Philosophy threads

[Punk Hazard]

It's ironic because OP's views on philosophy can be considered a philosophy too.

 

[~Sky~]

Why do they exist when science explains everything?
You are debating an answer for something you don't even know about. If you did you'd not discuss. Ie, threads about love. People discuss shit about God, women vs men and stuff like that when there's an actual formulae for love... :\
We are not in the XVIII for some years guys.

That's a nice philosophy.

 

[Punk Hazard]

first you must speak english.
[video=youtube;tU3lRm5W3oQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3lRm5W3oQ[/video]

Ahhh, I see you're one of those guys, who spew shit then b*tch out when challenged to back it up because they don't truly fully understand it themselves and only some things about it from listening to other people. People like you are amusing indeed.

 

[whoami28]

I'm tired of this thread. All we've proven is that LED ZEPPELIN likes to debate science, which in the end...IS PHILOSOPHY. Luckily, philosophy is larger than simply debating "truths" or "facts", there is an art to eloquence and clarity that seems to have gone out the window.

 

[RufusSerano]

First: the definition of counciouness is to phisically feel the world and from the feelings (like vision and gustation), interpret it with the usage of logic.

That is the most inconsistent definition ever. Define the word 'feel', how does that work 'feeling'? Define 'vision', how does that work 'seeing'?
Obviously you'll start to argue about nerves and chemo-electronic impulses, but both you and me (hopefully) don't 'see' electronic impulses... we see actual images in our head - no actually we don't, since in our head the impulses are never re-assembled to an actual image - so how does that image that we seem to 'see' even exist?
You could try to explin all that and define all the terms I ask you to, but it's bound to end up in a definition-circle where ultimately you will not define anything, since a defines b defines c defines a is invalid in itself... so let me make it easier to you:

Can your science proove the existence of my consciousness?
Good luck with that one...

Second: it's possible to cure all diseases, but cures for AIDS and the common flu do not "exist" because some diseases were created in labs to depopulate certain places (like Africa, which has an uncontrollable vegetative growth).

What kind of answer is that supposed to be? Those are ridicolous claims good sir...
So all the so far non-curable deseases have been created by some mad scientists, that big news, you should give that to the media...
dont forget to hand in your proofs though, they'll want to hear those too...
I wonder though? What makes a 'artificial created' desease un-curable? Care to explain?

Third: We can achieve immortality by several ways.

Well go on then. Show me an immortal human :3
Science is not just about theories and talk-no-jutsu you know?
Well, in case you have put your immortal human in the wrong handbag, try to explain some of these 'several ways' at least...

Fourth: Our universe is a small piece of a giant puzzles of universes. When one or two collapse, they'll form a big bang.

Proof? Anything?
That is speculation, nothing more. If you can't give me an experiment or another way to proof that there is more than one universe, than your speculations are nothing more than, well, speculations!
have I said speculation yet? Must've forgotten to mention the word speculation... sry...

Fifth: Jesus lived and science can disproove the existence of god by several manners.

I shall enjoy to read of the proof you seem to have that jesus of nazareth, the man who walked on water, turned water into wine, got ressurected and accended to heaven, truly existed...
Also I shall enjoy to hear more of those 'several manners' science has to disproove god, especially when jesus actually existed...

Sixth: Gravity is the distortion of space because of a massive object

define 'massive', define 'object', define 'distortion of space' and actually, define 'space'. An important part of science is to only use well defined terms that don't allow for confusion. Your terms are not defined at all, so naturally everyone will have problems understanding you. sry :/

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

Ahhh, I see you're one of those guys, who spew shit then b*tch out when challenged to back it up because they don't truly fully understand it themselves and only some things about it from listening to other people. People like you are amusing indeed.

he himself *****ed out when he said "please educate me"
as if i can post all of the known universe in this post before we even die

 

[Kαmi]

It's ironic because OP's views on philosophy can be considered a philosophy too.

Exactly. Simply arguing with another person can be considered philosophy. Different views and opinions... I wonder if he's gonna come up with a science explanation for this.

 

[Cruciatus]

I gotta feeling this kid believes the Sandy Hook shooting was staged so the government could take away our guns

 

[V h o]

I'm tired of this thread. All we've proven is that LED ZEPPELIN likes to debate science, which in the end...IS PHILOSOPHY. Luckily, philosophy is larger than simply debating "truths" or "facts", there is an art to eloquence and clarity that seems to have gone out the window.

He's not even debating science. If anything he's just giving bs answers/avoidance of the questions given. It's been proven that science doesn't cover everything in the known world or at least not yet. Would have been a good thread if any evidence to prove his point was made.

 

[Punk Hazard]

I gotta feeling this kid believes the Sandy Hook shooting was staged so the government could take away our guns

They ordered books, and got magazines instead.

 

[whoami28]

He's not even debating science. If anything he's just giving bs answers/avoidance of the questions given. It's been proven that science doesn't cover everything in the known world or at least not yet. Would have been a good thread if any evidence to prove his point was made.

