charleton

Er, no! http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01720/lucian-freud-2001_1720462i.jpg THIS is hyperrealism https://d2jv9003bew7ag.cloudfront.net/up...

Describe how you make that choice, please!

Kant was good at thinking 'Copernican turns'. You might want to think about your question backwards? Maths and the world is a dialogue. Whilst we inve...

Little things please little minds. No true Scotsman bullshit.

But all this is deduction, not induction, as I was trying to point out. FYI, but not particularly relevant.... http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/arc...

LOL He does that for himself.

I am what determines my actions. My life, my experience, my emotion, my volition, what my body tells me. Free will is simply not being constrained by ...

I was not interested in the dress. This is a PORTRAIT, the dress is incidental. The image I linked seems to have a better face for some reason.

We can never have full knowledge of all the causalities, but no I am not saying that. On the most basic level, we are not aware of all the chemical pa...

I puzzled at the way you seem to view this idea. All maths is a conceit. It's a means by which humans are able to describe space. There are no points,...

Sherald seems to be a one-trick-pony. https://www.booooooom.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Sherald2.jpg

AT THAT TIME. Why is this codicil present? It's a rental!

This just reduces free choice to a roll of the dice. I prefer to determine my choices. They have more meaning that way.

Yes, all choices are determined by antecedent conditions. What makes them different from the automatic consequences of inanimate cause and effect is t...

But this puts it all back to deduction, since you are not drawing out a generality from the particularities. You are using a generalism -point 1 (abov...

It's a piss-poor portrait. Standards must have fallen. However. This image seems to be a little better. https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5a8313f7613...

But we know Pizzas exist, so your analogy is faulty.

Platinga is not reputable in anyway. He's a total nut case.

No, that would be your intention. You seem to see everything as a confrontation.

Eh? I assume you are an American. In English English people are not hired, cars are hired. What I meant was The notice implies that the diamond was fo...

You are dreaming. I stated exactly what I stated. No more no less. All the accretion is your invention. Belief does not make things real. Imagination ...

You are just enabling those that think the argument has legs.

It's full of bollocks. I just pulled out a crazy sentence. I have no need to remark on every silly line. All your efforts are worthless, and just give...

You are busting your own balls arguing over nothing whatever. The ontological argument cannot survive the most cursory glance at the opening premise. ...

Crazy talk.

I am not saying he did. I am saying that he could. Any child can see the difference between a flat triangle and one which is plastered on the side of ...

But that is simply rubbish. Imagining a thing does not help it to become real. This is so obvious. This is a no brainer. The entire argument is absurd...

Since we do not have, and cannot have access to infinity then the premise can only work at a mundane level. Since we can never know if the universe is...

As I say, belief makes no difference to an ontological argument. It does not make it 'greater'.

Has he got big ears and a fluffy tail? Does he tend to hop and love carrots?

LOL. Here's why I make the point.

This offer is a HIRE offer. The rest of the scenario is of no consequence and is nothing but sophistry. "at that time it will be yours" implies a limi...

You can believe what you like. If it helps you to think the fault is with me, then think that. But as with all cases belief is useless, unless grounde...

NOT in matters of ontology.

Your belief does not make a thing true. In an "ontological" argument, as in any other belief is of no consequence.

What you believe is of no consequence at all.

It does not exist just because you imagine it does, and there is nothing more to be said on that matter. So why bother?

These are the same things. What about an imagined imaginary imagined God? Surely such a thing would be "greater" for having to be more difficult to co...

Deduction is about definitions. About figuring out a fact from a generalised law. Induction is empirical. It seeks to offer provisional laws FROM obse...

This is more of a tautology.

lol

You problem is that you just don't know what you are talking about. If you don't find out, people are just going to laugh at you.

At the risk of not causing more confusion.... By "expect" I was responding to the statement "For nature's regularity to be such a surprising fact - so...

No one "expects." We get born and learn. And shit, if that rock was just like the last one. I drop it and it falls!!! I hit the cat and it runs away! ...

This claim has to be false since the meaning of the word "most" here is unquantifiable. Humans more than any other animal are more tabula rasa than an...

"What would Kant have made of non-Euclidan geomety?" He'd have said it was obvious if you decide that triangles can exist across 3D space, or on the s...

Rubbish. This is just poor logic. A broken deduction, pretending to be something. Nothing to do with induction at all. An inductive argument is more l...

You are not going to improve the life of a single person by not buying something.

"Free Will"??? There is nothing to give up here. When I make a decision, or act in any way it is determined by who and what I am; and through my needs...

Keep your naiveté. The servers you use to write your post contribute to the Chinese economy as they are full of components. If you want to be pure you...