AmadeusD

LOL, i'm now genuinely confused. I was intending there to point out that "I can only laugh" was in response to about eight posts, none of which were a...

(<--) I can only laugh :D Yessir, and I the same. I outline what I (still) recognise as a distasteful approach, but I very much appreciate your clarif...

Depends. Can one's saviour still be Jesus Christ? I'd think so, regardless of hte divinity instantiated from on high within the person of Jesus Christ...

Due to your direct responses to me, yes. It would be completely wrong to take that as somehow retroactively meaning I meant to engage you directly ini...

1. Yes; 2. Your earlier assumption is correct, it's just a good elucidation with great referencing. I agree regarding Kendi et al. I guess this is jus...

A herd animal, by the looks.

Hmm... I get it's a quip, but i'm not quite sure what you mean - your account showed to me (though, I saw this prior) the limb doesn't contain the pai...

Yes, it does actually. In any case, we can actually jettison this entire part of the debate (I am well aware of what I see as erroneous arguments earl...

I did not tag you in it. I assessed the page of the thread, laughed, and responded in kind. You seem to want some kind of insult to land. It wont, bec...

And yet Obviously, pain is not in the limb. That para honestly felt like trolling... Is it? These are aspects of visual world of a perceiver. If you'r...

If you feel the need to respond, directly, in this way, I can only laugh harder.

Oh come on, this is fun sometimes lol

A bit weak, but fair. I wouldn't assume I was either. I just think you're clearly wrong.

Are you sure? https://i.postimg.cc/tgwmjpzG/quine.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/MHbsVRJz/Q2.jpg It's always possible I am misunderstanding, but this entire...

That does not actually seem to be the case. This seems a floated theory on how to get around some esoteric aspects of pain, so to study them. The pape...

I wonder if you're aware of Samuel Sagan? If you are, perhaps this would be better as a DM thread.

I can only laugh.

So, you mean to say, you've been arguing with (i think) three people about antinatalism across two threads, and you don't care about, or understand th...

I don't think you're reading these responses. Not in any way, whatsoever. The number of people who cower into an ideology that saves them from head-on...

It seems you think Wittgenstein has a point, yes? Edit: It would have been much better for me to mention paraconsistency here. The sentence is not par...

Which is incorrect, in the structure of the sentence. As has been pointed out. Teh self-reference remains in your reading, though. So, whether or not ...

I suggest you endeavour not to be wrong about everything

So you are here in bad faith. I had thought so. But, to retort your nonsense: Nope. We would just both find you equally as risible. Sometimes, that's ...

I'm sure he'd oblige, but I, for one, prefer your context.

@"Lionino" I apologise, mildly but I thought you should have to read this page.

Interesting. This, to me, is to say that there are things that 'exist' and 'do not exist' yet they are all extant... Can you see if you can make the l...

Until you're willing to read the legal reports, keep beating hte horse my dude. I assume you got this from the legal reports about rates of prosecutio...

You'll need to let me know what this has to do with AN first (i can save the time: It does not have more than an aesthetic resemblance to the issues A...

Wealth may get us someway to equalizing these things, but they are not a good indicator at all. These problems will persist whether wealth even exists...

LOL. Oh brother. You don't understand the majority of what you've posted. I remember that zone well.

LOL, well fair enough!

Which, based on the description above, it is not. This, unfortunately, would use some logic of language chat, which I have very little interest in. Su...

Likely, but it might also be that he's collecting epistemic idealism under hte same banner - in which case, equivocally, his statement sort of hits.

He's correct, as far as I can tell and am concerned at this stage. It is not a paradox.

You really, really do not. Your position is that of most people, even one's aware of hte burden of living so there are no surprises here. Just, not a ...

You did not. You posted a popular, sponsored article which has been removed from the 'credible' list by more than one poster. You're going to beat a d...

:cheer:

Why did it take 9 pages.

Agree. I think you're wrong, so I can't agree here. Your objections are linguistic in nature and do not affect his actual reasoning (though, I think h...

So you're now confusing sociology, ideology, philosophy and mathematics. Gotcha. You've not presented a single one to base this on. And, doubtless, yo...

You may want to re-read all the replies to this erroneous posting, and your ridiculous conclusions. I also note that you are now relying on 'legality'...

What you've posted is a popular article literally advertising specific bars in the area. It has nothing, whatsoever to do with the discussion. Either ...

In Melbourne? I had a short foray in the area (intellectual area) and Melbourne was a hot bed at the time (circa 2010-2015). I still quite like the Th...

Not true. Natalism is a population ethic concern and has to do with population growth. We no longer need people to 'have children' to grow the populat...

Talking Heads right? You might like McWhorter's book. A pretty good antidote the Kendi's, Crenshaw's and DiAngelo's of the world.

You're reading backwards. Any parent that forces a child into life is 'Natalist' on that account there, but Schop is wrong about what Natalism is. He'...

Unfortunately, it's worse. Natalism is a population ethic concept, whereas AN doesn't apply to that set of concerns/issues. Using 'Natalism' as an eth...

You are now: 1. Mind reading; 2. Insulting; 3. Refusing to engage; 4. Doubling-down on your incredibly intense failure to be a functional interlocutor...

Fair enough! Not at all! I was far more concerned that my reply would come off bothering to you :P

I would say you are explicitly incorrect, or are misusing hte term Fascism which is quite specific, and not just an indicator of violent governmental ...