🧠｜serious-chat

[lavish finch]

A new development.

[dense agate]

censorship can really help but it won't be executed in a fair transparent way.

it will end up serving as a tool to whoever controls it

[lavish finch]

The individuals and groups who advocate most strongly in favor of censorship of misinformation are themselves the biggest spreaders of misinformation. Their doctrinal definition of misinformation is just true information.

You say that censorship can really help. Would you allow me to censor you?

I don't think so. Just as I would not allow you to censor me.

It's always an issue of power.

[dense agate]

misinformation and half truths are such an effective tool that both parties won't shy to use them, even media outlets that are supposed to be guarding the public from them utilize them instead, but i don't think anyone would make the argument that misinformation doesn't exist today.

[lavish finch]

It always comes down to who gets to decide what truth is.

That has never been and should never be a power given to government.

That has only been a facet of authoritarian governments.

[dense agate]

ofc not, as i've said multiple times I am against censorship, i believe in libertarianism the less power the government has the better, to an extent ofc.

but censorship or not, the current state of information today has to be addresses somehow, it is too great of a risk to allow misinformation to spread like wild fire.

[lavish finch]

Who would you give the power to decide what is misinformation and what isn’t?

The entire foundation of intellectual life is built upon the idea that we all get to decide for ourselves what is true.

As soon as you take that away you take away the possibility of intellectual life.

You take away the possibility of education.

[brave zinc]

Could you please elaborate? I don't quite understand.

[lavish finch]

Would you accept if I tell you what the truth is or would you like to decide for yourself?

[brave zinc]

I would do my own research if the truth you're trying to convince me of goes against what I believe to be true

[lavish finch]

If you already know what’s true what purpose are you researching for?

[brave zinc]

Perhaps your truth is more truthful than my truth

Am I making sense 💀

[dense agate]

i have no contradicting argument here, I value individualism, liberty and freedom from the government.

[thorny steeple]

Fair point, but someone cannot find the truth just like that it takes time and a lot of research it all lands on your values at the end

Nothing I say is "truth" an opinion hence dont take my words in your reconsideration after any conversation I have with anyone, if someone is searching for something you have to do it yourself.

[lavish finch]

When you give the majority the ability to silence unpopular opinions, it's always going to be the minority views that get silenced first.

[thorny steeple]

I completely agree

[hoary mica]

yooo hi im new to this server

[brave zinc]

I can see why you had to create a new Discord account.

[hoary mica]

dont ask about the reactions

[brave zinc]

I would be at peace, I'd like to believe.

[hoary mica]

I dont really know , i can sorta imagine it , i dont think we still wouldnt progress just progression would be a bit slower cuz media nowadays has such a grasp on our lives.

[brave zinc]

Progress and advancement in technologies and humanities and all sorts of fields would be nerfed exponentially, but we would be at peace. No depression. No time waste. No addiction to harmful social media platforms. And so on and so forth.

[hoary mica]

Some people think that , just for me it would be a little bit more boring , since i use the internet to get into a fun reality where i dont need to worry about my problems and just zone out and play videogames or watch youtube.

[thorny steeple]

The difficulties would mostly depend on your goals and values some can keep going with little to no effects on their lives without internet

Enjoyable to read the different opinions

[brave zinc]

In a world without internet, there would very likely be plenty of other fun activities to do instead of scrolling through TikTok or YouTube for hours on end like a zombie in a state of limbo.

[acoustic quarry]

What do you all want?
Option A: Life without internet
Option B: Life with Internet

[brave zinc]

Option C: Death

JK

Looks like our friend got muted. Can't say I'm surprised.

[acoustic quarry]

Why???

[thorny steeple]

Damn

[brave zinc]

If you read the following message, you would understand why.

[thorny steeple]

You can choose which to live with

[acoustic quarry]

I still don't understand

[brave zinc]

I was joking.

[thorny steeple]

"this worldly life is a prisoner to the believer and paradise to non-believer"

[acoustic quarry]

Internet is growing us more or making us weak?

[brave zinc]

Don't you mean "a prison to the believer"?

[acoustic quarry]

Do you know Dr Stone?

[thorny steeple]

ye

[acoustic quarry]

Silence

[brave zinc]

Is that some kind of a scientist?

[acoustic quarry]

Yess

[brave zinc]

I don't know him, no.

[acoustic quarry]

It's a anime on science

[brave zinc]

oh cool

[acoustic quarry]

Which era was best?

If you get chance to choice in which year you want to get born?

Noo

Why 2002 ?

But you can change it?

[thorny steeple]

Wouldn't choose, destiny knows best

[acoustic quarry]

But why?

Do you think our 21st century is best?

Omg so much logical 😂

[hoary mica]

I agree but if u say it like that it makes the internet sound like a horrible beast of a concept , i just think the internet is usefull for people who need help with certain things cuz search engines exist

[acoustic quarry]

There is one more logic

That century might be apocalypse

[brave zinc]

Definitely, yeah.

[hoary mica]

damn its cold up in albania

[acoustic quarry]

There is no war

Oops 🤐

[hoary mica]

guys i want to know ur general views on stuff like cancel-culture , idk why just ive wanted to listen to peoples opinions on it for a bigger understanding of the topic

[brave zinc]

It's not a war. It has always been a systematic ethnical cleaning of the people of Palestine.

[hoary mica]

wadahell

[brave zinc]

Isreal has killed a ridiculous amount of civilians [mostly children and teenagers] --even before oct 7th-- that it feels like an understatement to call it a war. It's like you are adding insult to injury.

[acoustic quarry]

Society might get disorganised

[hoary mica]

tbh ye

[acoustic quarry]

I was thinking what if everyone had same culture

[brave zinc]

It's just that Isreal has always and will probably always be vehemently supported by the great United States of America and Europe. That's why media outlets will never call it a genocide or an apartheid state --they don't want to be called anti-sematic or get de-funded or cancelled.

[acoustic quarry]

What if we all start calling us by our planet name instead of country name?

That's even better

I want to tell you something important guys

Our planet lost 40 years times because of it we came back in time and living again.

It's a time loop ➰

If you are 20 that means we was 60 in real

[austere dagger]

Oh

[thorny steeple]

alright, it's a difficult question. that's still not so specific, but I'll attempt to answer in a general sense though.

the Islamic position would depend on individual outcomes, it might take either of these positions:

1. compatible, such as the case with equality before law.
2. incompatible, such as the case with absolute equality between men and women.
3. partially compatible, such as democracy.

this is in reference to the Islamic Sharia law. preeminently, Sharia law is the criteria to whether a political matter is acceptable from an Islamic perspective or not.

[acoustic quarry]

Are you ChatGPT?

[thorny steeple]

nope. I'm totally human. 😂

ChatGPT doesn't say "nope". xD

I think. 🤔

[acoustic quarry]

This answer is bit too much systematic

Let's see ChatGPT answer on it

[thorny steeple]

I'm trying to be concise, professional, and consistent lately.

and more structured on how I phrase.

[thorny steeple]

OMG, alright man, you got me, I'm ChatGPT. xD

I'm just messing around as I've developed a sense of humor. xD

[acoustic quarry]

As a neutral AI, I don't have personal opinions. However, I can provide information. The French Revolution had a complex impact on various groups, including Muslims. While it introduced principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity, it also led to social and political upheavals that affected different communities differently. Some Muslims supported the revolution's ideals, hoping for greater equality, while others were concerned about the upheaval and its potential impact on their communities. It's a nuanced historical event with varied perspectives.

[thorny steeple]

jk ofc. xD

[thorny steeple]

see, I'm totally human.

[acoustic quarry]

ChatGPT response on you

[acoustic quarry]

You've provided a thoughtful analysis. Indeed, the compatibility between the principles of the French Revolution and Islamic perspectives can vary based on specific issues and interpretations of Islamic teachings. It's essential to consider the diverse views within the Muslim community and the complexity of aligning historical events with religious principles.

In simple terms, some aspects of the French Revolution, like equality before the law, may align with Islamic principles, while others, such as certain notions of absolute equality, could be seen as incompatible. The compatibility depends on how these principles relate to Islamic teachings, as judged by Sharia law.

[thorny steeple]

İs not İslam accepting equal woman with male in law and rights?

it's important to differentiate between the statement and the understanding. currently, I'm talking about the statement being delivered accurately, with little to no change at all.
understanding, however, is different. in Islam, scholars don't differ on the "Aqida" (theology/creed) it's the foundation of the religion and is not subject to different interpretations and understandings (if one differ in the "Aqida", they're not considered Muslim). for the case of "Fiqh", scholars might differ on interpretation of certain matters depending on their understanding.

in Islam, there are foundations, we could call them the roots, and there are branches. the roots are fixed, they cannot be interpreted at all. we take them literally. branches can sometimes, not always, be subject to different interpretations and "Ijtihad" (diligence), as long as they are compliant with the foundations.
that raises the question, how can I be sure of which school (Madhab) to follow. the answer is simple, we don't follow mere opinions, we follow interpretations backed up with evidence and proofs. the strongest is the more likely to be the correct one. we, as Muslims, are even sometimes called, the people of proof and evidence, due to how important proofs and evidence in Islam.

finally, the "Isnad" (chain of transmission), is not always made with signatures. in fact, it's almost only uses signatures in the case of "Ijaza" (chain of transmission of the Quran's memorization or recitation). Muslim scholars rely more on the methods of verification which are overwhelmingly accumulative. the fields of science that are used to verify the authenticity of Islamic information are very large and difficult to cover up in small messages like these, even I am ignorant of some of these fields' details, but I believe what I provided is fairly sufficient for any rational human being to accept.

[thorny steeple]

the default is that they are equal in law enforcement, unless it is stated otherwise in certain cases.

[formal scaffold]

https://tenor.com/view/honeycardi-monkey-monkeys-gif-21096895

[thorny steeple]

Thanks for the information. That's quite interesting. I've just got back home from a long day, and my brain is fried, so I might be missing something, but aren't you still relying on interpretation? Even if a bunch of people get together to interpret something, then decide amongst themselves who's interpretation is king, it's still interpretation. Am I missing something?

@thorny steeple by the way, in the "Ijaza", Shiekhs might also use seals combined with signatures. and there are certain Islamic organizations specialize in checking everything in regards and has prior information about them.

[formal scaffold]

Boukhari was crazy for checking out people that transmit the hadith, how's their morality and how it affects their transmission to any mission just to produce one hadith

[thorny steeple]

interpretations might give the impression that they follow their own whims. some interpretations are beyond the prospect of the statements, these are already revoked.
scholars don't decide among themselves which understanding is the best, each one gives an argument supported with evidence, and people follow the evidence. they might refute each other's claims as well sometimes. they primarily discourage people to follow their school (Madhab) without carefully checking the proof of every single matter they differ on with other schools.
the right thing is always following the religion not the people, that's what all Muslims will agree on.

