Spock here

How do you tell if something is real? Do you need physical evidence? If not then you have no tools to tell what is real or not. If you accept god with no evidence then you need to accept that everything exists, every retarded idea must be real. By the power of logic you can't say anything about the Universe now. How can you live in a world with no truth? You operate on your instincts and emotions or something?
You know they can deceive you, right?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird
fee.org/articles/michael-oakeshott-on-rationalism-in-politics/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Really activates my thermostellar warhead.

>I can't into thinking, philosophy is real

t. shillposter.

Real is what exists.
Does oxygen exist? You can't see it?
Does that keyboard exist? You can see it.
Does this website exist? You can physically touch it but you're on it.
Everything exists.
Thinks you cannot touch or understand or feel exist and thus are "real"

What?
If you accept shit existing without evidence then everything exists. Every thing that can be thinked of. You can't prove that something doesn't exist if you throw scientific method into trash.

Accepting something exists without evidence is the problem. If you accept something exists without evidence then for you everything exists.

>Does oxygen exist? You can't see it?
Yes, I saw freezing oxygen once. I also used oxygen in many chemistry experiments. These reactions did not work without oxygen. Mass spectroscopy also told me that it was oxygen.

He can also clain that some things don't exist with no evidence. If this is the case then he is contradicting himself and by the power of logic is officially insane.

No, what happens is they bring up the standard of evidence argument. They will link you to a youtube video of a guy talking about Jesus and tell you that you need faith. If you tell him that's not evidence he will tell you that you just can't accept it.

That's how that goes user.

Sure why not.
What's wrong with that.
We live in a universe, an existence that is, made of pure madness and chaos. Order and logic has no bearing on existence.
If it doesnt exist in the past, or now, it will exist in the future. And time works differently as to how we perceive it as we are mortal.
Time is a cycle, a circle.
not a line.

Fuck off space nigger...

Oh look its babby's first epistemology

If you can't tell what is real and what is not then you need to shut up as you have 50% chance of harming everyone with your random noise. You become Sup Forums IRL.

>Existence is pure madness and chaos
>Existence is random

Hahahahahaaa... You're either stupid or delusional.

Both.
Don't forget mad.
Dinosaurs no longer exist, but are they real? Of course.

Existence is neither madness nor random.

>Dinosaurs no longer exist

Yes they do.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird

"They are descendants of extinct dinosaurs with feathers, making them the only surviving dinosaurs according to cladistics.[3]"

We have bones and birds. What does god have? Book written by Jews and an army of shills?

Protip : mammals evolved from reptiles

Mammals evolved from proto-mammals user

Academic Skepticism. Logic dictates that nothing can be absolutely proven.

Why do you guys always have this imaginary war in your head between fundamentalist young earth creationists and "SCIENCE"? Its such a ridiculous false dichotomy

Yes and proto-mammals evolved from reptiles.

Of course, nothing is real. Like my eyes. I don't know anything exists.

You're not real.

Yes, they evolved or went extinct and as such no longer exist.
Contrarianism is funny huh

Yes, but listen, there's a big distinction there. Just correct it and move on. I get what you're saying but saying mammals evolved from reptiles can lead you to a lot of extremely false conclusions.

Yes, bones and birds exist, and so do books written by jews that are defended by armies of jews and their allies.

Ludicrous straw man detected.

Nope, you fags make shit up and never invented anything to actually hep humanity. You are regressives that are slowing us down. Hence you are our enemies. You believe in your shitposting. You must be stopped.

They didn't go extinct and what you perceive as dinosaurs is a conglomeration of millennia of evolution and different species. You were just blatantly wrong. You learned something new today.

What do you mean?

Nothing is real. Evidence is meaningless.

This is your argument? Aren't we in agreement?

I mean you're not even real. Just like me.

Newfag thinks regression is a bad thing.
Hahahahaha
It's a cycle user. Death and rebirth.
The cult of science is the same as organised religious cults.

Thats a whole lot of unsubstantiated claims about me when I haven't actually made any positive statements yet, what happened to being logical my butthurt Polack friend?

Facts that need qualifiers to make other facts appear false are not especially useful.

>It's illegal to read this post unless you work for CNN

user stop being retarded.
Good lord, talking to tier ones is embarrassing.

