Magic: Who thinks they can do it, and why otherwise intelligent people buy it.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Morality actually matters, whatever the fuck you think.

I don't think he was saying that, if anything I think he was goading you into discussing it on a realistic level. As with the brute force comments above.
(I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth roger).

He should have said it then.  He thinks it's fun, so do I.  Nothing personal meant to any of you.

Same goes for you Roger, I hope you don't take my posts as a personal attack or anything, I'm just responding in kind.  It's a game, it's why I come to the discordian boards.

Of course.  It's almost a...sociological experiment, right?  And JohNyx reacted just the way you expected him to.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Why, thank you for explaining how forums work, Little Dickey!    

Seems like you need it!  Now why don't you go someplace else and bitch about how Wiccan chicks wont have sex with you.

Okay, you get a C- for debating skills, and a solid F for comprehension.   

[Faust]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Johnyx, you weren't here for DK or any of the other philosophical geniuses.  Watch as hilarity ensues.  

Now thats not fair, I've read this guys comic and from the look of his posts he is a really mellow guy, dk was a horrid little ball of rage masked as conceit.

[Shai Hulud]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Johnyx, you weren't here for DK or any of the other philosophical geniuses.  Watch as hilarity ensues. 

Now thats not fair, I've read this guys comic and from the look of his posts he is a really mellow guy, dk was a horrid little ball of rage masked as conceit.

Could have fooled me.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

Well, you certainly have the passive/aggressive thing down pat.

[Kai]

I have complete confidence in the scientific method to test any hypothesis which is able to be falsified. And I mean any and every. There is not one falsifiable hypothesis that I would not be confident in using the scientific method to test.

A hypothesis can is only as good as the tests you can run on it.  I'm glad you have such confidence in the scientific method, but it's misplaced.  This is a naive and almost childlike trust in science.  As Heisenberg said, the scientific method can teach us nothing else beyond how facts are related to, and conditioned on, each other.

You obviously misunderstand it and blame it. That was implicit in the statement of yours I bolded.

And you obviously misunderstand what I've been saying.  We haven't got a better tool than the scientific method right now, in my opinion.  But I am not blithely ignorant of its limitations as you seem to be.  Think about it, where do you derive your assumption that the universe has laws that are consistent?

Do you have any evidence that the "laws" are not consistent? What would it look like if these "laws" you speak of were inconsistent?

This is why we use PARSIMONY. Science is also based on testing of physical evidence, and unless you can provide physical evidence to test, whatever "evidence" you have is scientifically meaningless. But I digress, you're being needlessly hypothetical with no evidence.

Get your head out of your ass for a minute and listen to yourself.  Evidence for a hypothetical?  STFU.

No evidence for a hypothetical, IOW, you're pulling ad hoc assumptions out of your ass because you like fapping to armchair philosophy.

Believe it or not, I don't live in Asia. My culture and civilization falls within the western tradition. The librarians at Alexandria were great scientists, and unfortunately that knowlege was pushed into a dank corner for nearly 1000 years while people entertained magical ideas like the world being flat. Maybe you're from some Asian culture but I'm pretty sure you aren't, so quit pretending you are, and like you actually know what you are talking about.

Do you even think before you type?  If it wasn't for the Asia cultures that you so casually dismiss none of the Western advancements that you prize could ever have transpired.  Interesting how  you haven't got anything to say about the usefulness of the Catholic Church in preserving literature...  maybe you're all right with superstition if it can be of use to you, just like every other existentialist you're criticizing.

I don't have anything to say about usefulness of the catholic church, no. Not after sitting on papal infallacy for the last 500 years, while attempting to shut down ever scientific study that interfered with their dogmatic bullshit.

Except you don't understand, thus you throw around bullshit comments about the scientific method.

Clearly you need to read a bit more on philosophy of science.  Science is great, but it's limited, it's within a framework.  That framework itself is something that science can't say anything about, and may very well be flawed.

Please tell me, if you will, how hypothesis testing is flawed. Please tell me how the scientific method is unable with confidence to test and retest every falsifiable hypothesis provided the technology is available. Because this bullshit is getting on my nerves, and you continue to say science is flawed over and over without providing any evidence of how the scientific method is unable to be used with confidence.

The rest of your post doesn't even bear a response.


What this comes down to is, you are unable to support your initial claim, but you never wanted to. This whole exercise is simply a fapfest, just like all existential bullshit.

[The Johnny]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Please tell me, if you will, how hypothesis testing is flawed. Please tell me how the scientific method is unable with confidence to test and retest every falsifiable hypothesis provided the technology is available. Because this bullshit is getting on my nerves, and you continue to say science is flawed over and over without providing any evidence of how the scientific method is unable to be used with confidence.

This I GOTTA see. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Guy's argument ---><--- Guy's ability to communicate.

Not really, I just wanted to use the new emoticon.

[Shai Hulud]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

Well, you certainly have the passive/aggressive thing down pat.

Look, I can either take it on the chin like a bitch or give it right back to you guys.  What's with the do as I say not as a I do thing?   Oh, right, your morality is more valid than mine.

Why don't I start a new thread about the morality thing, maybe we can have a more manageable discussion.

[Faust]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

Well, you certainly have the passive/aggressive thing down pat.

Look, I can either take it on the chin like a bitch or give it right back to you guys.  What's with the do as I say not as a I do thing?   Oh, right, your morality is more valid than mine.

Why don't I start a new thread about the morality thing, maybe we can have a more manageable discussion.

Bump it its in the top forum I think, but for gods sake read it first.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Look, I can either take it on the chin like a bitch or give it right back to you guys.  What's with the do as I say not as a I do thing?   Oh, right, your morality is more valid than mine.

False dilemma.  You could also formulate and put forward a workable or at least testable hypothesis concerning objective morality.

Or you could, you know, just ride this shit down in flames.

(Also, I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the kind of person I'm preaching to.  You shouldn't be either, if you can avoid it.)

[The Good Reverend Roger]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

Well, you certainly have the passive/aggressive thing down pat.

Look, I can either take it on the chin like a bitch or give it right back to you guys.  What's with the do as I say not as a I do thing?   Oh, right, your morality is more valid than mine.

Why don't I start a new thread about the morality thing, maybe we can have a more manageable discussion.

Bump it its in the top forum I think, but for gods sake read it first.

I like this thread.  It's funnier when he gets a simple argument from the OP completely backwards.

[The Johnny]

ETA:  You may also notice that I was responding to JohNyx, Sparky.

Get a room them.  Once you say it, it's out there for us all to tear apart.

A room with me? Fuck you, at least i was trying to be civil and have a constructive argument.

Sorry, didn't mean anything against you by it!  I appreciate your civility, it makes for a more productive debate.  Oh, and fuck you too for taking it too seriously.

Well, you certainly have the passive/aggressive thing down pat.

Look, I can either take it on the chin like a bitch or give it right back to you guys.  What's with the do as I say not as a I do thing?   Oh, right, your morality is more valid than mine.

Why don't I start a new thread about the morality thing, maybe we can have a more manageable discussion.