[thorny steeple]

yes, his criteria of verifying the authenticity of Hadiths were super strict, that's why it's one of the most reliable and authentic compilation of Hadiths in the Islamic world.

я не знаю русский язык

[formal scaffold]

unfortunetly not all muslim follow faith some do follow people and idiolize them

[formal scaffold]

И донът кнов россиян тоо

[thorny steeple]

Islam is about following Allah and his religion, and completely submitting one's will to it. if people are idiolozing others (that is to be like worshiping them, or holding them in high regards that they might compete with Allah in the obedience and respect), they are mostly not Muslims any more.

[formal scaffold]

I get your point so they aren't muslims in the first place

I stand corrected then

[thorny steeple]

🤓 эм, сэр, вообще-то правильно писать рашн

тут смайлики с других серверов нельзя отправлять

I didn't understand what you meant.

sorry for late response.

[formal scaffold]

HIdaya, Guidance come only from allah, people can't guide you but can influence u or be a reason for one particular good aspect you pick up

[craggy sphinx]

I say that a person is a subjective being, and that means that he can make mistakes

I don’t know why you think this is accurate, because you give me reasons. This is an endless cycle

[craggy sphinx]

np my friend

[thorny steeple]

I'm still genuinely confused.

how do you define both, subjectivity and objectivity?

I suppose "subjective being" could imply a being with subjective experience, as humans experience. So, you might argue that two beings with subjective experiences can have an objective experience of witnessing lightning in the sky. I'll avoid getting into the philosophy of whether they experience it the same way, and our inability to truly confirm reality, etc. 😆 But, really, this is so weird to me, because even though the two people use their sensory capabilities to observe a thing happening, it doesn't mean they experience the same thing. This is the crux of the subjective experience.

[thorny steeple]

I agree with you on this definition, but I'm checking if Eisan has a misconception about both terms, or that he doesn't agree.

[craggy sphinx]

@thorny steeple
Subjectivity means you perceive it/based on feelings,which is not always correct. You may make mistakes, and that's okay.

objectivity cannot be proven. If you think you can, then you are wasting your time

[craggy sphinx]

I don't think so

[thorny steeple]

Subjectivity is about your own experience, whether it's your feelings, views, opinions, interpretations, etc. Objectivity is outside of anyone's subjective experience, akin to how reality truly is; again, on this part, I'll try to avoid getting into the philosophy of metaphysics and whether reality is as we think it is, etc. For example, when we use science to analyse and eventually understand the existence and workings of weather phenomena, the usual use of the word 'objectivity' would apply here, because it doesn't (presumably) rely on subjective experience. You can also think of one's own dream as a subjective experience.

[thorny steeple]

I don't believe objectivity can't be proven. 1 + 1 = 2, it's objectively true.
we could disagree, but I don't think there is any reason to believe objectivity cannot be proven. I think objectivity is proven all the time.

one of us must be correct, this is an objective fact. based on the law of non-contradication.

[thorny steeple]

I really believe that philosophy is mostly unproductive when it comes to these issues.

[thorny steeple]

I prefer to be accurate and consider the bigger picture, so when I explain these things, I feel compelled to clarify the details.

I believe certain things are self-evident, and that they are the base in which we prove other things.

[thorny steeple]

so as I. I'm being labelled verbose sometimes due to overexplaining, and I agree, sometimes I go overboard. xD

[thorny steeple]

I shan't argue with that. I have no idea either way, and I don't feel especially confident about it being one way or another. There are some interesting hypotheses and there is evidence to challenge the idea that reality is exactly as we experience it, though. You already engage in this area, by believing in abstract ideas like a god and I'm guessing a heaven and hell? Does your religion have a heaven and hell, BTW?

[thorny steeple]

in Islam, life is a mere test. your devoutness and deeds will determine whether you go to hell or paradise.

[thorny steeple]

Ah, then you're already engaging in metaphysics, I think. [it is; just confirmed it]

[silver gyro]

Hi

[simple solstice]

Always the same conversation

[silver gyro]

About what?

[thorny steeple]

by the way, don't you think that if you subjectively experiencing something, you objectively having it somewhere for you to experience, doesn't that prove objectivity?

[thorny steeple]

@thorny steeple @craggy sphinx

[silver gyro]

@thorny steeple yoo wazzup brother

[thorny steeple]

hey there. 👋

[silver gyro]

Hi hru

[thorny steeple]

decent, Alhamdulillah. how about you?

[silver gyro]

Alhamdulillah I’m fine brother.

[thorny steeple]

if you're referring to metaphysics as the branch of philosophy, then I don't think I engage in it.

[thorny steeple]

glad to hear that, I wish you everlasting well-being.

[thorny steeple]

You're having that thought based on your subjective experience. Almost certainly, nothing we experience can be truly proven to be objective, because it's all subjective. That's why I got caught up in philosophy for a moment there. Do you see blue as I see blue? Do you feel that cup as I feel that cup? Do you smell the rain like I smell the rain? Can you prove I'm real such that you know you're not the only thing experiencing something right now? It's seemingly impossible, due to our subjective experience. Even using science, even if we record results and gather data, we're doing all that from out subjective experience. 😆 It's really quite brain-breaking the more you think about it.

[thorny steeple]

I don't find any brain-break in it honestly. I think if a bunch of people are experiencing the same thing, they are objectively experiencing them, even if it's a subjective experience. 'cause the fact that you experienced it, is still as I just said, fact. it's objective.
Lol, let's change the topic. xD

[thorny steeple]

Think it through some more. You're missing some important details if you've not already gone 'WTF'. 😆 Admittedly, it took me quite a while to get it. If you're ever curious, look into metaphysics (ontology).

[thorny steeple]

I really can't understand it, really.
even if I assume I'm in an illusion of having a conversation on Discord setting on my chair and talking to someone named "OSM", I still feel this illusion objectively exists, it's a thing.
maybe I'm a robot and I don't have subjective experiences like others. Lol

maybe this illusion is essentially the world. maybe we're just defining the reality as illusion, but we are basically referring to the same thing. 🤷‍♂️

[thorny steeple]

By being religious and pondering things like alternative existences (e.g., heaven), religious experiences, and so on, you're exploring metaphysics via philosophy of religion.

[thorny steeple]

didn't know about that. I'm not so knowledgeable when it comes to philosophy, but I'll definitely look this up and understand it more.

İs Tenth plague of egypt (dying of first borns) a genocide?

[silver gyro]

Yooo Thanks brother 👐

[forest patio]

no

[wet sedge]

Hello I’m coming from the future

[thorny steeple]

How's it going in the future?

[whole thicket]

am i still handsome

[wet sedge]

I can see that

[wet sedge]

You have to find how ?

Merely you struggling but at the end of the day you can realise that

[whole thicket]

please

[wet sedge]

Yeah

Are you human or bot

[whole thicket]

half human

half bot

[wet sedge]

Nice come to private chat

I have a few question for you

[whole thicket]

😮

[wet sedge]

What

[whole thicket]

ok come

[wet sedge]

We need to get osm with us

[whole thicket]

whats that mean

[wet sedge]

He want to come over to see the bright side of future

[whole thicket]

osm

[thorny steeple]

Oh, no thank you. I'm about to go to bed anyway.

[wet sedge]

Oh really

[thorny steeple]

Yeah, right now actually. I didn't realise how late it is.

👋

[wet sedge]

Sweet dreams

[whole thicket]

so where is the questions

[wet sedge]

Sorry I forgot about it

[whole thicket]

yeahh so many information in your head right

i mean whole future

[craggy sphinx]

Sorry, for technical reasons I was unable to answer you

1 + 1=2 this is by definition

prove it

your experiencing are based on subjective perceptions. this is not always correct.

[serene birch]

aren't we all organic bots?

There are electronic bots, metallic bots, synthetic bots and various bots, we are also organic bots.

The term "Human" is something we try to create as if we were a superior being. A simple comforting sentence that will prevent us from destroying ourselves.

[formal scaffold]

https://tenor.com/view/wall-donald-trump-drumpf-build-a-wall-build-gif-5702065

[serene birch]

https://tenor.com/view/blackbloc-rally-gif-9153366

Continue moving in the direction you programmed. It will be painful for you to realize your self-consciousness.

don't question

Don't break the order (the order that doesn't exist)

The man with the flag(Anarchy) is fending off the Nazis.

colloquially "ACAB"

Police and soldiers do not protect the public. First, it protects the head of the state and its own existence. Sometimes they even shoots they own people.

?

How is this determined?

If we can communicate here today, most of them were found and established by poor and insignificant people.

It's just your opinion dude. We strive to build better instead of destroying. Of course, you are right that the old ones will disappear while new ones are being built.

As long as we are primitive beings, yes, "organic bots".

[craggy sphinx]

does this make any sense?

[jolly agate]

hello beauitfull souls.

[craggy sphinx]

hello

[serene birch]

Hello good morning

Nice nickname, I like it

[jolly agate]

morning

[serene birch]

Accepting things and believing and obeying unconditionally is our biggest monster.

[craggy sphinx]

If I don't see the point in this, then I'm wasting my time

paramount - reason

Good luck!

[jolly agate]

because they scary.

[serene birch]

If you want, let's put you in the same cage with 4 hungry lions?

than you'll learn why. 😄

[craggy sphinx]

@ornate siren hello

[serene birch]

1 lion totally enough for you but I want it a lil more extreme

https://tenor.com/view/man-mauled-roar-lion-dont-gif-11503153

Unfortunately this guy killed by lion

I'm vegetarian I'm not killing any animals sorry

[jolly agate]

an honourable death

[serene birch]

This was not a suitable sentence for your beautiful nickname. 😦

[thorny steeple]

no problem my friend.

[serene birch]

?

tf dude

[jolly agate]

i do not mind.

[serene birch]

sometimes people, they don't know what they're saying.

[jolly agate]

you good brother.

[craggy sphinx]

hello, hru?

[jolly agate]

i dont think you do understand the weight behind those words.

think carefully.

[thorny steeple]

I see where you're coming from. yes, it is very fundamental.

[thorny steeple]

I'm doing good, Alhamdulillah, how about you? 🤍

[craggy sphinx]

I'm great, thanks 🙂

[thorny steeple]

here you gave one definition about subjectivity, what about objectivity, what is your definition of it?
and if possible, try to provide concrete examples of both.

[craggy sphinx]

objectivity cannot be proven, since you are a subjective being, which means that you can be wrong

Earlier you gave an example 1 + 1 = 2, this is the definition, but what about its proof?
if you give examples like “you have one apple and plus one apple, the total is 2. how do you know these are really apples? it may be that the example is being interpreted incorrectly. It's possible that these aren't apples at all.

that's why I say you can't be 100% sure of this

you give me reasons, it's an endless cycle

thus, it is impossible to establish whether it is true or not

[thorny steeple]

yeah. apart from that. I want to hear your definition of objectivity.

and an example of subjectivity, as well as objectivity.

a concrete example.

