[–] ▶ №2686973[Quote]>>2688427>>2689808
not trying to shill BUT what do other christians genuinely think of guy? hes controversal in the youtube apologetics scene
▶ №2686977[Quote]>>2686979
Isn't he basically the Catholic version of Redeemed Zoomer
▶ №2686979[Quote]>>2686981
>>2686977holy meds hes not catholic he doesnt even consider them christian
▶ №2686984[Quote]>>2686986
i dont like this protestantcuck
▶ №2686985[Quote]>>2686991
>>2686981from watching his videos hes closest to like a baptist albeit he just calls himself christian and doesnt like to be grouped in with denomations
▶ №2686988[Quote]
Donald mckenzie is my fav mullato
▶ №2686990[Quote]>>2686992
>>2686986he's pretentious
and if i remember correctly he doesn't like mary maybe that's some other guy
▶ №2686992[Quote]
>>2686990He has the same views most protestants have on the Virgin Mary
▶ №2687001[Quote]
Literally who is ts nophomo
▶ №2687005[Quote]
Isn't this the guy Adam Green raped on stage?
▶ №2688256[Quote]
>>2686964 (OP)protemuttcuck
▶ №2688268[Quote]>>2688280>>2688293>>2689414
Genuine question, from an outside perspective the whole of christianity is very comparable to modern slop fandoms of like tv series and video games, because in a sense they also make their own fanfictions of the bible complete disregard canon, to enjoy it like they want to, etc. why is this?
▶ №2688280[Quote]>>2688301
>>2688268Rolf you've asked this question before
▶ №2688293[Quote]>>2688305
>>2688268Personal biases. They focus on the parts of the religion they like and ignore the parts they don't care about
▶ №2688301[Quote]>>2688312>>2688320
>>2688280I am trapped in an endless cycle, everytime I come close to the truth I start from anew again. This is my personal hell.
▶ №2688305[Quote]>>2688312
>>2688293Are you christian?
▶ №2688312[Quote]>>2688325>>2688326
>>2688301Document your thoughts. Even if it is unoriginal, if you keep it somewhere you not have spend time remembering it
>>2688305No
▶ №2688320[Quote]>>2688329
>>2688301Start writing your thoughts in a journal
▶ №2688325[Quote]>>2688342>>2688350>>2688433
>>2688312It is not about spiraling, but more so that whenever I think I undserstand a topic concerning human behavior may it be politics, religion or history, I suddenly discover a new aspect I havent thought about before.
▶ №2688326[Quote]>>2688342
>>2688312May I ask if you are religious?
▶ №2688329[Quote]
>>2688320I am doing this for certain things already, like philosophy or literature.
▶ №2688362[Quote]>>2688366>>2688368
>>2688350I want to attain true knowledge but it seems that the things I want to attain cannot come from the material plane, so I have to turn inward and start meditating.
▶ №2688365[Quote]>>2688380
>>2688342So you are an atheist?
▶ №2688366[Quote]>>2688409
>>2688362What religion do you believe in
▶ №2688368[Quote]>>2688400
>>2688362You can't attain true knowledge, humans aren't meant to be perfect at anything
▶ №2688380[Quote]>>2688411
>>2688365Why are you talking to me so personally? Do you recognize my typing style? I have talked to you several times before this
▶ №2688402[Quote]>>2688415
>>2688400Well there is a way…
▶ №2688409[Quote]
>>2688366I dont believe in any religion.
▶ №2688411[Quote]>>2688428
>>2688380Do you want me to stop talking to you?
▶ №2688415[Quote]>>2688419
>>2688402Ok I will indulge, what is it?
▶ №2688423[Quote]
Video doesn't really encompasses the entire concept but it's not a bad start
▶ №2688427[Quote]>>2688429
>>2686973i think apologetic youtubers are cringe. if you want to learn more about your faith, books are a higher quality medium
▶ №2688428[Quote]
>>2688411No, I was just taken back by you asking what my religion is multiple times
▶ №2688429[Quote]>>2688434
>>2688427tsmt
Just ask your priest
▶ №2688433[Quote]
>>2688325thats good development. you are growing
▶ №2688437[Quote]
>>2688432I'll ask the channel owner to add turkaryan subtitles
▶ №2688438[Quote]>>2688441>>2688448>>2688458
>>2688419This is in no way a help for me.
