could I "skip" what I have NEVER even seen?

LOOK, you made a CLAIM, I asked you to back it up. So, far you have FAILED, ONCE AGAIN.

So, we, ONCE MORE, STILL WAIT.

And considering what your CLAIM was here, the hypocrisy is outstanding.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:01 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:51 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:51 am And WHAT clarifying question is that meant to be, which I supposedly did NOT answer?
I think we should start with the one from the other post that you have skipped.
Give us the list of words that have their own special meanings Ken. That's a request for clarification, I hope you can cope with the absence of a question mark this tim. There's only half a dozen of these words so it shouldn't be difficult toclarify if you want to.

HOW could I "skip" what I have NEVER even seen?

LOOK, you made a CLAIM, I asked you to back it up. So, far you have FAILED, ONCE AGAIN.

So, we, ONCE MORE, STILL WAIT.

And considering what your CLAIM was here, the hypocrisy is outstanding.

That comes from the page before this one in this thread Ken. Don't be so dramatic.

The clarifying question about what you ever meant when you wrote FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL.... is clearly never going to get a positive answer, and you will only ever clarify in negative terms. We may as well switch questions, we've hit a limit to your capabilities.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:34 am**

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:58 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:22 am I realise that the insane can't help it, but that doesn't make them any more likeable.
If it isn’t somehow automated, all of age’s formatting and quoting takes energy, focused attention, and precious time. If the energy is uncontrollable then it’s a disorder, like OCD.

- I’ll take a big ration of OC, but please no D.
- OC is a great motive force but the D replaces peace-of-mind and thus defeats the purpose of action.

- If the energy and attention is controllable, then age is either a knowing or unknowing Dada Performance Artist (DPA.)

- A DPA will do something like cut the grass with the mower blades set too high to touch the grass.
- A DPA purposefully puts new, unanticipated meaning to “form follows function,” for philosophical consideration.

Speaking of insanity...

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:40 am**

noted.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:50 am**

Oakley wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 10:28 pm Greetings all,

I'm new here, so before diving in I thought I might pause to gauge the interest of members in discussing the possibility of a world without men, that is, a world without male humans.

I've had this conversation elsewhere, and it seems that some folks find this topic highly offensive. Making trouble is not my intention, so it seems wise to at least briefly put my finger in the air to see which way the wind blows on this topic, on this forum. I'm particularly interested in guidance from the mods.

If this isn't going to work, ok, no problem. Just let me know and I'll drop it without complaint.

Thanks!

A world without men in my opinion would be a good idea, since the idea would be one step closer to the reduction of the human species. Hopefully leading to human extinction. No one ever asked to be born, but thought has manipulated the human on a psychological level to believe it’s ok to exist, when clearly the opposite is also true.

Such is the thinking talking ape…it believes it knows what’s best for it, then imposes that on the unborn…it’s quite sick and unnatural…but then nature is dumb, it’s really a mindless unintelligent event, hopefully a rare one off event, that will never happen again, once it’s all over.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 11:14 am**

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:01 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:51 am
I think we should start with the one from the other post that you have skipped.
Give us the list of words that have their own special meanings Ken. That's a request for clarification, I hope you can cope with the absence of a question mark this tim. There's only half a dozen of these words so it shouldn't be difficult toclarify if you want to.

HOW could I "skip" what I have NEVER even seen?

LOOK, you made a CLAIM, I asked you to back it up. So, far you have FAILED, ONCE AGAIN.

So, we, ONCE MORE, STILL WAIT.

And considering what your CLAIM was here, the hypocrisy is outstanding.
That comes from the page before this one in this thread Ken. Don't be so dramatic.

The clarifying question about what you ever meant when you wrote FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL.... is clearly never going to get a positive answer,

But it WILL, so your ASSUMPTION here is, ONCE AGAIN, Wrong.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am and you will only ever clarify in negative terms.

Even this ASSUMPTION besides being absolutely Wrong is just plain ABSURD and RIDICULOUS, on its own.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am We may as well switch questions, we've hit a limit to your capabilities.

But I have a LOT MORE, endless in fact.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 11:36 am**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 11:14 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:01 am

HOW could I "skip" what I have NEVER even seen?

LOOK, you made a CLAIM, I asked you to back it up. So, far you have FAILED, ONCE AGAIN.

So, we, ONCE MORE, STILL WAIT.

And considering what your CLAIM was here, the hypocrisy is outstanding.
That comes from the page before this one in this thread Ken. Don't be so dramatic.

The clarifying question about what you ever meant when you wrote FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL.... is clearly never going to get a positive answer,
But it WILL, so your ASSUMPTION here is, ONCE AGAIN, Wrong.

You could prove me wrong any time, very easily. Just tell us what you were predicting with that sentence.
Or you can prove me right by continuing to waffle and rejecting every question as inadequate to the task you wish to make impossible.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 11:14 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am and you will only ever clarify in negative terms.
Even this ASSUMPTION besides being absolutely Wrong is just plain ABSURD and RIDICULOUS, on its own.

