Arbitor Posts

...A book?

...Wtf do you READ? "The Clock goes Tick Tock"?

Page 1: "The Clock."
Page 2. "The moving clock."
PAge 3: "Tick Tock."

Also, I've found out that in this topic I evidently like to use the word evidently.

Evidently putting a link in your signature can do wonders to bring even the most unexpected people to come to a topic. You have Chef Sanji to thank for my presence here, as I saw he changed his name, wondered why, and found out he had been named chef here, decided to check out what it was about, found it mildly entertaining, and made a post about how useless I felt my expertise would be.

Evidently I was both right and wrong. A conundrum.

Actually I didn't, as I stated in my original post. I was just pointing out how predictable your reaction towards me being "real" for a moment is. Granted this is of course IB, I wouldn't dare try to tell you to be nice to me. Posting here has opened me up to both the sympathetic and the totally sociopathic. I knew the risk when I posted.

I can still say how any given post affects me though.

Sure, though how many would count as 'bad silliness' is relative to the reader of the forum topics and posts. For instance, I might find far more of them to be silly in a bad way than you might, due to my background and what I'm used to, concerning conversation(the vast majority of my posts are in the SD forum). You're NOT used to such an environment, and as such have been emotionally adapted to accept a wide array of silliness, though the fact that the silliness is there is objectively true, and from my perspective, this can easily lead down...bad roads, and the risk is hardly worth the reward(wider topic margin).

Leave it to Anesthetize to emotionally skull fuck me.

Well, you can see it as a gift of generality among fascinating topics, but the cost of any benefit is always parallel. While you have a vagueness that allows you to talk about whatever you want, you still have to deal with the fact that this includes many things that are, strictly speaking, just plain silly. And unlike Serious Discussion, those, by the nature of the vagueness of the forum, cannot be restricted in any way.

I recognize a couple people. Though nobody regulars I don't think.



"Chat topics" wold still be less likely to contain the specific type of discussion we mean than "Serious Discussion". When something is a s vague as "chat topics" one would expect to hear about what others do during the day, or about random thoughts about nothing important(etc: "Do you like the color blue? I do. Let's vote on the best color. I vote for blue.")



Bashing is a strong word. Debating aggressively is a better phrase I think.

And debating serious philosophical, scientific, and political matters is not for the soft skinned by its very nature, I would think. To Quote Winston Churchill

"Be glad if you have enemies. It means you stood up for something once in your life."

Sorry, I didn't know where to put it. IB and Random interchange to me.

But anyhow, thanks for the story. I tried to +rep you but evidently I need another 9 hours.

Mine's a black labrador, got her when she was just a pup. She was the runt of her litter too. She was so tiny, and never grew to be near as big as most other labs.

She also had severla names over her life. First we named her Eve, officially. Then since we talked to her in a cutsey way it would change to 'Eevers' 'Eever Beaver' 'Evee' 'Evening' and all other things you could think of. But she recognized the 'eve' in all our little nicknames and responded to them.

I believe you're incorrect in saying 'everyone doesn't go there'. Clearly many people go there as there are always new posts.

But in any case if one wants to find interesting philosophical discussion one would have to go where one would most likely find it. A "Forum Games" section of an internet forum is less likely to have serious topics of discussion such as philosophical meta ethics or epistemology than a place in the forum labeled "Serious Discussion". Especially when the rules for such a section encourage such discourse.

For the past couple months, since about right before christmas, my family and I have known that the dog I had since I was 7(I'm 21 now) has had an inoperable cancerous growth on her lungs. This makes it hard for her to breathe and causes her to randomly choke on nothing.

At the time, it was christmas, and none of us had the emotional energy to go through with denying her her last christmas, so we decided to put off anything drastic. Our vet told us that we would do well not to wait too long, as her standard of living will steadily decrease as time passes.

It's now almost March...and...tomorrow we're going to put her down. She doesn't eat, she doesn't drink, she doesn't even go outside. She has problems shitting and pissing as a result of her not eating or drinking, and she hardly moves from one spot during the day, as any movement on her part causes her to have to breathe heavily.

...Even though I saw this coming for...three months now...I can hardly handle this.

It's emotionally draining and making me lose sleep, and every day I look at my dog who can't even look at me back(she has fog in her eyes, vet says she's damn near blind). When I approach her she growls at me until I get right in front of her face, then she recognizes and licks me.

...At least she recognizes me when she can see me.

So...why the hell am I typing this on the internet? I don't know. I just have to write my thoughts down...helps me vent my frustration a little. I don't expect a whole lot of empathy from people that don't personally know me but I don't mind. I don't really care.

...Fucking hell I'm gonna miss her.

Is that an order or a statement of observation?

I do enough of that in the Serious Discussion forum.

Orally Fixated.

I'd join the staff but I'm unsure what use a philosophy student would be. : /

You've given antrhomomorphic conditions of a god's existence, this leads me to believe you believe in a personal god, this can be referred to as your own religion.

Congratulations, you have opinion #8,924,865 about how God should be viewed, and trying to seperate the belief frombeing called a religion.

Pretty sure.



This is not only my field of study, but philosophers in general tend to look down on epistemological solipsism. So if I'm arrogant for agreeing with people who know what they're talking about...ok?



That would be silly, but that's not what I think. I'm not a dualist. Solipsism is necessarily dualistic in nature.

My mind is my brain, that's my position, there's no difference between the two, and I've yet to see any reason to propose otherwise.



I don't claim that they're apart, for one, and for 2 I don't believe in a soul. The mind is simply a manifestation of consciousness and entience, which are by products of the evolved brain that humans have.



Again, I'm not a dualist. You're asking me to explain why dualism is correct when I'm not one. Did you even read my post?



We can know plenty of things to a practical certainty, this allows us to say that unless there's a huge paradigm shift in the way reality must be viewed, I can call those that view reality in the way epistemological solipsisits do, silly. It's never silly to call another philosophy silly, and to espouse that position is kind of postmodernish, which isn't valid, just annoying.

The more BlackShogunFox posts in it, the more I think it'll happen. Seriously, trying to educate him as to what medicine is, and why his position is all based off of confirmation bias, bad logic, cynicism, and a complete lack of evidence is...draining. I've decided to just let him think he's right for no good reason. World's against him, it's all a conspiracy, evidently the big rich parmaceutical companies are scared of him...all that nonsense.

http://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/

http://www.ehow.com/facts_5476906_bad-reaction-tetanus-vaccine.html

http://www.thisissurreytoday.co.uk/Swine-Flu-Negative-reaction-vaccines/story-11362067-detail/story.html



[/quote]

Great. So in response to my peer reviewed studies I sourced, the vetted information on my side, your counter articles are....personal blog sites...and...unsourced news articles...

I think it's clear which side is the more rational one to be on.

So you'd rather do somethign that hasn't been proven to work at all, instead of accepting the scientific data, because you read some 'articles' about vaccine complications, and you haven't gotten sick yet even though you only recieved 3 vaccines.

That's silly.
Not only do youlive in the UK, which is a developed country that vaccines have all but ERADICATED many forms of disease from(which is why you should thank vaccines in the first place for you not getting sick), but you have no actual evidence to back up any sort of detraction against vaccination.

This seems...at the very least...misguided.