▶ №2688440[Quote]
>>2688419But thanks anyway
▶ №2688448[Quote]
>>2688438and what actually your "way" is?
▶ №2688458[Quote]>>2688471
>>2688438You are doing that to achieve a goal. Once you do finish it you will stop
▶ №2688461[Quote]>>2688464
>>2688441I have already seen the video before, I know this youtuber. I believe that there is a being (I am using this in the loosest sense here) which created existence and I even partially believe what he says about humans, but my question are entirely of different nature alltogether.
▶ №2688464[Quote]>>2688500
>>2688461What are your questions?
▶ №2688471[Quote]>>2688495
>>2688458In the beginning of my own little experiment I thought there was an endgoal, but it feels like a fractal the closer you zoom in on something the more infinitely complex it gets.
▶ №2688495[Quote]>>2688519
>>2688471thats just the beauty of life. even if you had 1000 years to life, you still wouldnt know everything
▶ №2688496[Quote]
esl
▶ №2688500[Quote]>>2688503>>2688516>>2688531
>>2688464How can I build a system of knowledge that is based on absolute truths? Mainly my concern is what would this knwoledge look like what axioms hold, can I infer a different set of axioms etc. Before you say god is the truth or something like that, using god as a fist fact wouldnt help me derive anything useful I need for the thing I want to create.
▶ №2688503[Quote]>>2688515
>>2688500The sooner you will find out that you cannot run everything off of logic. let alone for the masses. They need a balance.
▶ №2688515[Quote]
>>2688503This creation would just be for myself, I wouldnt want to share it with everyone, atleast as long as I am alive.
▶ №2688516[Quote]>>2688527
>>2688500The video does answer that, theosis is the transformation of humans into gods, therefore being able to obtain knowledge of absolute truths.
▶ №2688519[Quote]>>2688554
>>2688495But I want to know everything
▶ №2688527[Quote]>>2688548
>>2688516But you cant achieve it here and now, you will not become a god walking among earth.
▶ №2688531[Quote]>>2688549
>>2688500That's vague. I believe that you want something more precise, but you lack the language to describe it
▶ №2688548[Quote]>>2688568
>>2688527Well you can't expect it to be easy or cheap
That's the cost of divine knowledge, it comes at a cost
But the process is worth it
▶ №2688549[Quote]>>2688564
>>2688531I know exactly what I want but you are partially correct, I lack the language to describe it, but I am also intentionally being a bit vague, because I could theoretically describe it more precise.
▶ №2688554[Quote]>>2688560>>2688574
>>2688519why not know a few things really well and build your life off of those things you know? become a specialist rather than a jack of trades
▶ №2688560[Quote]>>2688614
>>2688554The idea of being omniscient does seem appealing tbh
▶ №2688564[Quote]>>2688589
>>2688549Why do you choose to be vague then?
▶ №2688568[Quote]>>2688586
>>2688548For A to happen you first have to believe in A to be true, then A is the truth. Can you prove with absolute certainty that A was true before it happened?
▶ №2688574[Quote]>>2688601
>>2688554I do not want to live, what you would call a normal life.
▶ №2688586[Quote]>>2688595
>>2688568Something can be true without anyone believing in it to be true
▶ №2688589[Quote]>>2688610
>>2688564Difficult to answer.
▶ №2688595[Quote]>>2688596>>2688632
>>2688586You have not answered my question, I know that A was true regardless if I believe in it or not, but what makes A true apriori?
▶ №2688596[Quote]
>>2688595shit no apriori cares about
▶ №2688601[Quote]>>2688607
>>2688574i think its better to become a top 0.5% in something you love rather than being a top 50% in every single small thing
▶ №2688607[Quote]>>2688612>>2688640
>>2688601To put it simply I want to know everything about one specific hobby I have, I dont want to know everything in the literal sense, I can live without ever knowing if a historical event happened or not.