But you've never given any positive clarity on the matter.
You ask "why do you assume ..." "who said..." "when have I ever..." and so on.
You could just make your intention with the statement explicit, and then I stop being right.
But until you do that, I am right.

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 11:14 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 10:07 am We may as well switch questions, we've hit a limit to your capabilities.
But I have a LOT MORE, endless in fact.

Prove it by just answering the question. Tell us what you were predicting and for whom.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:12 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:50 pmAND you have OBVIOUSLY FORGOTTEN 'it' can NOT be a HYPOTHESIS if 'it' is ALREADY thee ACTUAL Truth of things, which I OBVIOUSLY CLAIM 'it' IS.

Right. In any language but kenglish, (thanks to FlashDangerpants for that one) what you are saying is that you believe the universe is static and eternal. You can insist that the English word 'believe' means something else in kenglish, which is your prerogative, but if you wish to communicate successfully with another human being (another term that apparently means something alien to the English meaning) you either have to teach someone kenglish, or learn English yourself.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:50 pmNow, EITHER I am Wrong, or I am NOT.

Well, in English, that does seem to exhaust the possibilities.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:50 pmAnd, we will just have to WAIT and SEE, contrary to YOUR BELIEF, to find out FOR SURE.

That's the sort of mealy mouthed excuse for being an ignorant fuckwit that Mr Can might use. There is very little evidence for your belief, and a truckload against it. But there is something you wish to be true, and you will assert it regardless; naïvely hoping that one day reality will flip in your favour.

Age wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:50 pmThe REASON WHY you WOULD NOT answer my CLARIFYING QUESTION posed to you here is because you COULD NOT.

Dunno what clarifying question you are referring to, but if you remind me, I will happily give it a pop. Don't be too upset if the answer I give is 'I don't know.' They are some of the most important words in English, we use them to distinguish between people who are truly open and honest, and people who are mental.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:58 pm**

uwot wrote:
In any language but kenglish ( thanks to FlashDangerpants for that one ) what you are saying is that you believe the universe is static and eternal

I think when Ken talks about the Universe he means absolutely everything that exists at this point in time
And when you talk about the Universe you mean local cosmic expansion - obviously they are not the same

So when you say the Universe is expanding due to red shift you only mean what can actually be observed
But Ken is not talking about what can only be observed but that which cannot be observed as well
And so using the same word - Universe - to mean a different thing is what is causing this confusion

You may say that nothing can be said about the unobservable Universe because it is unfalsifiable
And while that is true just because something is unfalsifiable does not necessarily make it false

Were you to agree in principle to there being something beyond the observable Universe you might have better discourse with Ken
Scientific knowledge increases over time so who is not to say that a Universe beyond this one will be eventually discovered one day
Even if it is never discovered it will remain merely unfalsifiable not false

So less the multiverse is falsified within our lifetime Kens point - that the Universe is not expanding - remains a valid one
No one knows whether there is anything beyond this Universe or not so the default position should be one of agnosticism

I am not taking Kens side here by the way but am simply suggesting a way to more productive dialogue between you and him
This is a philosophy forum so understanding precisely what the other is saying should be something everyone should be able to do

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 6:02 pm**

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:58 pmI think when Ken talks about the Universe he means absolutely everything that exists at this point in time
And when you talk about the Universe you mean local cosmic expansion - obviously they are not the same

I appreciate that you are trying to be helpful, and I thank you for your input. Where to start? Well, if the observable universe is one 'bubble' in some multiverse which is eternal and static (which if there are bubbles blowing up willy-nilly it isn't) then you are either faced with Olber's Paradox, or you have to assume that the observable universe has some sort of barrier that prevents light, or any other from of energy from reaching us. Forever is long enough for information from outside the visible universe to reach us.

surreptitious57 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:58 pmWere you to agree in principle to there being something beyond the observable Universe you might have better discourse with Ken

I respect your optimism, but ken/Age is adamant that blue shift contradicts red shift, so he clearly has no idea what he is talking about. Several people have tried to have a better discourse with ken; I don't think anyone has had much success.

Posted: **Tue Jul 20, 2021 6:34 pm**

uwot wrote:
Well if the observable universe is one bubble in some multiverse which is eternal and static ( which if there are bubbles blowing up willy nilly it isnt ) then you are either faced with Olbers Paradox or you have to assume that the observable universe has some sort of barrier that prevents light or any other from energy from reaching us . Forever is long enough for information from outside the visible universe to reach us

This universe could be one where no information can leave it or enter it such as in brane theory
That is multiple universes residing on a single brane but each one effectively being a closed system

This universe is only I4 billion years old which is incredibly young indeed compared to when heat death will occur so the term forever is very relative

Philosophy Now Forum

A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?

Re: A World Without Men?