Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Starlord, Aug 18, 2016.
The river's coming up. Normal 6kfps today 12kfps. 'Got a few things to do.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
There is a assumption in the question being asked. That there is a reason at all.
StarLord, do you acknowledge the possibility that there may be no why at all?
Waste of time quoting this - it's not applicable here.
How do you know?
What, for example, balances grass?
Can you tell us where this "nothing" is?
(And note, re the above quote, "nothing" isn't an action - ergo there can't be reaction to it).
Why is there not just a golfball? Or a just dead goldfish? Can you show why (or even make a rational argument that) the "reaction" to "nothing" is the universe and everything in it rather than just a single example of "something"?
1) Your supposition of "balance" is just that - a supposition.
2) Why must that "something" (as asked above) be the entire universe?
You need English lessons: anything isn't the same as everything.
Not actually an answer.
Your final sentence here is nearly true: you're arguing something without either A) comprehending how to argue and B) making sense.
Correct. So, since your OP (and all subsequent ones) lack rationality why did you choose to post in the philosophy sub forum?
Claimed but not shown.
Make your mind up! Is it a "reaction" to"nothing" or is just "permitted" by "nothing"?
Either way you're talking nonsense.
A) it's not a revelation and,
B) it's self-evident nonsense.
No it's not.
By the way: "epiphany" and "revelation" aren't exactly valid philosophical arguments.
It's been awhile Dwyer but for once , just perhaps this once ; I agree with you .
Hrm. And I was just about to say, for once, I disagree.
StarLord has been here barely a month. I feel that terms such as drivel, crap and nonsense are appropriate for members who have earned them with their behavior.
StarLord deserves not to be painted by the same brush that was used for all that came before him. The sins of other members do not come forward to land on his doorstep just because we are cynical.
I suspect it will be another debate about ambiguous terms such as nothingness and purpose, but it's "just" another debate only to us, not to StarLord.
He deserves the benefit of a clean slate and proper manners.
I have said my peace.
Given the number of completely unsupported assertions, the number of non-sequiturs and the (unjustified) arrogance ("Something most will never comprehend", "No one replying tho this has the slightest capability of grasping the magnitude of this revelation", "This epiphany is literally going to change the world") I claim that I tarred him with his own brush, not those of others.
Drivel, crap and nonsense is exactly what he's posting.
Why we exist though is before the ancients'. Anunnaki.
The Anunnaki merely changed our genetics . They did not create us.
We Humans exist because we could .
It is time for us to get back our identity, find our existence means something to us all !!!
And the drivel, crap and nonsense content has just gone up.
(As has the number of unsupported assertions).
"Say your peace would imply that you've had the opportunity to speak and set your mind at ease"
"An argument can be made for saying one’s peace after holding it,"
"But say one's peace is now so common among younger speakers... that it begins to rival have another thing (for original think) coming as a newly dominant variant."
It wasn't accidental. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Apparently you have not read , as millions have not , read about our ancient history . It's vital that we all should.
When we have read about our ancient history ; who we are will make us think about us . Differently .
Um, I have read about our ancient history.
I've also read - as you've been told several times - the irrational claims of Sitchin (and his ilk) that purports (but fails) to be that history.
There is no history that includes ancient aliens - only fabrications based on wishful thinking and shoddy scholarship.
Many think differently and has supported his claims . Through analysis of his interpretation of the cuneiforms but also through archaeology.
Support all you like...Children, some of them, still support the Easter Bunny.
A claim only has credibility when it is supported by evidence.
He didn't "interpret cuneiforms", he made sh*t up, because he was neither qualified to, nor competent at, reading Sumerian.
And, equally, there's no archaeology that supports Sitchin.
The evidence is there you ostrich head in the sand .
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Calm down young fella!!!
There is no convincing evidence of any ancient Aliens what so ever, having visited Earth, now or in the past....FACT!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Some impressionable gullible people though are simply taken in by such sensationalistic nonsense. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Who would be credible , in your opinion , dywer ? Name , names .
Actually he didn't make anything up . It is what it is .
Don't be an ostrich head in the sand pad .
Separate names with a comma.