[craggy sphinx]

relationship of subject to object

[craggy sphinx]

your thoughts

[thorny steeple]

prove it.

[craggy sphinx]

I can't

[thorny steeple]

there you go.

[craggy sphinx]

I have some guesses

[thorny steeple]

if you can't prove subjectivity while claiming it's the only thing that is true, while demanding a proof for objectivity? you need to question your own belief first.

[craggy sphinx]

where did I say that I proved it?

[thorny steeple]

I said you can't.

[craggy sphinx]

I question everything.

people are rational and subjective beings.

[thorny steeple]

then why don't you question your question of everything?
what kind of explanation do you want from the other person? on what basis do you want them to prove something? you're asking for a contradiction.

[craggy sphinx]

not really

I have already said that it is impossible to prove objectivity. if you think this is not the case, then you will have to come up with a good explanation.

I only have assumptions

[thorny steeple]

what could be a good explanation for you? you can simply deny any.

[craggy sphinx]

this is not a denial

you give me reasons

[thorny steeple]

I could put my self in your shoes, and say, you can't also prove subjectivity, maybe everything is essentially objective. 🤷‍♂️

[craggy sphinx]

maybe, but I can't be sure about it

[thorny steeple]

then you can't make a positive claim that objectivity is unprovable. to say objectivity is unprovable is to say objectivity objectively doesn't exist, and that everything is subjective.

[craggy sphinx]

no, I can't be sure about that

[thorny steeple]

do you get the point I'm trying to make here?

it's a contradiction.

[craggy sphinx]

no , you say that I am sure that objectivity cannot be proven, but I don’t think I am sure of this

as I said earlier, I have only assumptions

[thorny steeple]

what I wanna say is that, if you question everything, you'll end up having nothing. this will most certain lead you to nihilism, where people believe everything doesn't exist.

there should be a foundation for judging things around us, otherwise, you can't even question, 'cause question is a part of this foundation.

I hope you get my point, 'cause it is kind of simple, yet a bit difficult to understand.

[craggy sphinx]

friend, I don't have enough charge, I might disappear

[craggy sphinx]

I explained the difference between nihilism and skepticism a long time ago

nihilism is stupid I think

[thorny steeple]

I know, what I'm saying is that, there is a significant chance skepticism will lead you to nihilism.

you can't argue with a nihilist, he doesn't have the foundation in which things can be proven, he might doubt logic itself.

it's a really hopeless state to be in, and that's why I believe philosophy is mostly unproductive, especially these branches of it. it's good to be skeptic and to not easily accept anything, otherwise, you can easily be fooled, but not taking it to the extreme.

[humble lion]

Flare

[thorny steeple]

objective truth refers to the knowledge outside of one's perspectives or biases. subjective truth, on the other hand, is based on personal experiences, beliefs, and interpretations.
they might align sometimes.

[humble lion]

[thorny steeple]

yo Elllnd! how is it going mate? 🤍

[humble lion]

Good since u asked how are u?

[thorny steeple]

https://tenor.com/view/hug-embrace-my-man-bros-bro-hug-gif-15504535

[thorny steeple]

I'm good, Alhamdulillah.

[humble lion]

Be good always

[thorny steeple]

@craggy sphinx
I hope you think about what I told you, you might conclude with a real productive and positive stance. also, don't get too much involved in philosophy, I think it pollutes people's mind.
I mean for real, if someone heard me saying "1 + 1 = 2" is not objectively true and that it can be something else. they will definitely think I lost it. 😂

[icy mauve]

Hi

[jolly agate]

imagain there is a white room, you are allowed to stand at anywhere inside the white room but there is a condition you are always have to look at the center at which there is a 5 meters tall cylinder standing. Now if i were to started adding random people inside the white room and ask them what you see at the center. what do you think the response would be. @craggy sphinx

[craggy sphinx]

ask them to explain it. If they can't do it, then you're wasting your time.

[craggy sphinx]

no

[lavish finch]

What are you talking about?

[craggy sphinx]

nihilism and skepticism are completely different ideas

The nihilist sees no meaning in anything, although he needs it

[jolly agate]

trying to give an example for objectivity

[jolly agate]

Objectivity means being fair and unbiased, sticking to facts without letting personal feelings or opinions influence your judgment.

[craggy sphinx]

why do you think doubt can lead to nihilism?

[thorny steeple]

sorry, but I won't. these basic facts that are self-evident would be the common ground for me and other person to prove other facts. it is what it is.

[craggy sphinx]

I think you are confusing the concepts of "deny" and "reject"

[lavish finch]

Extreme skepticism does become a dead end

[craggy sphinx]

np

[thorny steeple]

yeah maybe, I don't like these kind of philosophies anyway. it doesn't matter as long as you get the point.

[jolly agate]

Endless doubt can make people question what gives life meaning or anything. When this doubt lingers it might lead to nihilism a belief that life has no inherent purpose or value.

[lavish finch]

Hey

[jolly agate]

hello

[craggy sphinx]

I don't think so

[jolly agate]

elaborate

[lavish finch]

Someone might doubt that knowledge is possible and that becomes an endless loop because they think they know they don’t know anything. I think Socrates fell into this mistake.

[craggy sphinx]

sorry but I don't think you understand

[jolly agate]

you still havet given answer to that one.

[thorny steeple]

I remember reading Plato's Apology and being really confused as to whether he (Socrates) thought he was wise or not. I think he was either just appealing to the court or he was torn between feeling wise but having the awareness one cannot know everything or even know for certain anything. Perhaps both, of course.

[thorny steeple]

what is it that I don't understand?

@craggy sphinx
we can agree on disagreeing. it's totally fine. 🤝

[lavish finch]

What is it that you don’t understand. I think that’s a good question when someone says you don’t understand.

[craggy sphinx]

I had no goal to prove that I was right

[lavish finch]

What is your goal then?

What is your goal for participating in this conversation?

I’m asking everyone.

Including anyone who might be reading silently

[jolly agate]

what if they not apples rather two objects and you have one object someone else gave you another object how many objects you got.

[thorny steeple]

You piqued my interest the moment you mentioned my favorite philosopher. 🙂

[jolly agate]

to get enligenten

[thorny steeple]

That, and I'm curious to see whether some understanding can be found in the discussion, and what I can learn from it.

[lavish finch]

I see, thanks

Flare?

[thorny steeple]

I was hoping he changes his mind about philosophy and that objective facts exist. but seems like he doesn't want to.

So, this is similar to our discussion yesterday.

[thorny steeple]

it is essentially our discussion yesterday continuing.

[lavish finch]

Flare would you be open to changing your own mind instead?

[thorny steeple]

yes.

although, I don't think you can prove that things are umprovable, it's a contradiction, 'cause you want to prove and yet claiming things are unprovable.

[jolly agate]

a liars paradox indeed.

[lavish finch]

So then you could change your mind about wanting to change someone else.

[thorny steeple]

I have subjective experience, because my experience is only my own, to my knowledge.

Now, for all I know, reality isn't what I think it is, or even real at all, and all of you are not real.

You come along, telling me you're having the same experience. Whose experience is real? Can we rely on each other's experience? How do we prove that which is outside of our subjective experience (so called 'reality') is real? How can we prove we exist as two separate beings each with our own separate subjective experience? It's all seemingly quite impossible, because we assess objectivity with our subjective experience.

[thorny steeple]

yes I can.

Here's a scenario that might help.

Assumption: We're all living in a computational simulation ran by some sort of intelligence, and each of us is entirely simulated. We have no awareness of the 'true' reality; that which is outside of the simulation.

I exist. You exist. We each have our subjective experience. Now, in this scenario, within the frame of the simulation, the simulated reality is the objective truth. It's objectively true that trees exist, because the simulation is creating this. Regardless of how we think or feel, regardless of what our senses tell us, and regardless of how we interpret our place in this simulated reality, trees still exist as they are.

The thing is, in this scenario, we (you and I, here in this server) have the incredible benefit of knowing what objective reality is, within the frame or scope of the simulated reality.

In the real world? We have none of that.

[thorny steeple]

@thorny steeple
I genuinely still on this stance, can't understand any of what you're saying, it seems to me like one shooting himself in the foot. exactly like saying, you can prove that things are unprovable.
refer back to the message I'm replying to, and tell me, what do you genuinely think about it?

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how else to explain it. Perhaps if you sit with it for a while, it might click. Not everything is easily or instantly understood.

It's worth noting that understanding in a view doesn't require that the view is also yours. For example, I understand the concept of destiny, but it's not a view of our existence that I hold.

[thorny steeple]

It sounds like you're essentially saying what Descartes said: Cogito, ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. It's a fair point. If you're saying that at least one single piece of objective truth is that you in some way exist, because you're here thinking about your existence, then I think that's a valid point.

[thorny steeple]

no, I don't reason reason, it would be a contradiction. what I'm saying is that you have the foundation in which you can reason, you can't question that foundation, 'cause questioning is among this foundation. I hope you understand me now.

your last sentence is exactly what I mean.

[thorny steeple]

I think I sort of see what you mean. The issue still remains, however, that you cannot prove, for example, that the tree is a tree, or that the tree even exists. How are you going to assess this? Using scientific instruments? Sure, great, except those are understood through sensory perception. That's not going to work. You could grab a friend and have two experiments to try to verify the tree is a tree and that the tree exists, but you run into the same issue plus the issue of whether the other 'person' is a person and exists! 😆 It gets pretty absurd. This, if I've explained it well, is essentially the problem with the subject of reality and objective truth. It's unverifiable. What Descartes said strikes me as a poetic way of describing solipsism.

Keep in mind that our perception of reality is ever-changing, and often faulty. We have numerous cognitive biases and failures in reasoning. Our memories are known to be unreliable; false memories, suppressed memories, implanted memories, we forget, etc. Some are prone to suggestion and manipulation. Given how clearly faulty a human body and mind is, it really doubles down on this issue of reality and objective truth.

[uneven pelican]

If it is leading you to nowhere then why should even bother it?
Also if we can't hold on to anything how can we even think?

[thorny steeple]

our faultiness of reality is exactly what proves the objective truth, 'cause there is something outside of our perception that we were once wrong about and came to realize it's different than what we thought. if you see a tree, and you verify via another person, why don't we admit that it's objectively a tree, even if it's in a simulation. I mean it exists within the simulation, or within the illusion.
see, it won't get us anywhere. I believe objectivity is inescapable.

xD

[thorny steeple]

exactly, if one would to question even the most fundamental facts in the world. why doesn't he also question his own question? how can he prove that his ability to question even exists according to his claim? 🤷‍♂️

it's exactly shooting yourself in the foot. that's what I believe.

[thorny steeple]

Again, all of this is done through subjective experience.

[thorny steeple]

but subjective experience objectively exists. that's what I'm saying. 😂

I mean, if I appeal to this logic of the inability to prove anything.

totally not what I truely believe.