Mammals, Amphibians, and reptiles all evolved from fish. We all come from a single ancestor cell bro. Yes, even plants and fungi.

I can see how you can take my post that way if you can't comprehend the important distinction of billions of years of evolution as well as the differences between modern mammals and proto-mammals. There's a lot of massive factors from reproduction habits to warm/cold blooded traits you're just glossing over in a 8 word sentence.

Not arguing that. I'm saying that mammals do not come from lizards.

Absolute proof is a high standard. Tautologies are definitionally true, but still not absolutely true.

I exist. If I do not exist, I can not have made this statement. Therefore, in some sense, something that is indistinguishable from me exists.

I know who you people are. Inb4 you were just pretending to be retarded. By subscribing to this ideology you are branding yourself as a retard. Sorry. You had 1000 years to prove us wrong. Now it's to late. Change your name and your logo.

Not necessarily fish but yes, single celled organisms that grew cell by cell ever increasing in complexity.

Truth doesn't require and army of Jews to defend itself.

You don't exist user. Neither does your argument.

I agree, and?

And what ideology would that be? I have not made any claims yet. You are being very illogical.

Never said lizards. Reptiles. Learn the difference. Not all lizards are reptiles and not all dinosaurs are birds.

Numbers are not real faggot. But you accept them.

Reminder that unicorns are real.
And there is no reason mythological creatures do not exist, even if they are different from their fictional descriptions.

Dinosaurs were not lizards. They were warm blooded. Just like birds.

Creationism. Don't play stupid. I don't give a fuck if you believe it personally. You are irrelevant in this discussion.

>I have never read Thomas Aquinas

And where in anything I said have I advocated for creationism? This is exactly what I mean when I say that you are fighting imaginary opponents.

>Absolute proof is a high standardIf
you heat H2O to 100 degrees celsius at sea level in Earth atmosphere it will boil.

How Can I Know The Truth?

You can’t. We could all be wrong about everything. Get over it.

Philosophy is like art; we are forever in search of perfection. Where artists are searching for perfect beauty, philosophers are searching for perfect knowledge (very unrelated to the economic sense of the term). Artists know that perfect beauty is impossible, and philosophers know that perfect knowledge is impossible. We’re not stupid, but we’ve seen enough Werner Herzog movies to know that there’s nothing wrong with aspiring to an impossible goal.

You can divide information into two categories: opinions and facts (you can of course interpret both). Opinions are subjective judgments often based on emotional responses. Facts are used as evidence to demonstrate propositions because they have been in some way verified. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

These seem to be divergent concepts, but a brief look at the current news cycle will reveal that 306 out of 538 Americans can’t tell the difference.

They exist in our brains. Everything that can be thought exusts in our brains but it doesn't mean that they exist in outside world. God exists in every brain of a religious person but it doesn't mean that it's real. Real things exist outside of mind.

Are you retarded? Never claimed that dinosaurs were lizards. Learn how to read.

Dude were having a language problem but for all intents and purposes were on the same side. No need to continue on this specific path.

>You can’t. We could all be wrong about everything.
My computer programs run the same on all x86 CPU's every time.

numbers donr exist out of your mid faggot.
They may be useful but anything beyond basic shit is absolutely imagery.

If you saw a man raising people from the dead, healing the lame and the blind, feeding thousands of people with 5 loaves of bread and a few fish, walking on water, casting out demons who beg him to have mercy on them, blowing off philosopher Greeks like they are nothing, instantly gaining the respect of Roman governors, and owning the religious leaders, was crucified, died, was buried, and three days later rose from the dead, still bearing the wounds of his crucifixion, literally rose into Heaven, and then granted his powers to his disciples... would you honestly doubt that he is, in fact, God?

You are the American here. You should know nomenclature used in animal classification better than me, yet you don't. Just saying.

Eventually, there will be no more x86 CPUs.

When this thread gets pruned did it ever exist?

I obviously do.

Counts of objects exist and numbers are a mental representations of these counts. God is a representation of your internal fears about death and imperfections. Huge difference. Numbers represent real objects and that is why they allow us to manipulate reality. They are a tool.

