Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Sh*t about the universe

tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 7:38:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
http://listverse.com...

Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Nice article.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 7:49:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
"It also indicates that logically, "proof" is a weaker concept than "true"; such a concept is unsettling for scientists because it means there will always be things that, despite being true, cannot be proven to be true."

I think I would've been happier being shot in the face than hearing this theory... O.O
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 9:01:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I laughed at the end. I would like to think that I'm a sane person, but to make that assumption based on my own reasoning capabilities, I am actually proving my own insanity.

Little do I know, but this entire forum might be a delusion of my own. Perhaps I'm actually sitting in a rubber room, but I think I'm typing. Maybe I'm temporarily unconscious because of a grenade that went off in battle during Stalingrad while fighting for the Nazis. Maybe I need to just STFU.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2010 10:28:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. I love quantum physics. When I was 12 I wanted to be a quantum physicist but when I left Christianity my attention turned more towards philosophy. Ultimately the two tie together, just as philosophy does with everything else, as made example of by the end. Great article.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 12:34:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/17/2010 10:28:52 PM, FREEDO wrote:
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSS. I love quantum physics. When I was 12 I wanted to be a quantum physicist but when I left Christianity my attention turned more towards philosophy. Ultimately the two tie together, just as philosophy does with everything else, as made example of by the end. Great article.

Physics > Philosophy
President of DDO
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 1:15:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.

It isn't philosophical, it's fact.

There are no immutable claims aside those that are very simple.

"You exist" is clearly very simple and verifiable by the fact that you can present information, experiences, and interactions that are absent within my brain that I can verify empirically to be truth. "All life on this planet abides by the theory of evolution" is a sweeping claim that is likely quite false, but it definitely somewhat inaccurate.

The man proved it mathematically, there's no greater logic at man's disposal than that.

In response to the article:

Welcome to a portion of reality from my eyes, ladies and gentlemen.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:11:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 1:15:20 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.

It isn't philosophical, it's fact.

There are no immutable claims aside those that are very simple.

"You exist" is clearly very simple and verifiable by the fact that you can present information, experiences, and interactions that are absent within my brain that I can verify empirically to be truth. "All life on this planet abides by the theory of evolution" is a sweeping claim that is likely quite false, but it definitely somewhat inaccurate.

The man proved it mathematically, there's no greater logic at man's disposal than that.

In response to the article:

Welcome to a portion of reality from my eyes, ladies and gentlemen.

Actually, if someone exists in a hologram, then they are just a representation of existence, so that "simple claim" also fails to stand against the OP's link.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2010 6:13:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 6:11:32 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:15:20 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.

It isn't philosophical, it's fact.

There are no immutable claims aside those that are very simple.

"You exist" is clearly very simple and verifiable by the fact that you can present information, experiences, and interactions that are absent within my brain that I can verify empirically to be truth. "All life on this planet abides by the theory of evolution" is a sweeping claim that is likely quite false, but it definitely somewhat inaccurate.

The man proved it mathematically, there's no greater logic at man's disposal than that.

In response to the article:

Welcome to a portion of reality from my eyes, ladies and gentlemen.

Actually, if someone exists in a hologram, then they are just a representation of existence, so that "simple claim" also fails to stand against the OP's link.

Have you been watching Red Dwarf?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:38:36 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/18/2010 6:11:32 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:15:20 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.

It isn't philosophical, it's fact.

There are no immutable claims aside those that are very simple.

"You exist" is clearly very simple and verifiable by the fact that you can present information, experiences, and interactions that are absent within my brain that I can verify empirically to be truth. "All life on this planet abides by the theory of evolution" is a sweeping claim that is likely quite false, but it definitely somewhat inaccurate.

The man proved it mathematically, there's no greater logic at man's disposal than that.

In response to the article:

Welcome to a portion of reality from my eyes, ladies and gentlemen.

Actually, if someone exists in a hologram, then they are just a representation of existence, so that "simple claim" also fails to stand against the OP's link.

There's a few issues here. First, what are you presenting as "someone?" Because, I submit to you that it's impossible for "someone" to "exist" in a hologram. At least, solely. It is possible for there to be a representation of someone in a hologram, but that's what a hologram is.

Either way, it cannot prove solipsism.

...which leads to my other two points. First, I wasn't attempting to disprove Godel's assertion. In fact, I am in complete agreement with it, which I thought my post made painfully obvious. Furthermore, I was presenting an argument against solipsism, to refute theLWerd's claim that one could use the same logic to support solipsism. Which, one cannot, since it is easily disproved with using a simple premise:

You are not the only conscious being that exists, because you can interact with other conscious beings.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/20/2010 7:13:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:38:36 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 6:11:32 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
At 11/18/2010 1:15:20 PM, Ren wrote:
At 11/18/2010 12:34:01 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/17/2010 7:31:03 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
Number 1 sends a chill down my spine.

Really? You've never heard that before? People always bring it up in a last ditch effort to dismiss any logical claims made against them, or when advocating solipsism, etc.

It isn't philosophical, it's fact.

There are no immutable claims aside those that are very simple.

"You exist" is clearly very simple and verifiable by the fact that you can present information, experiences, and interactions that are absent within my brain that I can verify empirically to be truth. "All life on this planet abides by the theory of evolution" is a sweeping claim that is likely quite false, but it definitely somewhat inaccurate.

The man proved it mathematically, there's no greater logic at man's disposal than that.

In response to the article:

Welcome to a portion of reality from my eyes, ladies and gentlemen.

Actually, if someone exists in a hologram, then they are just a representation of existence, so that "simple claim" also fails to stand against the OP's link.

There's a few issues here. First, what are you presenting as "someone?" Because, I submit to you that it's impossible for "someone" to "exist" in a hologram. At least, solely. It is possible for there to be a representation of someone in a hologram, but that's what a hologram is.

Video games are essentially holograms, and many characters within these games are not representative of anyone that actually exists in real life.

Either way, it cannot prove solipsism.

I'm not attempting to make an affirmative for solipsism; I'm just throwing some thoughts out in the open.

...which leads to my other two points. First, I wasn't attempting to disprove Godel's assertion. In fact, I am in complete agreement with it, which I thought my post made painfully obvious. Furthermore, I was presenting an argument against solipsism, to refute theLWerd's claim that one could use the same logic to support solipsism. Which, one cannot, since it is easily disproved with using a simple premise:

You are not the only conscious being that exists, because you can interact with other conscious beings.

Those other conscious beings might be figments of the original being's imagination.