[thorny steeple]

Yeah, remember, understanding how a belief works doesn't mean you're required to believe it. I can understand a religious belief, but it doesn't mean I must believe in it.

It sounds like you do understand it, but that you're struggling to get past your disbelief in it.

[thorny steeple]

yes, I agree.

[thorny steeple]

surely I don't understand it. I mean I understand what you're saying, but I don't understand the conclusion.

There are various philosophical views I don't understand and some I understand but disagree with. I disagree with fatalism, but I (think) I understand it. Philosophy isn't science; it has a lot of history cooperating with science, but it's not itself a science.

more accurately, I think it's all a contradiction.

[uneven pelican]

I think subjective effect is true but our mind can't handle with this too much controversy.

[thorny steeple]

I like the idea that the one thing I can maybe be sure of, is that I exist in some capacity or another, because I'm here thinking and experiencing. You can feel the same way. Even if we're in totally different planes of existence, even if you don't objectively exist, you exist to me, and vice versa. I think that's the gist of Descartes' view.

Attila the Hun in the chat?

[chrome pier]

first point: do you know the meaning of nihilism? do you know anything about Nietzsche or Arthur Schopenhauer? have you ever learned philosophy?

second point: comparing nihilism and skepticism is synonymous with: you know nothing. And I'll give you some arguments about it.

-Nihilism arises with Nietzsche, a movement against Platonist philosophy. With Platonist philosophy people create a perfect world based on superior entities (traditional philosophy). Although Nietzsche did not share the same idea (neither did Kant), therefore his philosophy was based on changing this (basically ideological doctrines).

-Nietzsche uses nihilism to explain "God is dead and now you have nothing"; with it people enter a state of: being aware that their ideal world has collapsed, that they were living in a lie and that everything they had was lost.

-Nihilism has two ways of expressing itself: a positive one (accepting reality and moving on) or a negative one (sinking into depression because everything they had has collapsed).

another point: skepticism was used by the sophists to question the arche (first principle or foundation or principle).

Later skeptics would use it to doubt absolutely everything.

Third point: importance of nihilism.

Thanks to Nietzche and Kant we have been able to distance ourselves from those groups that had us indoctrinated, whether it was the Church, legal tutors or absolute monarchs (in the 18th century).

Therefore, thanks to that: "because I must believe what others tell me"; Sapere Aude and nihilism arise to begin to demolish doctrines.

fourth point: etymology of philosophy

• "love of wisdom" --> filos (love) + sophia (wisdom) from Greek.
  Philosophy is the mother of all sciences, for example: Democritus (a pre-Socratic) was the first to talk about the atom or Pythagoras who apart from being a mathematician was a philosopher who talked about the relationships between people (reducing them to numbers).

[thorny steeple]

Little birdie told me we wus discussing philosophy

[chrome pier]

Therefore, to say that philosophy does not serve and has not served for anything is to ignore reality.

First of all because philosophy is present in any field: in companies, in schools, in debates and in absolutely everything. Although it is reflected in various ways: for example, business philosophers who are in charge of business ethics.

In short, I hope that with these arguments you can learn something new.

[thorny steeple]

alright, I was wrong. calm down. Lol

[thorny steeple]

Well said here. We owe a lot to philosophy.

[chrome pier]

yes

[thorny steeple]

I have not claimed philosophy is utterly bad. I said these branches of philosophy are unproductive and I believe they are polluting people's minds. that's what I said.

[uneven pelican]

I don't think we should focus the west nihilist writers etc. because there are so many aestern writers too but most of the time they do't get the attention they deserve.

[chrome pier]

just read it, to err is human. We can learn from each other, my words are not absolute truth.

[thorny steeple]

I hope you keep it less heated.

[chrome pier]

is your opinion, not mine. But i need arguments about your words

[thorny steeple]

I mean I certainly understand your thought process, Flare. Sometimes these discussions can seem unfruitful and more like a hippie on shrooms saying "I think we're all one dude. Love and peace", but I believe these are still interesting things to consider. I don't understand why everything would have to have a practical use. Understanding other people's perspectives and thought processes could lead to more empathy and compassion in the world

[thorny steeple]

@chrome pier
please read the whole thing. I said I don't care that much about these branches of philosophy. my definition of nihilism was, perhaps, wrong. but it's not the term that I was trying to use, it was the definition itself.

[chrome pier]

you can tag me?, there is a lot of conversation going on in between

[craggy sphinx]

For something to 'exist' there must be a reality. What even is reality? How can we know something which appears to us, is really there?

Like when you hallucinate you see things which aren't there.We see things which aren't there, we don't see things which are there.How can we tell what is which?

[thorny steeple]

what is the goal of philosophy?

[thorny steeple]

Why do you say that? Maybe I hold more existentialist views, but life having no inherent meaning allows me to take it more easy, to search what makes me happy, what drives me, to give purpose to my own life.

[chrome pier]

for me?

[thorny steeple]

yes.

[thorny steeple]

I think it helps develop out critical thinking, but I don't have any objective sources to back up this belief

[thorny steeple]

this will make me repeat myself again. I already understand what you're saying, and I gave my response earlier.

[craggy sphinx]

hello
People have mental attachments. These can be strong attachments, but also simple ones. For instance, I like to have tea every day. It's a nice flavor, a healthy habit. I see no problems with it. Yet, it is nice and it contributes to a better day.

A nihilist would say the tea is meaningless. That I might as well not drink tea, as it doesn't matter to them. But if it has a nice flavor and is healthy it does matter. If I'm more happy, it does matter.

Why it matters, is because things should be healthy, mentally and physically. That way it can thrive. And for things to thrive is important, because it makes life better.

I would agree with a nihilist that life seems random. However, that doesn't mean things lack purpose or meaning.

[chrome pier]

I would have liked to dedicate myself to it. I think it is the basis of dialectics and learning.

I mean: not to stay with one version of the facts, but to learn about everything. As for example in the Academy that Plato founded to expand knowledge in Athens.

It is like an art to be able to think (I don't say to think in the right way, but to think beyond what we are used to know).

[craggy sphinx]

sorry but I don't think you explained

[thorny steeple]

what is the goal of it then?

isn't it to understand things around you?

[thorny steeple]

To better understand ourselves, how we think, how we feel, morality, ethics, religious belief, the nature or reality, etc.

[thorny steeple]

Is it truly the belief of a nihilist to discredit any meaning that a person gives to his life? I would agree that drinking tea ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but I like it, it improves my life, so why not do it anyway.
Granted, I don't know enough about nihilism to make a claim about it, but I didn't think nihilism was as simple as "Nothing matters or has meaning, so you might as well not do anything that you believe to be meaningful"

[thorny steeple]

if some branches of philosophy tell you, you can't understand those things, it's impossible. are they unproductive then? they fail to reach their own goal. 🤷‍♂️

[craggy sphinx]

there is a direct denial . so I think it's stupid

[chrome pier]

critical capacity

[thorny steeple]

Can you fully understand your religion and your god? Since I assume you don't consider yourself in any way as powerful, wise, or knowledgeable as your god, I'll assume the answer is no. Given this, is it then a waste of time?

[thorny steeple]

Agreed. It really encourages critical thinking.

[thorny steeple]

I think you're misunderstanding the point nihilists are trying to make. Not sure about it though, I'd have to educate myself to better understand it

I see how you'd reach such a conclusion within a nihilist framework, and I would agree such a conclusion would prove to be useless to us humans

[chrome pier]

understand them as such you cannot understand them because for each philosopher things mean many things.

For example: knowledge for platon is reminiscence (remembering the innate ideas that have been eliminated when your soul has gone into your body) and then for empiricists like Hobbes knowledge was extracted through the senses (i.e. what we see) since we are a tabula rasa (a blank paper and knowledge will try to learn through the senses).

[chrome pier]

yes

[thorny steeple]

By your logic, it's pointless to continue living, because we can never truly reach enlightenment. We have a short amount of time on Earth. I suppose this is a gist of nihilism itself. Anyway, I think it's about the journey, not just the goal. We seek to know, but we can learn on the way.

[craggy sphinx]

nihilism denies everything. this is not skepticism, which many people confuse with this idea.

Do you see the difference between "deny" and "reject"?

[thorny steeple]

ah, too many oppositions against me at the same time. can you lower the heat a little guys?

[thorny steeple]

I don't see how denying everything would be so bad

[uneven pelican]

I agree journey should be the main focus.

[craggy sphinx]

who determines whether it is good or bad?

[thorny steeple]

I can't remember exactly what nihilism itself entails, but I can tell you how I feel as an existential nihilist:

There is no inherent meaning or purpose to existence, but we can make our own, as you've done with your religious belief; it gives you purpose and gives your existence meaning.

[thorny steeple]

What heat, your view is just being challenged. I don't think people are here to be malicious or to argue for the sake of arguing

[uneven pelican]

I think it puts you in the middle neither possitive or negative.

[chrome pier]

it is quite complex to explain and my level of English is lowit is quite complex to explain and my level of English is low

[craggy sphinx]

yes

[thorny steeple]

That's a subjective matter. That's why I'm asking you why you think it would be bad to deny everything

[thorny steeple]

that's not what I'm saying. what I'm saying is that if these branches of philosophy yield nothing at all. if they don't explain anything at all and that they tell you you can't even begin to explain things around you, they are unproductive, or they are even pointless.

Yeah, I'm certainly not sat here raging and spitting all over the screen. 😆 I'm all good. Enjoying the discussion. 🙂

[thorny steeple]

It seems pretty good, so far!

[craggy sphinx]

Don't know. For some, killing people is good. why is that bad?

[thorny steeple]

that's not what I mean, I mean that one at a time would be appreciated, otherwise, my view won't be challenged 'cause I can't even read and respond to everything.

[uneven pelican]

Do you mean that they are making life unliveable?

[thorny steeple]

Morality is a whole nother can of worms, that I would like to leave unopened for now, lol.

[thorny steeple]

I mean that they block you from moving forward, therefore they are unproductive.

[uneven pelican]

Because I think you are right more realism and nihilism makes everything unliveable.

[thorny steeple]

Oh, I see what you mean. I'd push back by saying it absolutely does yield something. As mentioned, it encourages critical thinking. Questioning things like reality and our existence can lead to a richer understanding of our place in the universe, encouraging new philosophical ideas and thoughts. Even with all this aside, it can be fun and engaging.

[thorny steeple]

Ah, that's understandable. Yeah, it can be kind of chaotic, a discord server. It's like 6 different people all talking at the same time

[craggy sphinx]

but you didn't care about morality a few minutes ago

[uneven pelican]

You right if nothing makes sences why bother?

[thorny steeple]

When did I say anything like that?

[craggy sphinx]

“does not make sense” With such thoughts, you can do anything, ending with suicide.

[thorny steeple]

Just because something doesn't make sense, doesn't mean there is no sense.

[uneven pelican]

I would be realy happy if you can explain that more.

[chrome pier]

thanks, thanks. Although I don't really think I'm understood much since it's not my language.