Haha yeah I know. Hence the "truths" and "facts". W/e ignorance is bliss they say.

 

[Cruciatus]

omfg I'm just waiting for Aim64C and Freakinstein AG to be all over this thread

 

[Made in Heaven]

Saying stupid things won't benefit you

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

That is the most inconsistent definition ever. Define the word 'feel', how does that work 'feeling'? Define 'vision', how does that work 'seeing'?
Obviously you'll start to argue about nerves and chemo-electronic impulses, but both you and me (hopefully) don't 'see' electronic impulses... we see actual images in our head - no actually we don't, since in our head the impulses are never re-assembled to an actual image - so how does that image that we seem to 'see' even exist?
You could try to explin all that and define all the terms I ask you to, but it's bound to end up in a definition-circle where ultimately you will not define anything, since a defines b defines c defines a is invalid in itself... so let me make it easier to you:

Can your science proove the existence of my consciousness?
Good luck with that one...


What kind of answer is that supposed to be? Those are ridicolous claims good sir...
So all the so far non-curable deseases have been created by some mad scientists, that big news, you should give that to the media...
dont forget to hand in your proofs though, they'll want to hear those too...
I wonder though? What makes a 'artificial created' desease un-curable? Care to explain?



Well go on then. Show me an immortal human :3
Science is not just about theories and talk-no-jutsu you know?
Well, in case you have put your immortal human in the wrong handbag, try to explain some of these 'several ways' at least...



Proof? Anything?
That is speculation, nothing more. If you can't give me an experiment or another way to proof that there is more than one universe, than your speculations are nothing more than, well, speculations!
have I said speculation yet? Must've forgotten to mention the word speculation... sry...



I shall enjoy to read of the proof you seem to have that jesus of nazareth, the man who walked on water, turned water into wine, got ressurected and accended to heaven, truly existed...
Also I shall enjoy to hear more of those 'several manners' science has to disproove god, especially when jesus actually existed...



define 'massive', define 'object', define 'distortion of space' and actually, define 'space'. An important part of science is to only use well defined terms that don't allow for confusion. Your terms are not defined at all, so naturally everyone will have problems understanding you. sry :/

"define" "definition" "what does ---- mean?"
how about this...

You must be registered for see images

but anyway, i'll very carefully answer your questions.
The first one you can get the answer from this little book we call dictionary
Second: Yes, diseases that have no "cure" were created by scientists. Why don't you google Dr Robert Degallo? And they have no place in media because the media is, like the governments who pay for the scientists, run by bankers who pull all the strings.
Third: [video=youtube;QsHuGQieyjY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsHuGQieyjY[/video]
Fourth:

You must be registered for see images

Fifth: The bible was poorly translated into Latin and from Latin to English. The second half of such book contains several expressions which cannot be interpreted literally (it's like reading "Jesus hit the nail in the head" and thinking that he actually used a hammer back then). Besides, the Jewish people used codes because they were running away from the Romans. So for example, 666 means the emperor of Rome (because in Aramaic, 6 means "bad" and 3 means "indeed", so the Roman Emperor was indeed bad for ****ing up with so many jewish lives) There are several other examples of this language.
Sixth: F= G (m*M)/r²

 

[RufusSerano]

he himself *****ed out when he said "please educate me"
as if i can post all of the known universe in this post before we even die

Your science knows several ways to make you immortal, remember? That shouldn't be the issue then...

/Edit

You did not just post a video of michio kaku on the topic of immortality did you?
You are aware that all he talks about are theories? That nobody knows wether preventing the damage free radicals cause in the mitochondria will make you immortal?

This guy is making speaches and earns his money by sharing his pseudo-science.
I too can make a video and say: Our brain has micro-structures that act as supra-conductors and make quantum-effects in room temperature possible, wich at some level causes conciousness to pop up.
But that is neither science, nor truth. Its just an unprooven claim, nothing more.

Again, show me your immortal human and you'll have convinced me.

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

omfg I'm just waiting for Aim64C and Freakinstein AG to be all over this thread

Hell yes. It's possible that they're still typing down their essays.

 

[Bastian]

Science also explains why you're being so rude and defensive when someone offers an opinion that differs from your own.

 

[LED ZEPPELIN]

alright guys... it was fun trolling with you. i'll take a break and will be back tomorrow. it's fun to see how no one yelled troll. i had a lot of bursts of laughs. see you soon

 

[Punk Hazard]

alright guys... it was fun trolling with you. i'll take a break and will be back tomorrow. it's fun to see how no one yelled troll. i had a lot of bursts of laughs. see you soon

This post reminds me of a movie with Bruce Willis and Tracy Morgan.

 

[Bastian]

alright guys... it was fun trolling with you. i'll take a break and will be back tomorrow. it's fun to see how no one yelled troll. i had a lot of bursts of laughs. see you soon

Most likely you were completely serious in posting this thread, it was only after others proved you wrong you decided to post this. Probably in an attempt to sway the opinions of the wiser members of NarutoBase. We can't have them thinking you're an idiot now can we?