Thanatos Sand

That's a fallacious question that presumes I have to explain how Nature did something to correctly claim it did it. I don't and neither does anybody e...

He said that while there is progress, it isn't just determined by the truths of scientific practices and scientific observations, as some had claimed,...

There are three human-constructed races: Mongolid, Negroid, and Caucasoid. There are no genetic differences/separators between these races. There are ...

Sorry, different ethnic groups are a very different thing from different races. So, I didn't obfuscate your point, it was already self-obfuscated. You...

You erroneously said there are genetic differences between the races. The Pygmies and Bantus are not different races. So, what you wrote doesn't suppo...

Kuhn never said scientific knowledge didn't progress. You need to read his book again if you ever read it a first time.

The one who isn't informed enough is clearly you, since these differences can occur between two different people of the same race. Try not making "arg...

There are no genetic differences between the races. There is no post-modern dogma concerning science. To what post-modern thinkers and which of their ...

No, there musn't. Tha'ts religious talk. Nature has more than shown it's a very potent and creative creator in the existence of the universe, it's man...

Saying there are facts of human nature doesnt' change the fact that many of those facts are constructed by human choice of classification and that our...

No, It makes sense if you know literary history well; you clearly don't. There's nothing scientific about it. To reject Byron, Keats, Wordsworth, and ...

I haven't, but Poe is definitely at the Postmodern spectrum of High Modernism, particularly with his emphasis on the irrational uncanny, preventing th...

corrected post

You literally said "but not Dick." You did not say "possibly" not Dick or "it's my opinion it's not Dick." So, either avoid making such affirmative co...

This statement only has value if you identify which Postmodern philosophers, and which of their works, you have read.

I don't know if you're going to regret this, but you just made an erroneous correction of my correct claim giving no aesthetic or literary foundation ...

Ah...and finally the banal, ambiguous, and nebulous personal attacks. Considering the "quality" of the ideas you do like, I consider your disdain for ...

Yes, we can see The Book of Rich says quantum vibrations are the mind. Too bad your link doesn't say that. Keep trying.

No, it being the best way of explaining that view of science wasnt' proven in that link. Sorry. And you have no brand of science; just lovely fantasie...

Sorry, that's the Book of Rich speaking again. Too bad it's far from a best seller.

You talk to Penrose; my post was addressed to your arguments, not his. And I have no idea if I agree with him on his notion of "swampy" when I don't e...

Oh boy. You're speaking from the Book of Rich again. Not only does not everyone agree that materialization is "swampy," but not everyone even knows wh...

LOL. It wasn't just an opinion or a request; it was a statement that how we've been debating has been wrong and how we need to change it. So, your sta...

Your telling everyone they need to debate the way you want them to is an argument rooted in selfishness.

No, Postmodernism also describes an artistic aesthetic that includes Frank Gehry in architecture, John Cage in music, the films of Charlie Kaufman, an...

Bold is for demarcation. You know that, but you troll anyway.

. The problem is you keep saying Rich has a point, but you don't specify what that "point" is, and the point he's been largely and avidly making is th...

You just supported what I previously wrote about your erroneous notion of "all is quanta": ?Rich "No, nobody in physics supports your "all is quanta" ...

No, nobody in physics supports your "all is quanta" claim. So the only ones setting physics back 100 years is you and that claim.

Einstein's asking a rhetorical question about the moon does not prove "all is quanta," and Einstein never said it was.

I agree with all that, man.

Science fiction is a wonderful thing.

I never said you said we should get rid of the word animal; I said you erroneously said we shouldn't use it, as you did in your post here: And I have ...

Because good and evil are concerned with more than productivity. If productivity was humanity's only concerns, we would all put some people into slave...

Of course it's true since you cant' have a language of words without classifications of those words to give them specific functions...such as verbs, a...

We are all animals; we just happen to be highly intelligent and advanced ones. If you want to get rid of classifications like "animals," you would hav...

That's the second time you straw-manned me. I never said one could transcend production. I said "good" and "evil" denote moral and immoral behavior th...

As you can see, I said transcend "productivity," not transcend the "economic system."

The only one who has been trolling is you. I made this polite initial post to you: "No. "good" and "evil" go beyond productivity. They denote moral an...

No, I read your post perfectly fine, and the only one constructing a simplified but incorrect (and ahistorical) version of "good" and "evil" is you. C...

No. "good" and "evil" go beyond productivity. They denote moral and immoral behavior that can be irrelevant to and transcend productivity. For example...

You're ranting now, Rich. We were talking about your claim that "all is quanta." You have well shown that idea only exists in your Book of Rich. Get b...

I also like how that doesn't assert that all is quanta either. You're really on a roll...:)

Of course, but he never said all is quanta. So, you need to read your own posts better....:)

Those theories are lovely, Rich. Unfortunately for you, none of them assert that all is quanta as you claim in the Book of Rich.

What a lovely non sequitur and failure to respond to my last post...:)

LOL. First of all, that post isn't from a famous physicist or any physicist at all; its from some dude named "Jmfig314." And even he doesn't say it's ...

So, you can't provide a link either? I knew your "it's all quanta" claim was coming from the Book of Rich...:)

You keep saying this, and yet you never provide proof or a link. So, all you've been doing so far is quoting from the book of Rich. So, go ahead and p...

Yes, in your eyes she may no longer be beautiful, but that's an issue of your perception, not her beauty. So personal experience doesn't determine the...