[thorny steeple]

how is telling you that you know nothing and you'll never know anything yields anything? if you doubt everything, even the most fundamental facts that you essentially depend on to question and prove, I don't see how productive is this honestly.

[thorny steeple]

What does not make sense?

[uneven pelican]

But you can't there will still be limits.

[thorny steeple]

Sure! Basically, you might not understand something and to you it might appear to be nonsense, but it doesn't mean there is nothing to learn from it; that there's no sense to be made from it.

[thorny steeple]

it's even annoying. you want to respond, but you just can't.

[craggy sphinx]

yes, you will be killed before you can kill anyone else

[thorny steeple]

Yeah, I see. And when you've responded, there are 4 more responses you have to respond to

[versed escarp]

Hi, @chrome pier could you dm to discuss something?

[thorny steeple]

exactly.

[chrome pier]

okey

[uneven pelican]

But we were talking for everybody if we look every person each ...

[craggy sphinx]

ok...too much murder, that's what your nihilism leads to @thorny steeple 😅

[thorny steeple]

I don't think it does, necessarily, no. People will murder people regardless, even when they "know" it's morally wrong. Simply denying objective morality won't make you a murderer.

[thorny steeple]

You're replying to my post which itself provides possible answers.

[craggy sphinx]

this is not objective morality

[thorny steeple]

I simply don't get why nihilism would lead to murder then. I would need some strong evidence in order to believe that

Isn't it part of many theistic beliefs to claim that you can never know God's will? God's plan and such like. Yet, religious people have spent thousands of years trying to understand how their god or gods works or work and what he, she, or it wants.

You could argue that it's pointless to try to understand religious scripture, because it's all open to interpretation of the semantics, translations, and ancient culture, traditions, beliefs, etc. Yet, religious people continue, because it is felt as though there is something to gain from it on the way.

I don't think "I don't think anything matters, therefore I should just go on a murdering spree". I don't see how that adds up

Because I still, as an individual, believe that murder is wrong. Where this belief comes from, I don't know, and it's not worth discussing right now, fact of the matter, the feeling is there, regardless of how I look at the world

[craggy sphinx]

I don't know. how do you know that this is not true?

[thorny steeple]

If someone truly doesn't care and thinks nothing matters, I could see them deciding to do whatever comes to mind, because it doesn't matter. This includes murder. That being said, I don't think it's a given, and I'd say this is evidently the case.

We've no evidence for inherent meaning and purpose at all, hence why I'm an existential nihilist, so, if anything, we're likely already experiencing life without inherent meaning or purpose. People murder and do other horrible acts, but people also do many great things. We seem to derive our own meaning and purpose.

[thorny steeple]

Well, I mean, how do I know anything, ay? I just do as I see fit. And I don't see how murdering someone would fit

[craggy sphinx]

if you didn't see the point in anything, you wouldn't do it.

you would say why am I wasting my time if it doesn't make sense?

[thorny steeple]

Not necessarily. We still feel enjoyment. I'm a good example of this. I'm confident there is no inherent meaning or purpose to existence, yet I get out of bed in the morning; I learn, I laugh, I enjoy, I grow, I create, etc.

[thorny steeple]

We must not conflate life having no inherent purpose or point or meaning with our subjective experience, in which life does feel meaningful to some extent

[craggy sphinx]

Why do you get out of bed if you don’t see the point in it?

[thorny steeple]

Because he makes his own purpose, in layman's terms

[thorny steeple]

You're assuming I see no point in it. This is why I used the word 'inherent'. Inherent, at least in this case, implies objectivity. I find my own meaning and purpose, so for me, my purpose for getting out of bed is to live, to learn, to laugh, etc.

[craggy sphinx]

"meaning" is what is meaningful to you.

if you think nothing makes sense, then why do you get out of bed?

[thorny steeple]

Our own subjectivity (the intuitive feeling of meaning, purpose) can coexist with objectivity (which nihilists argue is void of any meaning or purpose)

😑 Dang. 😆 That's a lot. 🤓

[craggy sphinx]

I don't think so

[silver gyro]

Heheh 😅

[craggy sphinx]

this is silly

[thorny steeple]

No, you think it is.

[craggy sphinx]

" I don't see the point in drinking water, but I drink it "
Why drink at all if you don't see the point?

[thorny steeple]

Yes, same

[thorny steeple]

As an existential nihilist, I want to live, thus I see the point in drinking water. The keyword is I, because it's a subjective thing.

The point is survival, which I would argue is just a human instinct that doesn't necessarily need to be congruent with the reality of the situation

[silver gyro]

Hi

[craggy sphinx]

so does this make sense to you or not? why are you walking around?

[silver gyro]

Half Palestinian

[craggy sphinx]

please don't change the subject

[silver gyro]

Thanks brother

[thorny steeple]

No, it fits neatly within the subject we're discussing.
We, as humans, value our survival, the "universe" might be indifferent. It's an example of subjective human experience and the reality that nihilists propose, coexisting

[thorny steeple]

Because I want to, as a result of wanting to survive, wanting to experience, wanting to learn, etc. Everything I do, provided it's in my control, I do because I want to or I feel compelled to in some way, based on my wants or perceived needs.

Let's look at core beliefs, again. I have a core belief which states that "I must be a good person." This is a fundamental belief that I hold dear. Many things I think, big and small, can be watered down to this core idea. I think almost all of us actually have this core belief.

As a result of this core belief, I strive to learn, because I feel that being a learned person is a good thing, thus I have a good chance at being a good person. I enjoy this conversation, because I want to understand others and share knowledge, and I feel that helps me be a good person.

These are all things that I do based on that core belief. Whether or not I feel there is inherent purpose or meaning to existence, the belief and the resulting effects are present.

[craggy sphinx]

““ I don't see the point in eating, but I have to eat for my existence””

Nihilism is very good, yes

[craggy sphinx]

you eat this so as not to die. you do it to keep fit.

Why are you doing all this if it doesn't make sense to you?

[thorny steeple]

Nihilism isn't "not seeing the point", it's arguing that there is no inherent point.

[thorny steeple]

I've explained this a few times now, extensively.

[craggy sphinx]

”” Nihilism is a philosophical doctrine that belongs to the category of negative philosophies. It is based on the idea that the world has no meaning and value, and nothing awaits a person after ““

you added this on your own

[craggy sphinx]

explain this

[thorny steeple]

Due to the way it's worded, 'inherent' is implied. Ideally, 'inherent' should've been used in that text, to be clearer to the reader that it's talking about inherent meaning and purpose, not subjective meaning and purpose.

I eat food because it's in my human nature. My body signals to me that I'm hungry, which makes me desire food. And when I eat food, certain chemicals are released that basically tell you "good job" When we look at it from a standpoint of evolution, we evolved these desires in order to stay alive.

The reality: We need food to stay alive
The human experience: I'm hungry, I'm gonna eat something because I won't feel hungry and it will make me feel good

[craggy sphinx]

you don't have to eat it. but you do it. Why?

[thorny steeple]

Once again, I've explained this repeatedly, extensively. As has Doom.

[thorny steeple]

Because my body tells me it's a good idea, essentially. Because of this need for survival

I explained it pretty clearly. I'm not going to repeat myself

Eisan, it may just take some time thinking about it to understand what we mean. As I said to Flare earlier, not everything is understood instantly. Give it some time. Ponder on it.

As I also said to Flare, it's not a matter of having the same view, but understanding the view itself.

[craggy sphinx]

this shouldn't make sense to you if you're a nihilistic

[thorny steeple]

Yup, it makes total sense from a nihilist point of view.

[craggy sphinx]

but you eat it because it makes sense for your body

[thorny steeple]

Yes

[craggy sphinx]

why don't you give up food? it doesn't make sense, does it?

you may not listen to your body

[thorny steeple]

Oh, I have. But I'm not going to get into my depressive episodes

[craggy sphinx]

it's stupid, "I need this, but I don't see the point"

[thorny steeple]

Again, you're misrepresenting my view entirely

[craggy sphinx]

you speak from the side of nihilism, which denies meaning in everything.

where is the distortion?

[thorny steeple]

Inherent meaning.

It's an important distinction to make

[craggy sphinx]

give a definition

[thorny steeple]

Sure

[thorny steeple]

You have the Internet at your fingertips.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/inherent

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inherent

[craggy sphinx]

"exists" means that it must correspond to reality.

how do you know that this is really true? How do you define reality?

[thorny steeple]

Hope that helps. I'm disengaging again, because I feel this is once again unproductive, and I'm too ill at the moment.

Inherent meaning: Meaning that exists regardless of your subjective experience.

👋

[craggy sphinx]

How do you know?

[thorny steeple]

I don't, and neither do you

[craggy sphinx]

does it make sense to assert this?

[craggy sphinx]

good luck!

[thorny steeple]

Yes, because a belief in inherent meaning is something that can neither be proven nor disproven. Therefore, it makes sense to assert it can't be known

[fathom vine]

With easy explanation they dont see the point of drinking or eating but it just has to be done. (Instinct of survival)
Basically they dont see at all the point of existence its like we have ben born to die and be forgotten

In th other side its those who believe in something(religion, God or nature)
Which it gives us an point or a “job” to live and makes worthy in our mind the existence

[craggy sphinx]

faith has nothing to do with the definition of meaning.

I think it is bad to believe things.There is no benefit, only creates delusion.
why does believing mean that it makes sense?

[fathom vine]

Its just two diferent points of view. Which there is no “right” on both sides . 🤷‍♂️

[thorny steeple]

Nihilist don't believe in inherent meaning. I was just stating that inherent meaning is unfalsifiable.
I also disagree with the assertion that it's bad to have faith. People derive meaning from their religion for example. Gives certain people hope and a sense of purpose or direction. I myself am not religious, so I derive meaning elsewhere

[craggy sphinx]

you claim that it makes sense, but at the same time you say that it does not lend itself to subjective analysis

there is no benefit in faith. it's just faith

[craggy sphinx]

.

[craggy sphinx]

in other words, you believe that it is useful

[thorny steeple]

Nihilism, as a framework to live your life, makes sense. I'm not saying in any way that it's the truth. I'm saying that as a philosophy to live by, it can work. Like I said before, it's even empowering to me. But I digress. I need to get going

I'll talk to you, next time 👋

[craggy sphinx]

nihilism doesn't say it makes sense/says it doesn't make sense

[craggy sphinx]

np

good luck!

[thorny steeple]

Thank you! Have a nice rest of your day, yourself

[craggy sphinx]

faith does not bring any benefit. You will always make mistakes and not benefit from them.

you will think it is right because you believe in it

Children need faith so they can calm down

I'll give you an example:

Let's say you are a child, and people bully you. You might be of the opinion that people are bullies. You have a reason to believe this, because you are being bullied by people.If you grow up, you will realise, people aren't bullies, you become more informed, better aware.

Why keep stuck to the opinion people are bullies? Why believe that and never change it?It makes you dumber no?