▶ №2688610[Quote]>>2688617
>>2688589I sense fear in you. What are you afraid of?
▶ №2688612[Quote]>>2688633
>>2688607are you sure it's a hobby if you're this possesive over it?
▶ №2688614[Quote]>>2688637
>>2688560the extent of our human frame cannot possibly know all that is and all that is to come. we are still finding new historical records from the past and good luck predicting the next 10 years of history. hell, we even lost technologies that previous societies had.
<im glad we have the internet as a source of knowledge, but even that is limited despite its digital vastness. the idea of omniscience in mortality is absurd
▶ №2688617[Quote]>>2688629
>>2688610ridicule even on here
▶ №2688629[Quote]>>2688643>>2688648
>>2688617You shouldn't namefag then. Anonymity is a blessing
▶ №2688632[Quote]>>2688638
>>2688595For some reason I can answer this but I can't express it
Weird feeling
▶ №2688633[Quote]>>2688642
>>2688612It is not a normal hobby like I dont know climbing or chess, it is like philosophy and I am possessive over it because I really really enjoy it and could do it for all eternity.
▶ №2688640[Quote]>>2688652
>>2688607seems like we agree then, despite using different words.
<as someone who excels in his chosen field, my only advice would be to gain as much experiences as possible. my time reading psychology books helped me find opportunities and made me excel in my welding and architecture classes for example.
▶ №2688642[Quote]>>2688662
>>2688633it's not a hobby then, let's call it a "interest" or "work"
however you can still call it a hobby if you want
▶ №2688648[Quote]>>2688654>>2688688
>>2688629We have a productive conversation here on pol that is already a blessing.
▶ №2688652[Quote]>>2688703
>>2688640I have already put much work into it.
▶ №2688654[Quote]
>>2688648it's like the ones we have over cuckjeet but instead of him it's you and it's not that stressful
▶ №2688657[Quote]>>2688676>>2688680>>2688703
>>2688638More reason to believe in something (at least similar to) theosis
We can't comprehend the concept of truth with our mortal states
▶ №2688658[Quote]>>2688661>>2688678
>>2688643Everyone knows that you are Indian because you always namefag. That should prove my point
▶ №2688662[Quote]
>>2688642The post I made about a project of mine gaining momentum was exactly about this interest of mine.
▶ №2688676[Quote]>>2688680
>>2688657The one thing I know for certain that the path to absolute truth is not an easy one and it requires much sacrafice.
▶ №2688678[Quote]
>>2688658being inclusive is a virtue
▶ №2688688[Quote]>>2688711
>>2688661Well, you get the hate, not me
>>2688648The desire to solve it is stronger than shame, so just state what you want to get closer to the solution
▶ №2688703[Quote]>>2688718
>>2688652i say since you are already writing notebooks and engaging with your interest, you are already progressing well. keep on reading and applying your knowledge in real situations.
>>2688657agreed
▶ №2688711[Quote]>>2688722
>>2688688Okay I will give you a problem that is tangentially related to mine, how do I prove that anything in the realm of logic exists at all with absolute certainty.
▶ №2688718[Quote]>>2688744
>>2688703Luckily for me this interest of mine will soon be my job hopefully.
▶ №2688722[Quote]>>2688736
>>2688711Define "absolute certainty"
▶ №2688736[Quote]>>2688785
>>2688722So no argument for non-existence can be made.
▶ №2688785[Quote]>>2688791>>2688807
>>2688736I have worried about this too, and it's a bit silly because anyone can make a statement against the existence of something regardless of the amount of evidence proving it. Consensus does not determine what is true, what works is what is true. If it keeps working then we can be certain that it is true. That is the philosophy of science
▶ №2688791[Quote]>>2688819>>2688870
>>2688785What if you're just hallucinating it?
▶ №2688807[Quote]>>2688870
>>2688785I am talking about metascience, the logic which lies beyond as the firmament of science, I have already talked about this topic extensively on here.
