More philosophy for the simple minded faggots here

Share your experiences with the opposite sex. Suggest ways to improve your success. Analyze the behavior of females in real life and online. Rant and rave about females. Show the importance of looks pertaining to attracting females and other social situations. Discuss aesthetics and the science of attractiveness. Exchange health, nutrition and looksmaxing tips.

EscortAddict wrote:LOL how you tried to indicate with "simple minded" that you are more sophisticated & educated than us :roll:

Most often the simplest explanation of a phenomenon is the best & most correct one.

For example the kopernikus model of the solar system (with the sun in the centre) was much more simple than the one from ptolemäus... and it was much more correct (still not 100%, that happend with kepler / newton)

Maybe fancy farry tales are nice to you because you can load up your brain with lot of irrelevant bullshit, but people like me like simple & correct explanations :)


And often simple explanations are overly simple, like the debunked physics concept of aether.
Earth's sole legacy will be a very slight increase (0.01%) of the solar metallicity.



IncelExecutioner wrote:
EscortAddict wrote:LOL how you tried to indicate with "simple minded" that you are more sophisticated & educated than us :roll:

Most often the simplest explanation of a phenomenon is the best & most correct one.

For example the kopernikus model of the solar system (with the sun in the centre) was much more simple than the one from ptolemäus... and it was much more correct (still not 100%, that happend with kepler / newton)

Maybe fancy farry tales are nice to you because you can load up your brain with lot of irrelevant bullshit, but people like me like simple & correct explanations :)


And often simple explanations are overly simple, like the debunked physics concept of aether.


actually not. they invented the aether to keep the presumption of absolute time & space alive, but then einstein came along and just ditched this presumption and had a theory that doesn't need the aether and could also explain all observable phenomena
Escort crew
Workcel crew
Oldcel crew

EscortAddict wrote:
actually not. they invented the aether to keep the presumption of absolute time & space alive, but then einstein came along and just ditched this presumption and had a theory that doesn't need the aether and could also explain all observable phenomena


Jeez you're so contrarian just to prove how smart you are. My point is that the overly-simplifying concept of aether is an example of a time simplification was not correct.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
EscortAddict wrote:
actually not. they invented the aether to keep the presumption of absolute time & space alive, but then einstein came along and just ditched this presumption and had a theory that doesn't need the aether and could also explain all observable phenomena


Jeez you're so contrarian just to prove how smart you are. My point is that the overly-simplifying concept of aether is an example of a time simplification was not correct.

well maybe. still we live in a deterministic universe :lol:



EscortAddict wrote:well maybe. still we live in a deterministic universe :lol:


I always stated I believed in most determinism, just not quite hard determinism. And by the way, indeterminism due to randomness is widely accepted as well. I.e. the universe is a mixture of indeterminism on the micro level and determinism on the macro. That doesn't make our lives have inherent meaning or allow us to transcend our physical trappings, though.

ITT: IncelExecutioner still hasn't accepted the irrevocable proof that free will is the biggest illusion in the world > Tries to compensate with new bullshit theories covered in fancy language

EDIT: Basically what feminists do as well.
Whimminz reactions when I try to be more "confident":
Image

Because sluthate is definitely the place I want to come to for philosophical considerations



lanklet wrote:Because sluthate is definitely the place I want to come to for philosophical considerations


A suffering incel is wiser than a blue-pilled professor at a state university.

Anakind wrote:ITT: IncelExecutioner still hasn't accepted the irrevocable proof that free will is the biggest illusion in the world > Tries to compensate with new bullshit theories covered in fancy language

EDIT: Basically what feminists do as well.


We are our fuckin brain. You understand? Too fancy? We are not driven by the individual components that make up our brain, WE ARE THE CUMULATIVE FINISHED PRODUCT that is our brain. The top level can exert downwards effects, i.e. a cumulative product can affect the smaller components.

You talking about "us" being driven by smaller physical processes, is retarded because the mere fact you separate "us" from the physical processes means that you consider them to be separate entities. I don't make that distinction, we are the object itself. And as the object, we do whatever actions the object is capable of doing.

Thoughts? Didn't think so.

IncelExecutioner wrote:We are our fuckin brain. You understand? Too fancy? We are not driven by the individual components that make up our brain, WE ARE THE CUMULATIVE FINISHED PRODUCT that is our brain. The top level can exert downwards effects, i.e. a cumulative product can affect the smaller components.

You talking about "us" being driven by smaller physical processes, is retarded because the mere fact you separate "us" from the physical processes means that you consider them to be separate entities. I don't make that distinction, we are the object itself. And as the object, we do whatever actions the object is capable of doing.

Thoughts? Didn't think so.


As I said, you're like a feminist. They don't have arguments either so they come up with fancy language that "sounds" smart to the unknowing. Have you ever read an article by a feminist?

Anakind wrote:

As I said, you're like a feminist. They don't have arguments either so they come up with fancy language that "sounds" smart to the unknowing. Have you ever read an article by a feminist?


The language I used in my last post was fancy? Are you fuckin illiterate?

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:

As I said, you're like a feminist. They don't have arguments either so they come up with fancy language that "sounds" smart to the unknowing. Have you ever read an article by a feminist?


The language I used in my last post was fancy? Are you fuckin illiterate?


ITT: IncelExecutioner still can't accept his defeat > Calls everyone else "low-IQ", "illiterate", "simple-minded" etc.

Show some strength and admit you are wrong about free will. That's what I do as well sometimes.

