Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Can we stop the superiority complex two minutes here please ?
I was not necessarily contradicting you. I was adding more context to the word. But since you played the toxic card, atheist doesn't means "belief in no god" but "without god" which means the absence of belief in god and not the presence of the non belief in god.
But thanks for your kind words. This is not up to debate. This is something known in most atheist circles.
Actually there is. A material one. There is no way for you or anyone else to learn the amount of knowledge required to understand radical leftism if you start at the conservative and far right end of the spectrum.
It's a physical impossibility.
Fatalism
A scientific model is not necessarily something that has been proven.
I was not necessarily contradicting you. I was adding more context to the word. But since you played the toxic card, atheist doesn't means "belief in no god" but "without god" which means the absence of belief in god and not the presence of the non belief in god.
But thanks for your kind words. This is not up to debate. This is something known in most atheist circles.
Actually there is. A material one. There is no way for you or anyone else to learn the amount of knowledge required to understand radical leftism if you start at the conservative and far right end of the spectrum.
It's a physical impossibility.
Life began in bullshit. Continues through bullshit. And will end in bullshit. That my friend, is true enlightenment.
A scientific model is not necessarily something that has been proven.
Can we stop the superiority complex two minutes here please ?
I was not necessarily contradicting you. I was adding more context to the word. But since you played the toxic card, atheist doesn't means "belief in no god" but "without god" which means the absence of belief in god and not the presence of the non belief in god.
But thanks for your kind words. This is not up to debate. This is something known in most atheist circles.
Actually there is. A material one. There is no way for you or anyone else to learn the amount of knowledge required to understand radical leftism if you start at the conservative and far right end of the spectrum.
It's a physical impossibility.
Fatalism
A scientific model is not necessarily something that has been proven.
I was not necessarily contradicting you. I was adding more context to the word. But since you played the toxic card, atheist doesn't means "belief in no god" but "without god" which means the absence of belief in god and not the presence of the non belief in god.
But thanks for your kind words. This is not up to debate. This is something known in most atheist circles.
Actually there is. A material one. There is no way for you or anyone else to learn the amount of knowledge required to understand radical leftism if you start at the conservative and far right end of the spectrum.
It's a physical impossibility.
Fatalism
A scientific model is not necessarily something that has been proven.
[automerge]1736026420[/automerge]
I do. I think the Genesis stuff is for the most part a metaphor.
[automerge]1736026489[/automerge]
Wtf!? Better start cooking your own pizza.
Is their being a radical leftist necessitate then having all this knowledge?
What if someone changes their opinion on radical leftist on the basis of appealing to authority, and trusting that all the core renants within radical leftism are true?
Humans change opinion all the time on the basis of authority, perhaps gut feeling, etc.
What if someone changes their opinion on radical leftist on the basis of appealing to authority, and trusting that all the core renants within radical leftism are true?
Humans change opinion all the time on the basis of authority, perhaps gut feeling, etc.
Earth-chan memes are hilarious. Weebos have sexualized global warming and the planet itself.
For me, some things may not be literal, like 7 days, since with God a day being like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day, was mentioned, but I believe we were created and I'm going on that rather than theories that can and may get disproven
If this isn't the definition of semantics, I don't know what is lmao
But since you want to be a smartass, animals have an "intellect" in the first sense (that doesn't require abstraction) humans have an "intellect" in the second sense (that requires abstraction)
This is a difference of quality, not quantity. Humans are qualitatively higher than animals
They don't. Children have the capacity for abstract knowledge, animals are entirely limited to perceptive or sensory knowledge which anyone looking at the animal kingdom for 5 seconds can see
"GUYS, I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!!"
But since you want to be a smartass, animals have an "intellect" in the first sense (that doesn't require abstraction) humans have an "intellect" in the second sense (that requires abstraction)
This is a difference of quality, not quantity. Humans are qualitatively higher than animals
They don't. Children have the capacity for abstract knowledge, animals are entirely limited to perceptive or sensory knowledge which anyone looking at the animal kingdom for 5 seconds can see
"GUYS, I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!!"