What if you meet someone. They seem friendly and nice. Your opinion is they are a good person.
If you believe it, then ur stuck with it.

Lets say the next day, they do terrible things. They lied the first day, the second day you see they torture and hurt people. Will you still believe they are a good person? How is this any better than changing your belief?

faith is based on your opinion, isn't it?

if you say that I believe that doing good to others is good, then why should it be a belief?

Why can't I just think about it?

in the same way, to assert the transcendence of things while labeling it is stupid

it makes sense because it is

why does this make sense? how do you know this?

this is just my opinion

[silver gyro]

What are you talking about may I can ask?

[craggy sphinx]

believe and nihilism

[spring sedge]

maybe it is about the religion

[silver gyro]

What is nihilism?

[spring sedge]

the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless.
"they condemned the show for its cynicism and nihilism"

[craggy sphinx]

it's not only religion

[spring sedge]

i find it in google

then, what did it conclude?

[craggy sphinx]

it is an idea that sees no meaning in anything

[spring sedge]

yes

[craggy sphinx]

I think it's stupid

"I need to drink water, but there's no point in that"

[silver gyro]

Ok thanks for the explanation brother

[craggy sphinx]

yes?

[silver gyro]

💀😅

[spring sedge]

sometime people love nihilism, maybe they just complain about the environment

[craggy sphinx]

np, but you don’t need to limit yourself to me. Look for more information

[spring sedge]

they do not really be a nihilism

[silver gyro]

Yeah I will do it later

[craggy sphinx]

maybe

[silver gyro]

Is it like I’m saying that I’m walking so it just doesn’t make sense to say that?

[spring sedge]

yes, it is similar

[fathom vine]

It more like I writed up at least that is what i think.
They just have the idea that we born and die after and be forgotten

So that what mostly makes no point for anything

[silver gyro]

Ahh okok

[fathom vine]

If there is no believe in a “duty” or “job to do in this world “

[silver gyro]

Do you believe in that?

[fathom vine]

Other things dont make sense at all

[fathom vine]

I explained the other side also

[fathom vine]

.

[silver gyro]

Ah ok

[fathom vine]

Its more like two different point of view so there is not “right” because thats how we or the other person think or feel.

[spring sedge]

he is agreeing about no nihilism

[fathom vine]

Im a Muslim so im with the other side . Whe are born to have a “job” in this life

[spring sedge]

oh! i see! you are Muslim!!!!

[silver gyro]

Right brother, Alhamdulillah for Islam

[fathom vine]

Not only loving God but also to serve the Nature.
More like we are here for something to do

But this doesn’t make us right. Or them right its just a point of view how we see it and how they see it

[spring sedge]

yes, religions have the mission for the world

[fathom vine]

This is another topic. Is weather we believe or not in God or supernatural things

But i get what they saying. I understand

[silver gyro]

What is the most difference you saw about Islam(Religion) and Atheism.

[spring sedge]

no different

[fathom vine]

Well im trying to learn more but im just in the beginning.
And i was a Muslim since the beginning

But not that deep into it I prefer to “stay on the sides”

[fathom vine]

Maybe because the country i live in the way i have been raised or the family.

[fathom vine]

Depends how much spiritual u get into it and it’s diferent of everyone.

[spring sedge]

maybe, i think whatever Islam(Religion) and Atheism, they also are members in the world. it is not means if i believe to Religion and then i am different to somebody

they just a people in the world, not being good or bad

i respect the Islam, catholic, Christianity, or Atheism

[fathom vine]

Well whoever says that to you is not really a religious people. It’s forbidden to judge people in name of God

[silver gyro]

Why you not prefer to stay on the both sides it means actually that you are planning to be a good Muslim. Cuz it says that Allah expects from us to learn more… not only about religion… to learn how different thoughts on earth are so that we can improve ourselves as Muslims and for the next generations we have. It’s actually a meaning of a Mujahid of other way.

I like to learn about atheism btw too.

[fathom vine]

More like this I prefer like u said I often Question the God or religion my self in order to learn more . So it can lead in closer to God or in the other side

[fathom vine]

Totally agree with you after all why we should care what the other believes or thinks .(as long as it doesn’t hurt or makes bad impact)

[spring sedge]

thanks for approve

[versed escarp]

@fathom vine Could you dm, please?

[craggy sphinx]

[dense agate]

peace and harmony at last.

[shy slate]

Heylo

[thorny steeple]

What are the advantages of having some woman friends as a male according to you?

[shy slate]

A change of routine

[hallow mango]

In Russia, I know many cases of violation of LGBT rights. I must report this to the world press. Which one is better?

[thorny steeple]

[shy slate]

Gulag news

[hallow mango]

i think better contact with american diplomats

[acoustic siren]

Hello

[fathom vine]

What they gonna do about it

[narrow brook]

Have you ever missed something that you can't explain?

[gaunt bronze]

What do you mean?

[patent viper]

oh god

merkels back

[narrow brook]

I mean that felling of missing something that you don't actually know or can explain

like a nostalgia

[gaunt bronze]

🧛‍♀️

[gaunt bronze]

ohhhh, i've definitely felt that

[thorny steeple]

First of all, don't have girl best friend as a man who's in a relationship too

Try demanding some same level of concern, frankness, openness and commitment from ur woman partner firstly

Then if u have women friends, have them as a friend not cus they're women and u need something emotional from them

Well they CAN be ur best friend too but make sure you both know that you're actually so much satisfied with being bes[ friends and have no intention of having anything further

That frankness can also—when seen by ur partner—allow ur partner to understand and not get jealous and treat ur women friend with the same level of doubts as they do you

Now idk if you're gonna come up with would you allow ur girl to have male bestfriend or male friend. We can talk on that

[craggy sphinx]

Hello beings of the highest light

[serene birch]

Guten Morgen

[orchid totem]

Then you shouldn't be here

[tawny shore]

Hmm!

[orchid totem]

[orchid totem]

where are you from ，bro

[tawny shore]

India. Wbu?

[orchid totem]

China

[orchid totem]

Is Israel really a country？Why can they detain Canadians at will

[bronze spruce]

isreal occupied Palestine

Isreal is not a country

[craggy sphinx]

[solid flume]

[ashen moss]

Hi

[thorny steeple]

❤️‍🔥❤️‍🔥❤️‍🔥❤️‍🔥

[lavish finch]

It is a country. It's a criminal country. But it is a country. No sense in denying that.

[orchid totem]

hat do you think of Trump?

crazy or wise？

[serene birch]

Have you ever seen a wise leader before?

[lavish finch]

He is a traditional demagogue. a political leader who seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people.

[serene birch]

If they were wise, they wouldn't engage with politics.

[orchid totem]

I think he is very wise

[serene birch]

The best of the worst, I can't deny that.

[lavish finch]

Yes, there are wise leaders.

[orchid totem]

Because it is one of the few people who see clearly the shortcomings of the United States now.

[serene birch]

at least the only leader who shakes hands with Kim.

"west side"

[lavish finch]

Frederick Douglass was a wise leader. An escaped slave, he was the leader of the movement to abolish slavery.

[serene birch]

I don't have the slightest information about this person. I'll read it in detail in the evening.

[orchid totem]

He violated some Jewish rights, so he stepped down

[serene birch]

If Jews constantly behave in this manner, I find it normal that they create hostility towards themselves wherever they go.

[lavish finch]

Who did?

[serene birch]

The idea that they are God's chosen people and we are slaves.

lol

[orchid totem]

Jews always do anything for money

[orchid totem]

Trump

[serene birch]

I think they have mass trauma and it's not getting better.

[orchid totem]

He has been in power for too short a time

[orchid totem]

maybe

[lavish finch]

Don't blame trauma. And don't blame jews for the crimes of Israel.

[serene birch]

They gets fired in some way. Romans, Muslims, Germans. I'm not saying it's right or true, but why does such a thing exist?

We need to questioning it.

[orchid totem]

I won't feel sympathy for them wandering again

[lavish finch]

Then you want revenge and you don't want justice.

[serene birch]

I'm not blaming actually, questioning.

[lavish finch]

Collective punishment is not justice.

[serene birch]

There is no other community in the world that has been expelled so many times, it just seems strange.

[serene birch]

Ofcourse.

[thorny steeple]

I've had quite a few female friends, but also quite a few male friends. An issue with a female friend, I've found, is the big question mark you might have above your heads, as to whether you're interested in each other or whether you'll ever be interested in each other. I found this especially problematic when I was young and didn't have much understanding of and control over my emotions. There's also romantic feelings to consider. If you find a female friend attractive, you might find this attraction leads to romantic feelings. This seems to be a problem often enough that it's a trope in film.

However, if you've both made it clear or are confident (e.g., through lack of attraction) that you're not interested in each other beyond friendship, then I think a woman can but not necessarily be more sensitive, thoughtful, gentle, compassionate, and supportive.

I'm also of the opinion that a great relationship can form from a friendship, and for me, that's a natural progress. YMMV.

[orchid totem]

But I cannot tolerate the extermination of the Palestinian culture of genocide

[serene birch]

But if they claim that they are god's chosen servants and other people are their slaves everywhere they go, it is very normal for them to arouse hatred.(my opinion)

I would like to remind you again that I have no hostility towards anyone. But I love questioning.

[orchid totem]

Everyone has different perspectives, that's okay

[lavish finch]

It's ok to have hostility. It's quite natural.

[serene birch]

As you start to complete the puzzle pieces a little bit, the truth comes out.

[lavish finch]

Feelings of hostility, that is. Not to act with hostility.

[serene birch]

I just don't like people who deliberately act stupid and malicious beings.

[lavish finch]

Of course

[serene birch]

the rest is my brothers and sisters.

[orchid totem]

When I came into contact with this information, I couldn't help but look at it with hostility

[serene birch]

more than 6,000 children and 4000 women died today. We Warn people not to support Israel, and saying that America is a terrorist state in the same way. I hope you agreed today 😦

[lavish finch]

America is a terrorist state.

[thorny steeple]

How do you justify this view?

[serene birch]

we have to fight altogether someway.

against russia against usa state all teror states.

Something that could happen to them today or to us tomorrow.

[lavish finch]

From our founding until now, we've been a country at war, using terror as a weapon of war. Starting with the genocide of the native population.

[serene birch]

very sad but true

I hope that together we will get rid of their cruelty.

When people gain power, they immediately start creating hostility and are happy about it.

[thorny steeple]

Isn't terror simply a by-product of war? Has America sent suicide bombers off to another country in order to incite terror? I suppose your next response might be to point out that America went to Iraq, but was that to terrorize, or was that to simply respond to an attack and to assist the country? I'm not American and I'm not well versed in this topic, so I have no stake in this, but I also don't have evidence to support modern day America being a terrorist state.

[orchid totem]

you are right

[lavish finch]

Are you arguing that Iraq was responsible for 911?