Never saw such man. Have you in the past 40 years?

not realy no Counts of objects works only for real numbers. p, and root for 2 are the basic example where counts of an object does not work.
The deeper you go the more unreal it bocomes.
What is infinity you cant count it you cant put it in the universe even. Its infinite that makes 0 sense is real world.

Math=/=Physical universe


There's a lot you can do in math that has little bearing on reality. Non-Euclidean Geometry for instance.

So you only believe things that you personally have witnessed? For some reason, I don't think that's true. I think you believe in plenty of shit that you haven't personally witnessed.

Infinities don't exist. They are an empty concept tgat we use for numbers too large to comprehend by our brains. Unreal numbers are still real as they describe real properties in the world. You are confused as we use numbers instead of mechanics between objects. Objects have fields and parameters my friend.

There can be physical evidence for things that you can't see or sense.

Was that true a billion years ago? Will it be true in a billion years from now? Use Kelvin in a vacuum, pleb.

Truth is when your expectations and measurements correlate. We experience in low-definition.

Hi

What he said is true today. In a Billion years, assuming Earth is still here, we can make the necessary adjumstments because we understand the science behind the claim. I really have no idea what you're saying outside of that.

I agree. Which is why people who say "there is no evidence for God" are just parrots.

I lie about believing when it's beneficial to my interactions with humans. If something works I believe that this particular thing works. When I see other people performing an action and getting desired outcome then I accept that this particular method of doing the thing works. Theory used to describe the phenomenon is irrelevant as long as it allows me to achieve my goal.

exactly, this user whats god to be proven in the context of this world, when in realty even maths goes beyond this wold with no problems, and he holds it so dear as something imperial and real.
there are literately imagery numbers
>Infinities does not exist
wow just wow
you just reject everything and give it a earthly spin even the uncomprehensible by you. You still put a limit to it of course you will never understand God.

You have physical evidence of god?

So? As long as I don't see that evidence then it doesn't exist.

Math is a tool user, you are jumping to conclusions saying math is real therefore nothing is real. Math does have flaws, but it works and we understand the flaws well enough to work through them.

>I watch Rick and Morty and I'm proud of it.

So you don't believe in physics?

Quantum mechanics?

So now you're LARPing as a deep-thinking sociopath instead of admitting that your standards for belief are very conveniently twisted around to include the shit that you'd "look dumb" for not believing but exclude God?

Yes.

A myth is not physical evidence.

>Empiricism
Lmaoing @ ur life.

just love the Lord ya faggots

At this point, you are just pleading to be agreed with regardless.

Never saw real life application of quantum physics. Until they provide useful applications available to me personally to test and exploit then it's a meme just like string theory.

fee.org/articles/michael-oakeshott-on-rationalism-in-politics/

There is physical evidence of Quantum physics. That's the difference between unicorns and science denial.

My logic is sound. You must apply your rules consistently to reality. Calling me names doesn't prove me wrong.

I didn't want to argue. But I admit I was a bit alpha about it.

You're begging the question. You have yet to determine that it is a myth.

The historical evidence is that Christ existed and was believed by at least some of his contemporaries to have performed miracles. Further miracles then add weight to the account of those contemporaries.

Anyway, you're probably mixing up the words: "evidence" and "proof". Common mistake among atheists who didn't learn to think for themselves. "Evidence" is not "proof". The Bible is "evidence". Whether or not it is convincing is an entirely different question than whether or not it qualifies as "evidence".

Eye-witness testimony is considered relevant evidence in every single court of law that has ever existed.

Maybe, never saw it. When I see the evidence I might reconsider it's meme status.

But you don't apply your rules consistently, if you could even be said to have "rules" which I am increasingly sure you don't. Thus far you have shown nothing but the fact that you can repeat shit you've already heard.

That absolutes are few and far between, if our measurements are even correct. I'm an Academic Skeptic, the "universe could be 10 seconds old" philosophy.

I'm not saying Christ didn't exist. I'm saying the events surrounding his life are mostly myth.

Eye-witness testimony has to be supported with evidence. You can't just make a claim and say it's true because you saw it.

>The historical evidence is that Christ existed

No bones with DNA = no evidence

Historians make shit up all the time.
Oh wait! They didn't have genetic testing 2000 years ago. Never trust human word alone.

That was gamma behavior, user.

So science and academia isn't good enough for you?

Okay.