But you can make cartain infrences that some things exist without a doubt for example like the concept of true or false (in the statement logical sense) and or existence and nonexistence.
▶ №2688819[Quote]>>2688830
>>2688791What if there was some sort of I dont know genius malignus playing all sorts of tricks in your mind of things that were true and false.
▶ №2688851[Quote]>>2688866>>2688888
If that was all I will go to sleep now. Good night!
▶ №2688866[Quote]
>>2688851good night nigga
▶ №2688870[Quote]>>2688886>>2688975
>>2688791Hallucinations do not change anything beyond claimed minor changes. Yes there are some things that could have an effect on it, but if there is not enough evidence, then we do not have a reason to believe it
>>2688807Eh, depends on what you are thinking of. "True" and "false" are general states that applies to many things, therefore differ depending on context. What is true about me could me false about you and true about a lamp because we have different states
▶ №2688886[Quote]>>2688912
>>2688870Just because you don't have evidence for something doesn't mean it can't be true
▶ №2688888[Quote]
>>2688851Good night Rolf. Sleep well
▶ №2688912[Quote]>>2688939
>>2688886Yes, but it also means that it is not true. You could believe in anything because it could exist in another universe or timeline, but it does not apply to anything else other than theory
What can stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
▶ №2688939[Quote]>>2688949
>>2688912So something needs to be believed to be true?
▶ №2688952[Quote]
>>2688949That contradicts your previous statement
▶ №2688975[Quote]>>2688984>>2689041>>2689061>>2689163
>>2688870Okay last thing I do before I go to sleep, lets do a little thought experiment, suppose you write down a countable number of existence statments, i.e
1. Trees exist
2. 12 dimensional quantum gravity exists
3. I exist
.
.
.
Now lets observe regardless if the list exists in our thoughts or if the things exist, can make a simple observation, we will do categories things that we can assign to these statements about exist or doesnt exist. We have three values either a A exists, it doesnt exist, or it there is a third state which humans cannot comprehend, but clearly for every statement there are only three choices and one of the has to be true, since I included a third option of things that neither exist or dont exist, therfore I can make a list which contains true statemnts.
▶ №2688987[Quote]>>2689011
>>2688969Oh. I meant to put "could not". Sorry
▶ №2689011[Quote]>>2689103
>>2688987Just because it can't be true doesn't mean that it isn't
▶ №2689041[Quote]
>>2688975To make it simpler what I basically mean write down:
A exists
B exists
C exists
Now here is the crucial point I dont prove the existence of A, B, C themselves but rather if the statement A exists does exist.
There are clearly three possibilities
(A exists) does exist
(A exists) doesnt exist
(A exists) is in a state which is neither existence or non existence.
Now write down all possible lists with A, B and C. It is very clear that one of them contains the list which puts all statements in the correct category of existence. We dont know which list is the true one, but one of them is, we call that list which we cant specifically identify the true list, and this is what we define as true.
There are no nontrivial arguments against this prove btw.
▶ №2689043[Quote]
But I will really go to sleep now.
▶ №2689061[Quote]>>2689131
>>2688975It depends on the subject. Yes and no answers are not the only solutions, it is could also be a mix of things that are true and others that are false. You assumed that there is only one unknown answer, but there could also be multiple unknown states influencing the subject.
The fundamental problem is that it is dependent on context, but you are trying to apply it to everything. That is illogical
▶ №2689103[Quote]
>>2689011>Just because it can't be true doesn't mean that it isn'tDo you mean can be true? We're all typing like ESL users right now…
▶ №2689121[Quote]
My worries about using correct grammar is straining me. I will just focus on getting my point across
▶ №2689131[Quote]>>2689135>>2689160
>>2689061No to specify:
My third category includes very other mode of existence. Thus everything is included and I am not making statements about context, you think I am talking about specifc things but as I have said I am doing statements about statements.
▶ №2689135[Quote]
>>2689131*every other mode
▶ №2689160[Quote]>>2689175
>>2689131> statements about statementsLike general statements about reality?