[thorny steeple]

No, I can't remember who was responsible for it.

[lavish finch]

You just said that our invasion of Iraq qas a response to an attack. What attack?

[orchid totem]

Is it really a 911 made in Iraq

[thorny steeple]

That's not what I said.

"I suppose your next response might be to point out that America went to Iraq, but was that to terrorize, or was that to simply respond to an attack and to assist the country?"

This is what I said. When America went to Iraq, did they go to terrorize or was it a response from attack or to assist Iraq?

[serene birch]

Saddam deserved to be killed. But invading Iraq was biggest mistake.

But I still wonder how else this man could have been killed.

Obama is thinking about this today. But it is too late

[orchid totem]

Iraq is in a mess under US governance

[thorny steeple]

I questioned whether it was a response to an attack, but I didn't assert that there was an attack.

[lavish finch]

The invasion of Iraq was a war of aggression. The supreme international crime.

[serene birch]

Because Saddam killed many Kurdish people in genocide.

[orchid totem]

Iraq's current per capita GDP is only half of what it used to be

[humble lion]

Iraq is not gonna survive the next 50 years

[serene birch]

But today, America creates kurd militants and terrorist organizations with a ton of different names.

and has been doing this for many years.

The world is a very complex place and very frustrating.

there is no any balance.

[thorny steeple]

Apparently, in 1998, Iraq suspended cooperation with UN weapons inspectors, which led to a response that escalated.

[orchid totem]

Even though it created 911, its people are not guilty

[serene birch]

And Unfortunately it will not.

[lavish finch]

The UN did not invade and occupy Iraq, the US did.

[thorny steeple]

I didn't say the UN invaded and occupied Iraq.

[serene birch]

The ego of being a superpower.

[lavish finch]

You implied that not cooperating with the UN justifies a war of aggression.

[thorny steeple]

Yes, but I did not say that the UN invaded and occupied Iraq.

[lavish finch]

It doesn't.

[thorny steeple]

I'm not altogether sure how I feel about whether it was a justified response.

[orchid totem]

🫡

The United Nations is like a facade

[serene birch]

I have to back to work guys

[thorny steeple]

I'm leaning towards not, but apparently it was mainly about nuclear weapons. Get that wrong, and you have a major disaster, so in that sense, I can understand why they (and apparently we; the UK) responded. I would like to think the following airstrikes that apparently occurred were specifically targeting key locations and not simply terrorizing civilians.

[serene birch]

I wish you all have a nice and peaceful days.

[lavish finch]

The criminal invastion of Iraq was mainly about oil and maintaining world hegemony.

[thorny steeple]

I wouldn't be surprised if oil were a factor, perhaps even the main one.

You've presupposed a criminal act. How was it a criminal act?

We've already established there was apparently a cause, which was a nuclear threat as a result of Iraq refusing to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors. Whether or not America could acquire oil out of this is irrelevant, at this point.

To clarify, I'm coming into this with a limited understand of the events that transpired, because I was young when Iraq was invaded, I don't tend to follow politics, and because I'm not American. So, if something I say seems ignorant, it's likely because of this. I'm questioning your reasoning and learning as I go.

[lavish finch]

Weapons of mass destruction was the pretext, the justification. But that was a farce.

[thorny steeple]

Do you have any evidence for this?

[lavish finch]

At the time, Blair declared that they would invade Iraq even if there were no wmds.

[thorny steeple]

I've found some evidence online to support this. I'm quite surprised.

However, you seem to be missing an important detail.

"he would still have thought it right to remove Saddam Hussein from power." — The Guardian

As Blair said in an interview:

"I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat. I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons in charge, but it's incredibly difficult. That's why I sympathise with the people who were against it [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, in the end I had to take the decision."

In other words, it wasn't simply an act of terror, at least on the UK side. Iraq was apparently known for having WMD, which made the threat plausible to the US and surely other countries.

So I ask again: how do you justify the view that America is a terrorist state?

[orchid totem]

It instigates civil war

Invasion of internal affairs

[thorny steeple]

Does it do this with terror; by terrorizing?

[orchid totem]

Attack the opponent by insulting them first and then invading them

[thorny steeple]

As we've just covered, it wasn't a matter of insult, it was a response to a potential nuclear threat.

When a police officer perceives a threat and draws his gun, causing terror in the suspect, is the officer a terrorist?

Likely, the answer is no. If this is the case, then why do you hold a different standard for a country? If the answer is yes, then why is he a terrorist? The suspect's terror is a by-product or a consequence of a threat of the weapon drawn. The weapon was drawn in response to a perceived threat.

[lavish finch]

Bush-Cheney created an international torture regime where they would send suspects to black sites to be tortured with similar justifications - credible threats.

[thorny steeple]

If true, that's horrible. However, you could argue that it was in relation to a perceived threat. If they considered the threat valid and extreme, particularly if the confirmed the threat, I can see why some would feel torture necessary. Once again, we're back to America responding how they felt was appropriate in the face of nuclear threat. I'm curious as to how you feel about my police officer scenario.

[lavish finch]

The police officer scenario is different because in ordinary police work there isn't necessarily a goal of using or threatening violence for political or ideological ends.

When the US announces that it will continue bombing Afghanistan until the people change their leadership, that is.

That is using violence for poltical ends.

[orchid totem]

Can you attack others at will? Without conclusive evidence

[thorny steeple]

You've implied that the goal for the US invading Iraq was for political or ideological ends, when we've already established it was a response to a perceived threat.

"When the US announces that it will continue bombing Afghanistan until the people change their leadership, that is.
That is using violence for poltical ends."

I almost agree, but, again, it's a response to a perceived threat. A change of leadership would have lessened the threat. I do agree that politics played a part, but I disagree that it's the full story.

[orchid totem]

Why not attack North Korea? Because its threat to American hegemony is not as significant

Is it reasonable for a police officer to suspect that you had a weapon and killed you?

[lavish finch]

The US admitted that there were no wmds in the country just a year after invading, and yet it continued to occupy the country for 8 more years.

[orchid totem]

Everyone has the ability to carry weapons. Can the police kill people at will

[thorny steeple]

A good question of ethics, the answer to which I'm not sure a yes or no question, but one of exceptions and caveats. I lean more towards no, however. I'm not sure whether the US at any point had conclusive evidence. I suspect and hope they had very compelling or conclusive evidence to justify torturing people.

[orchid totem]

I can't imagine what this world will be like, just doubt can attack a country

Suspecting that you have weapons is just a reason because you have undermined American hegemony, which is the fundamental reason

[lavish finch]

The US has made credible threats against Iran. Would that justify Iran making a pre-emptive attack against the US?

[orchid totem]

You searched Iraq all over but couldn't find what you did

You choose to continue military intervention in domestic affairs

[thorny steeple]

Yeah, I would agree that 8 years is excessive, especially after confirming that there aren't WMDs. However, is this the full story, or are you simply cherry-picking? Is America providing any support to those in Iraq, such as water and food? Is America under fire from enemy forces, thus the threat is ongoing?

[orchid totem]

Do you say that human rights include the Palestinian people

[thorny steeple]

I don't see why not.

I'm not familiar with what's going on there, BTW.

[orchid totem]

What can you do to make a country a mess even if food is provided？

[thorny steeple]

I'm not sure I understand the question. Why would I intentionally make a country a mess?

[orchid totem]

Can the lost lives and irreversible damage caused by war be compensated for

USA

[thorny steeple]

Possibly, in some way.

[orchid totem]

not you

[orchid totem]

Why do you support Israel's massacre of Palestinians

Israel has the right to self-defense, but is this too extreme

[thorny steeple]

Where did I say that I supported this? I've already said that I don't know what's going on over there. I do not support a massacre.

[thorny steeple]

Why is Israel allowed to defend itself, but America not?

[orchid totem]

What I mean is that you don't care about human rights, you only care about your own interests

[thorny steeple]

How have you arrived at that conclusion? You're directly contradicting my own words: "I don't see why not."

[orchid totem]

But this is going too far

[thorny steeple]

hey! 👋

what's up?

I see you're discussing the Israeli oppression against the Palestinains.

[orchid totem]

Don't discuss anymore. Neither of us can convince anyone

[thorny steeple]

It's actually about a remark made earlier, that America is a terrorist state. I asked for justification of this claim.

[thorny steeple]

people choose to whether they want to be convinced or not, that's what I realized after a while of debating with other people.

[orchid totem]

You have the right to self-defense, but it's too much

[thorny steeple]

does funding another terrorist state count as evidence that the US is a terrorist country as well?

[orchid totem]

Attacking other countries has caused suffering for their people, economic collapse, and the country has made a mess

[thorny steeple]

Although my views were misrepresented, some of which I didn't even express, I have enjoyed our discussion, but if you wish to stop, I'll respect your wishes.

[thorny steeple]

On this we can agree.

[thorny steeple]

it's not even too much. they surely have the right to self-defense, but against the people who attacked them, not the civilians. what Israel has done doesn't count as a self-defense.

murdering 14,000 Palestinian civilians, and bombing densely populated cities. Israel is surely a terrorist state.

[orchid totem]

And the evidence is insufficient

[thorny steeple]

It does imply support of said terror. Based on that alone, I can see why someone would claim that America is a terrorist state, because it's actively financially supporting what is apparently a terrorist state.

[orchid totem]

However, human rights in the United States have no effect on Israel

Or rather, Palestinians do not have human rights, after all, they are referred to by Israel as "humanoid animals"

[orchid totem]

This method is identical to that of the United States

[thorny steeple]

do you consider the accomplice as guilty as the perpetrator himself?

[thorny steeple]

Good point. As guilty, I don't think so, but certainly guilty. A really tricky question of morality, I think.

[orchid totem]

Because it is the United States, it is not guilty

Because it can already freely attack any country

[thorny steeple]

One thing I think is important to remember, when talking about countries like this, is that America is not one human, but a collection of over 330 million people. Not all Americans share the same views and want the same things.

[thorny steeple]

let me give you an example, assuming I'm a serial killer, but I don't have the weapons to commit my crimes, if you would to come and support me with the weapons, knowing that I would murder innocent people, including women, children, elderly people etc... don't you think you're as guilty as I am, since I wouldn't be able to commit my crimes if I hadn't had your support?

[orchid totem]

incisive

[thorny steeple]

Another good question. If I knew with 100% certainty, then I would consider myself as guilty as you.

[thorny steeple]

that's the case with the US and Israel.

one sec. let me back up my claims with evidence.

[orchid totem]

The first step is to randomly find evidence or say that you are a devil or that your people's human rights have been violated. Then create public opinion. The third step can legitimately attack any country

[thorny steeple]

Unless, perhaps, there were somehow a sufficiently defensible reason for your actions, such as to prevent long-term suffering and eventual extermination of the human race. I'm not sold on this scenario, but it's all that comes to mind, at the moment.

