Guest quasicartes Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 we spent time in philosphy on this. a bunch of different ppl from long ago said stuff like that. it made no sense to me, so i went to sleep<{POST_SNAPBACK}>If you started talking about the advanced stuff straight away it will never make sense to you. It's like teaching calculus to a 5 year old. Start from the basics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 then where did this thread come from?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Where does the anger come from?Actually, it's not due to "Cogito ergo sum."The anger doesn't come from an existant being, but it comes from thought.This is because you don't need to exist to think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the mascot Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 we started from the beginning, but i am not cut out to be a philosophizer, so it never mad sense. you guys are way to advanced for me :lost: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 ConclusionWhilst the preceding three arguments against the cogito (appear to) have failed, aparently successful arguments have been advanced by Bernard Williams and Zacharyas Boufoy-Bastick. A very convincing argument has been made by Bernard Williams, in his exposition of why both Lichtenberg and Descartes were mistaken. He claims that what we are dealing with when we talk of 'thought' or when we say 'I think' is something conceivable from a third-person perspective; namely objective "thought-events" in the former case, and an objective 'thinker' in the latter. The obvious problem is that from introspection, or our experience of consciousness, we have no way of moving to conclude the existence of any 'third-personal' fact, verification of which would require a thought necessarily impossible being, as Descartes is, bound to the evidence of his own consciousness alone. In his proposition of the epistemological Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 ^ I got that from the link posted in the previous page.Although un-credited there, David Hume and other philosophers also believed in "I think, therefore I am thought." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 we started from the beginning, but i am not cut out to be a philosophizer, so it never mad sense. you guys are way to advanced for me :lost:<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Go watch the Matrix, then read books explaining the philosophy behind it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingSupra Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 wow, what happened to the questions that made me go hmmmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 wow, what happened to the questions that made me go hmmmm?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>Doesn't the fact that you don't exist, and yet you can generate thoughts, makes you go "hmmmm"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the mascot Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 interesting. one thing i got from philosophy is that someone claimed there are two worlds: one is a mathmatically perfect and the other is a cheap rip off made to appear like the perfect form. we live in the rip off. imagine a chair. now try to think that the chair you are seeing is a crude "portrait" of that chair, made to appear and function like it, but really is it. so right along with you nyc, what would the "perfect" world look like???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 But what happen if god and satan are the same?<{POST_SNAPBACK}>The definitive answer: http://www.geocities.com/drwhorl/MAYBEsingle.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoltar Posted May 16, 2005 Share Posted May 16, 2005 hmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 16, 2005 Share Posted May 16, 2005 ^the guy takes lots of assumptions, BUT his story makes more sense than what the church says. At least it explains why God can't kill Satan. Even if the whole thing is 99.99% crap, there is at least a truth: God and Satan is not what you really thing they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 16, 2005 Share Posted May 16, 2005 ^Cool! People coming up with their own theories! Until today, there are still people who think they can proven Einstein wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOCHO Posted May 16, 2005 Share Posted May 16, 2005 Satan's best move is making everyone believe he doesn't exist, this is what I call a mastermind..and who said God can't kill Satan? If anyone says that then they havent studied the bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 Satan's best move is making everyone believe he doesn't exist, this is what I call a mastermind..<{POST_SNAPBACK}>God's best move is blaming everything bad on Satan (while attributing everything good to Him), that's the real mastermind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOCHO Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 prove it with the bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 My view is that God allows Satan to exist because without him we would have no free will, no choice. And that is a mighty important thing when it comes to theology, or Christianity at least.But I'm an atheist anyway, who's a much bigger fan of Judaism than Christianity, so.. umm.. take what I say with a grain of salt I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 My view is that God allows Satan to exist because without him we would have no free will, no choice. And that is a mighty important thing when it comes to theology, or Christianity at least.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>"Without evil there could be no good, so it must be good to be evil sometimes"---Satan, in South Park movie 'Bigger, Longer & Uncut' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest quasicartes Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 prove it with the bible.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>One fine day, I will show you the prove.In the meantime, while waiting for my proof, you can prove your claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.