▶ №2689175[Quote]>>2689199
>>2689160Something like that.
▶ №2689193[Quote]>>2689202>>2689206
>>2689163Where is this from?
I am doing a logical disjunction between the truths of different lists.
▶ №2689199[Quote]>>2689217
>>2689175Very few statements apply to everything. It is a futile venture to attempt to find more
▶ №2689202[Quote]
>>2689193Holy shit, I just had a massive insight I can make this even more rigiorous and can introduce the concept of truth in bigger generality.
▶ №2689206[Quote]>>2689221
>>2689193It says at the beginning (Wikipedia) but it can no longer be found on the internet. I saved it like 10 years ago but I think it was recorded in 2007.
▶ №2689217[Quote]>>2689230
>>2689199No? I can literally make an inifinte list of statments that are general, again you are thinking to concrete. I can even show you a semi-rigorous proof:
Trees exist.
The statemnet trees exist does exist.
The statement" the statement trees exist does exist" exists.
The statement The statement" the statement trees exist does exist" exists exists.
I could keep going ad infinitum making ever more general statements.
▶ №2689221[Quote]>>2689236
>>2689206Did you record it?
▶ №2689230[Quote]>>2689285
>>2689217I don't get where you're going with this
▶ №2689244[Quote]
>>2689236>for reasonsome reason
▶ №2689249[Quote]
Dude is looney, I got 'nished from xis 'cord for not agreeing with predestination. He bases his argumentation that his interpretation of the Bible is correct because he is elect (predestined for salvation) and he knows he is elect because he interprets the Bible correctly.
▶ №2689285[Quote]>>2689305
>>2689230I know were you are coming from I will try to fill the gap to my argument.
If I say the tree is brown, you would say maybe to you but to a colourblind person it may be gray or something.
But if I say the statement the tree is brown does exist, there are only finitely many choices for you to answer, for example you could say depending on the context the statement the tree exist might exist.
But the crucial step is her now, I can make the statement: Depending on the context the statement the tree exist might exist is a statement that exists.
You would be unable to respond, because you would contradict your previous statement, thus making this statement true.
▶ №2689305[Quote]>>2689333
>>2689285> I can make the statement: Depending on the context the statement the tree exist might exist is a statement that exists.>You would be unable to respond, because you would contradict your previous statement, thus making this statement true.How does that make the statement before it true?
▶ №2689333[Quote]>>2689342>>2689366
>>2689305My argument is that following statement is now true:
> I can make the statement: Depending on the context the statement the tree exist might exist is a statement that exists.Because if you said that this statement might only be true in some contexts, would make the above statement still valid, thus making it a valid statement.
▶ №2689342[Quote]>>2689348
>>2689333Nobody fucking cares nigga kill yourself
▶ №2689366[Quote]>>2689389
>>2689333>> I can make the statement: Depending on the context the statement the tree exist might exist is a statement that existsThat is a new statement, not a modification that causes the tree to always exist because the subject is the statement, not the tree
▶ №2689368[Quote]
>>2686981Xe is nondenominational
▶ №2689389[Quote]>>2689409
>>2689366I think it does not always imply the tree exists but even so I could modify it to:
Depending on the context the statement the tree might exist is a statement that exists.
▶ №2689409[Quote]>>2689424
>>2689389So? That only claims the statement exists, not that the tree exists
▶ №2689414[Quote]
>>2688268Wishful thinking and pride from the individual
Other denominations are basically failing to be Orthodox, making endless argument as to why the church fathers agreed with them particularly, and saying that the Orthodox are not actually Orthodox according to the bible
▶ №2689424[Quote]>>2689426>>2689440
>>2689409That was my whole point, I said that I am not talking about concrete things like trees, but only things regarding statements of statments.
▶ №2689426[Quote]>>2689440
>>2689424Because before we can even talk about the thing we have to talk about if we can talk about statements of the thing.
▶ №2689440[Quote]>>2689456
>>2689424>>2689426What's the point? We know that those statements exist
▶ №2689456[Quote]>>2689465>>2689478
>>2689440How do you know that these statements exist? How do you know anything exists?