Anakind wrote:
ITT: IncelExecutioner still can't accept his defeat > Calls everyone else "low-IQ", "illiterate", "simple-minded" etc.

Show some strength and admit you are wrong about free will. That's what I do as well sometimes.


"Wawa admit you were wrong so I can go back to jerkin off to trannies." What are you gonna do, beat me up if I don't? Listen fuckhead, the way debates work is you disprove the other person, you don't tell them to "just give up".

Now you claimed my post was too fancy, to cover up the BS theories. How so? Seems pretty basic to me:

We are our fuckin brain. You understand? Too fancy? We are not driven by the individual components that make up our brain, WE ARE THE CUMULATIVE FINISHED PRODUCT that is our brain. The top level can exert downwards effects, i.e. a cumulative product can affect the smaller components.

You talking about "us" being driven by smaller physical processes, is retarded because the mere fact you separate "us" from the physical processes means that you consider them to be separate entities. I don't make that distinction, we are the object itself. And as the object, we do whatever actions the object is capable of doing.

IncelExecutioner wrote:"Wawa admit you were wrong so I can go back to jerkin off to trannies." What are you gonna do, beat me up if I don't? Listen fuckhead, the way debates work is you disprove the other person, you don't tell them to "just give up".


That's what we did yesterday and you're still talking.

Anakind wrote:That's what we did yesterday and you're still talking.


That's why you can't come up with anything against my argument, which was the same yesterday just I can summarize it more coherently now. You are stuck and you know it. I never argued that determinism doesn't exist at all and that there is a spiritual world. I was qualifying your simplifications.

Now I know you have a philosophy degree, so it's amusing that you are opposed to abstract language when pretty much all philosophy involves highly abstract language.

I also find it funny that the people here who don't know shit about physics are all the sudden hardcore reductionists who understand the way the universe works perfectly, while I actually have degrees in physics-related fields and don't have such presumptions of my understanding of the physical working of the universe.

Anakind wrote:Incredible how try-hard you are.


Go jack yourself off you tranny-fucking FREAK.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:Incredible how try-hard you are.


Go jack yourself off you tranny-fucking FREAK.


I'm on no-fap. So no.

Anakind wrote:I'm on no-fap. So no.


Is it because you're ashamed of you're HUMILIATING fetish? Or are you hoping that no-fap will boost your testosterone and give you the balls to go approach other dudes with balls?

IncelExecutioner wrote:
Anakind wrote:I'm on no-fap. So no.


Is it because you're ashamed of you're HUMILIATING fetish? Or are you hoping that no-fap will boost your testosterone and give you the balls to go approach other dudes with balls?


It has already been established that no-fap has nothing to do with testosterone but all to do with dopamine. And why is being into trannies "humiliating"? Do you have a problem with sexuality, you religiously brainwashed faggot?

Anakind wrote:It has already been established that no-fap has nothing to do with testosterone but all to do with dopamine. And why is being into trannies "humiliating"? Do you have a problem with sexuality, you religiously brainwashed faggot?


I know, that's why I said "hoping". Learn how to read.

Pretty ironic you're the one calling me a faggot. I don't have an issue with it, it's just pretty humiliating from a social perspective and you must feel extreme shame that you prefer a counterfeit to the real thing.

IncelExecutioner wrote:Pretty ironic you're the one calling me a faggot. I don't have an issue with it, it's just pretty humiliating from a social perspective and you must feel extreme shame that you prefer a counterfeit to the real thing.


How is it "humiliating from a social perspective", you religious freak? Are you some kind of hillbilly from Alabama?

Do me a favor and don't answer back. It's getting boring for both of us.

Anakind wrote:How is it "humiliating from a social perspective", you religious freak? Are you some kind of hillbilly from Alabama?

Do me a favor and don't answer back. It's getting boring for both of us.


Haha, getting all hippy on me now, not such a dark triad reductionist when it comes to defending your little secret.

i'm offended that you ignore my posts :lol:
Two or three surgeries away from being Ja Rule gang.

Image
Image

SupportLocalSluts wrote:i'm offended that you ignore my posts :lol:


I skimmed that pdf (http://www.kritike.org/journal/issue_3/ ... ne2008.pdf)....I dunno, it seems to be a sort of pseudo-physics trying in vain to explain the mind-body gap...that's just my perspective.

I don't think we we will ever understand the mind-body gap...it's all in vain. Maybe once the singularity is reached, who knows. Seems futile for now.

IncelExecutioner wrote:
SupportLocalSluts wrote:i'm offended that you ignore my posts :lol:


I skimmed that pdf (http://www.kritike.org/journal/issue_3/ ... ne2008.pdf)....I dunno, it seems to be a sort of pseudo-physics trying in vain to explain the mind-body gap...that's just my perspective.

I don't think we we will ever understand the mind-body gap...it's all in vain. Maybe once the singularity is reached, who knows. Seems futile for now.


It's a bunch of concepts. Now look up the papers by Micheal Turvey on coordination dynamics and tell me it's pseudo-physics. There's a good one on hula-hooping modeled using an inertia tensor.

Your boy Ray Kurzweil is a descriptive social scientist mental masturbator compared to most ecological psychologists.

Read the paper again, btw, they aren't interested in the mind-body gap. They reject the notion that the mind itself is a valid object of inquiry. There is no mind-body problem in that philosophy as a result.
Previous

Topic Tags

Return to Shitty Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 104 guests