[orchid totem]

Can someone be killed for legitimate reasons,Or rather, what are legitimate reasons

[thorny steeple]

Sure, I think ethics usually states that it's OK to kill in some situations, such as in the defence of another's life. But this isn't a clear-cut black and white affair. It's nuanced and complicated. Each situation should be individually considered.

[orchid totem]

If one person kills another person's sister, can the other person have a reason to kill the entire family of the murderer to protect their family

[thorny steeple]

If someone broke into my home and attempted to murder me, I consider it a moral act to kill the criminal in defence of my life. However, if I could defend myself such that I incapacitated the criminal, then I think that should be the preferred result. I think the violence should be justified and we should be held accountable.

[orchid totem]

Do you think it's reasonable

[thorny steeple]

On that scenario alone, without other information, no, I do not think that's a valid use of force. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

[orchid totem]

This is what Israel is doing now

[thorny steeple]

If that's the case, then I wholeheartedly agree that Israel is wrong.

Back in a bit. Phone.

here is a proof (even though it doesn't need a proof, it's known for everybody) that the US assisted Israel with whatever it needed (including one of the most advanced weaponry arsenal on the planet) on its "supposed" attack on Hamas
here is also another evidence

here is just one example of Israel's intention to commit a mass murder and a barbaric bombardment on Palestine

during this so called "war", Israel roughly killed 14,000 Palestinian civilians, with children taking up the most of them. I've got tons of sources and instances of the Israeli barbaric killing rampage that it went against the Palestinians.
in fact, Israel have been committing ongoing massacres against Palestinians even before it became a real state, up until now.
here is a video for more details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E50gE7YwDKI

also here is a testimony from Israeli former soldiers admitting they committed mass atrocities against Palestinians in the tantura incident (WHILE LAUGHING!!).

[thorny steeple]

@thorny steeple
I still have tons of other evidence that Israel is 100% an apartheid, terrorist, barbaric state.

[orchid totem]

And engage in genocide, cultural extinction

[thorny steeple]

What do you think about Yuval Noah Harari's opinions about palestine conflict?

Aaaand back.

I'm glad y'all can't see me, as I'm all gross and snotty with the flu. 😆

So, I had a brief look online, and found this, from a US news site:

"Calls for more aid to Israel came quickly in the wake of a terrorist attack by Hamas on the country this weekend, and President Biden has said military assistance is on its way."

This seems to have been conveniently left out, in this discussion. So, assuming the above is true, that implies America is not aiding Israel in order to simply incite terror, but to provide aid to Israel following an attack. What would you all say to this?

[orchid totem]

The United States has been controlled by Jews

[orchid totem]

Because the Hamas attack was too sudden

[orchid totem]

I'm sorry to hear that

[craggy sphinx]

Hello beings of the highest light

[orchid totem]

But whose was the previous NAMER Infant Fighting Vehicle

[thorny steeple]

no us is being controlled by billioners by lobying

[serene birch]

They are not exactly, but their lobbies have a big impact, yes.

They act together because of their mutual interests.

The main first fact and factors is this road route.

That's why we saw US, French and British ships there.

All the wars in the world have been fought for resources, the rest is history and fiction.

NATO == NAZI

NATO

NAZI

[fathom vine]

👀

[vale ledge]

https://tenor.com/view/big-brain-markiplier-gif-14835823

[serene birch]

This is what it is

[fathom vine]

Its not

What Nazi have to do with Nato

[serene birch]

Russians sees no difference between those.

😄

[fathom vine]

Well Nato is created to defend from Rusian

But that it

[serene birch]

Why russia can't join?

Big question

[fathom vine]

Because that was the reason it is created in the first place

[serene birch]

Because russians are monster

NATO is angel

[fathom vine]

To defend from Russia

[fathom vine]

No because both have different ideals

[serene birch]

The Nazis said these words before World War II. 🙂

[fathom vine]

Nazis wanted only to occupy lands

Nato have played only the defense side since it was created

[serene birch]

this is what we see in cyprus before and gaza now

and afghanistan, iraq, syria

get knowledge buddy

[fathom vine]

Soo what u trying to say with this

[serene birch]

I'm living in NATO country btw

[fathom vine]

Russia is better?

[chrome harness]

What's the point?

[fathom vine]

Same

[serene birch]

SSCB == nazi == nato

[fathom vine]

Im not understanding hem also

[chrome harness]

I understand

[serene birch]

all those ideas are garbage

A monster hungry for blood, resources and power.

[fathom vine]

I aggre with this

[serene birch]

When NATO invites China and Russia, then I say this ideology is an angel.

Being set up against them means putting pressure on them.

[fathom vine]

Than there will be no “exuses” for opening a war

[serene birch]

YES

[fathom vine]

I understand now what u was talking

I thought u were trying to put Russia in better place

[serene birch]

thank you finally someone understand my idea 😄

I will cry

[fathom vine]

Everyone does

We just cant do nothing about it

[serene birch]

No, I'm trying to put the world is a better place. I don't care about any countries. My goal is to save children as much as we can.

[fathom vine]

But European will face soon what they have done

All those middle eastern people coming in Europe

All those Áfricans coming in Europe

[serene birch]

KARMA

[fathom vine]

Soon in few years it will be a garbage

[serene birch]

Sad But True.

[fathom vine]

USA already facing it . Now it will be Europeans time

Slowly but it’s coming

[serene birch]

I always say this. "Revenge is a hot dish, people prefer to eat it cold."

If you kill someone's mother, father, brothers or sisters. They will wait in patiently.

[fathom vine]

And when i say this that we dont need Africans here or we dont need middle eastern here send them back

They call me “racist “

Okay than wait few years and see

[serene birch]

It's even embarrassing to say this, but it will happen.

[fathom vine]

For sure I totally agree with your opinion

Sadly its more a fact now

[serene birch]

If it wasn't a dream, it will happen. I think being friends with them is the right thing to do.

[fathom vine]

Than life would be easier. Government dont want you to do a easy life they need hard working slaves

[serene birch]

Never be on the racist side. They smell it 🙂

[fathom vine]

So that will not happen forget it

Muslim are good people nothing against that . But not all those refugees are good people

[serene birch]

Man, I am against racism, by the way, we parted ways.

[serene birch]

Nor all europeans or westerns

[fathom vine]

Yep but the main problem I always say

[serene birch]

Main problem is borders

[fathom vine]

Even good Muslim of Middle East doesn’t agree with our style of our life

[serene birch]

If you ban something people will fight to get it.

[fathom vine]

Soo as soon as they became more and more

They gonna try to change our style of life. Give it few years

[serene birch]

Maybe this will be good?

[fathom vine]

Here I disagree

[fathom vine]

Forcing others to change their style of life it will be a fight back

[serene birch]

This is what America has been doing for years

[fathom vine]

Yes and now Karma is back

[serene birch]

They changed the entire Arab people.

Their cultures.

[fathom vine]

Now they coming to change ours

[serene birch]

Yes, now is the time to learn their culture 😄

[fathom vine]

Ww3 would be huge

[serene birch]

HAHA

[fathom vine]

Because enemies would be your neighbors also

[serene birch]

no no it will not happen. But If racism will rise yeah a little bit.

I prefer to hug with my enemies.

Best solution

[fathom vine]

As I told when they become more in numbers

They will start changing your lifestyle

This will bring the chaos

[serene birch]

Because as you get to know them. you see how beautiful and different their habits are.

[fathom vine]

Im a Muslim my self nothing against it. But we have diferent lifestyle

Which they don’t agree with ours

[serene birch]

These guys are not cannibals, they don't sit around and eat people, I don't see any wrong behavior.

[fathom vine]

As of Africans they also biger problem lets not forget about it. Because people don’t speak being afraid of being called racist

[serene birch]

you should focus on your lifestyle.

They dont need to change you. And probably they will not even try.

[fathom vine]

We will see

Give it time because its too early

[serene birch]

But they also want to live. Because dream of zionism, the entire middle east was turned into a bloodbath.

[fathom vine]

Its not their fault

[serene birch]

yeah

[fathom vine]

We bombed their houses

We gone there to give them “freedom “

[serene birch]

Embracing them brings peace, separating them breeds hatred. They are already tired. Just like the Jews.

[serene birch]

The more free you are, the more they should be, too much might cause problems..

I have to return my work buddy. nice to talk with you

[fathom vine]

Have a good day

[serene birch]

As always, I wish a world of peace and tranquility.

[fathom vine]

This “wish” is far to become realistic

Unfortunately

[serene birch]

To change the world, we must first start with ourselves.

[thorny steeple]

I'm not defending Hamas on what they did, but Hamas was essentially founded as a resistance, Zionists have literally stole the land of Palestine long time ago. long years of oppression and living in an open air prison (Gaza), and years of forceful displacements and massacres of innocent civilians. the way I perceive it is as a reaction of violence. I don't buy the narrative that Hamas are terrorists though. I have strong evidence to believe that they are a force for good.

[silver gyro]

Is he even not for Palestine?😅

[thorny steeple]

he doesn't know.

[mental peak]

honestly, i feel like i'm failing at being a teacher because every class I just bore the hell out of my students

it's a problem i still hasn't found a way out yet

I've been looking at my textbooks, but there's not much I can do. Students' english abilities are just plain horrendous so I can only teach them word by word

[lavish finch]

In what context do you teach? Public school?

[mental peak]

Well I'm studying for tesol so private schools and tutition centers are my future jobs, but for now during my studies I'm volunteering at a english tutition class in a church as youth ministry

we have around 5 to 6 students now

aged 13-15 with one exception of 17

[lavish finch]

Are the classes obligatory?

[mental peak]

yes

but technically they can quit participating in the youth fellowship at their own will, so.

one decided to not come anymore last week and I wonder if it's because of me

[lavish finch]

is your curriculum obligatory? For example if you wanted to start playing board games instead of grammar would you be able to?

[mental peak]

oh, no. English teaching is obligatory but how to teach is up to me

i would imagine playing board games in relation to teaching grammar would be accepted. we played hangman once or twice, the students enjoyed it but it does not seem to aid much in learning

[lavish finch]

Are you open to some advice?

[mental peak]

Yes.

[lavish finch]

Don’t be so hard on yourself.

[mental peak]

Ah.

[lavish finch]

Give yourself a little freedom to be boring.

It’s not a computer game. It’s not an amusement park. It’s not the movies. It’s Eng.

You might get some kids who are interested. And some kids won’t be. Don’t take it just personally.

[mental peak]

I suppose that's true.

[lavish finch]

I run an after school program for youth.

We do one hour of academics and 30 minutes of free time.

We employ people like you, college-age tutors, volunteers, to spend time with the youth.

If we were there to have fun I’d play dungeons and dragons with them.

But the main purpose of the program is to assist them in their schoolwork.

It sounds like you’re still exploring what kind of teaching you’d like to do.

[mental peak]

I think the main goal is to build rapport with the students and encourage consistent participation

at least as far as youth fellowship goes.

[lavish finch]

It’s very similar for us.