▶ №2689465[Quote]>>2689520
>>2689456Again certainty meaning every argument for nonexistence fails.
▶ №2689478[Quote]>>2689488
>>2689456It's right there
▶ №2689488[Quote]>>2689520
>>2689478But your eyes might be tricking you.
▶ №2689520[Quote]>>2689546
>>2689465>>2689488I already explained this. Anyone can argue against something, but if it keeps working then we can be certain that it is true
"Absolute certainty" can not be possessed by us anyways because we can not know everything. It could be true in different conditions, or we made a mistake in our reasoning, or something else
▶ №2689546[Quote]>>2689561>>2689578
>>2689520No you cant be certain that these things hold in general just because they worked a finite number of times, you really think like a physicist or engineer.
▶ №2689561[Quote]>>2689578
>>2689546Physicist not in a derogatory way, I get your reasoning and in a physical/engineering context I would agree that this approximation is good enoguh.
▶ №2689578[Quote]>>2689630
>>2689546Why?
>>2689561Are you thinking of metaphysical forces?
▶ №2689630[Quote]>>2689653
>>26895781. Because the claim from you is, I observed an object falling to the ground 10000 times (due to gravity etc.), therefore without a doubt in my mind you would say the object always falls to the grund with absolute certainty.
My response would be, can you prove that the object will fall onto earth at 1000000000000 or the 9999999999999999999999999999999 time or at the nth time with absolute certainty?
You couldnt because you can only infringe upon the past instances this happened thus you cant prove it with absolute certainty.
2. I am thinking of how physical laws need to be applied to make them useful, or discover new lwas. But philosophy allows us to look at the absolute validity of the law itself.
▶ №2689653[Quote]>>2689657
>>2689630We cannot have absolute certainty about anything. It is the paradox of knowledge. Your attempts to gain it are futile
▶ №2689657[Quote]>>2689662
>>2689653You may think that and I thought so too but there are things which can be proven with absolute certainty.
▶ №2689662[Quote]>>2689690
>>2689657What examples do you have?
▶ №2689690[Quote]>>2689733
>>2689662The something that doubts. I will only give a short (probably partially incorrect version), because the actual one takes like 15 pages but it goes like this:
Suppose you cant be certain of anything, there is a chance that anything that you have ever learned. thought experienced was fake and didnt exist. You doubt everything you have ever believed, but now suppose you have disregarded all your beliefs as wrong there remains one thing which is true, the thing that doubts (or the doubting itself whatever linguistic version you prefer).
▶ №2689733[Quote]>>2689745>>2689760
>>2689690> there remains one thing which is true, the thing that doubtsThis assume that those memories where transferred to the same conscience, but that could also be false
This also assumed that this conscience is real, but why should we believe that?
▶ №2689745[Quote]
>>2689733were transfered*
▶ №2689760[Quote]>>2689775>>2689809
>>2689733There is nothing that prohibits you for doubting your own continoud existence, Descartes who talked about this even explicitly mentioned it. The self doesnt have to doubt, what is important is that there is something which doubts.
▶ №2689778[Quote]
biggest heretic that has ever walked this earth AWARD
▶ №2689808[Quote]>>2689818
>>2686973he spreads false teachings such as annhilationism
he has the audacity to call himself an "Orthodox Christian" but by that he doesn't mean that he's Eastern Orthodox, he has insulted the Orthodox Church many times award
▶ №2689809[Quote]>>2689821
>>2689760How do you know those doubts are real? Again you could endlessly doubt something if so desired, but humanity uses science in some form or another to determine everything. If you reject that because it cannot be give us absolute certainty, then you cannot prove anything because nothing can give us absolute certainty
▶ №2689818[Quote]>>2689825
>>2689808Protestants love to call themselves lowercase-o orthodox
▶ №2689821[Quote]>>2689824>>2689857
>>2689809If you doubt your doubts you are doubting
▶ №2689824[Quote]>>2689865
>>2689821Or something is doubting for that matter
▶ №2689825[Quote]>>2689957>>2689970
>>2689818what's up with that?
▶ №2689857[Quote]>>2689884
>>2689821If it did not exist, it would not be a doubt, which is possible in this theory
▶ №2689865[Quote]>>2689887
>>2689824That doubting thing might also not exist
▶ №2689884[Quote]
>>2689857If it did not exist you could doubt its non existence.
▶ №2689887[Quote]>>2689908
>>2689865>doubting thing might also not existIsnt that a doubt my friend?
▶ №2689908[Quote]>>2689919
>>2689887Maybe it is not. Maybe this is all the imagination of some lion and we don't exist, because anything can happen in theory (which is imaginary)
▶ №2689919[Quote]>>2689943
>>2689908Well but doubting would still exist in that case.
▶ №2689943[Quote]>>2689974
>>2689919What if we are a hologram that still exists after every living thing becomes extinct. Doubting would not exist then
▶ №2689957[Quote]
>>2689825I have no idea, I guess they interpret it as "holding true to the Bible"
▶ №2689974[Quote]>>2689998
>>2689943The problem is you dont get to imagine made up scenarios (since by assumption of the theory you would have to doubt them), you can only doubt them.
▶ №2689998[Quote]>>2690028>>2690042
>>2689974>The problem is you dont get to imagine made up scenariosHuh? I just did that
>>2689974>you can only doubt them.I could also not doubt it. It is not necessary for existence
▶ №2690028[Quote]
>>2689998>Huh? I just did thatThis answer would be like if we played chess and you suddenly started playing checkers, I would also tell you that it is not allowed, it would be a different game.
▶ №2690042[Quote]>>2690053
>>2689998But my thought experiment was literally that you start doubting anything, then say it first hand that you dont want to participate in this thought experiment, but it was literally an assumption.
▶ №2690053[Quote]>>2690069
>>2690042I did not say that. I claimed that doubting is not necessary for existence. I want to continue this discussion
▶ №2690069[Quote]
>>2690053I agree doubting is not necessary for existence, but there is a certain list of priorities on has to establish to prove other things.
▶ №2690078[Quote]>>2690103
>>2690063I am also tired friend it is 11:30pm in Austria. WOuld it bother you if we were to continue this discussion another time?
▶ №2690083[Quote]
>mystery meat good even tho they don't really look like either parent and this creates distance between the parents and the child and this makes mental illnesses far more common. o algo
▶ №2690103[Quote]>>2690123
>>2690078Mhm, my issue is that I do not know how we could correlate our schedules in a way that we would meet at a similar time
This would be easy on any mainstream social media, but we are limited to the confines of this imageboard
▶ №2690116[Quote]
Being healthy is the most important thing, so above that I want you to sleep. If you are tired your cognition will be off
▶ №2690123[Quote]>>2690151>>2690159
>>2690103Sadly true, there are many things in this conversation that still need to be clarified and I am aslo unsatisfied ny how I expressed some things I have said. But this was by far one of the most interesting philosophical discussions I have ever had.
▶ №2690151[Quote]>>2690159>>2690171
>>2690123Do you want to connect on another platform? That is the most convenient option
▶ №2690159[Quote]>>2690172
>>2690123>>2690151two gay guys about to erp on discord
▶ №2690171[Quote]>>2690179
>>2690151This is an instant ban I think. A few days ago someone was perma banned for posting his discord username on pol.
▶ №2690179[Quote]>>2690187
>>2690171What about Twitter?
▶ №2690187[Quote]>>2690203
>>2690179I am not on twitter.
I only have discord and youtube.
▶ №2690203[Quote]>>2690213
>>2690187Uhhhh, this would not work
Just go to bed and make a thread about this tomorrow. I wake up before you, so I will see it
I will also archive this thread so that we can reference it again
▶ №2690213[Quote]>>2690228
>>2690203Ok I will do it when I have time.
▶ №2690228[Quote]>>2690239
>>2690213Okay. Good night Rolf!
▶ №2690239[Quote]
>>2690228Good night friend!
