User Controls
2+2=4
-
2021-12-12 at 11:47 PM UTCUsing axiomatic systems to justify anything other than the system your truth resides in is dumb.
All glorps are green... But wtf is a glorp? Well it's exists in my Axiomatic spiritual belief system and is as real as concrete.
Heh, yeah fucking right. -
2021-12-13 at 12:17 AM UTC
Originally posted by Nile Using axiomatic systems to justify anything other than the system your truth resides in is dumb.
All glorps are green… But wtf is a glorp? Well it's exists in my Axiomatic spiritual belief system and is as real as concrete.
Heh, yeah fucking right.
Using epistemic nihilism to deny the validity of verifiable fact is retarded and anyone who does it should fucking kill themselves -
2021-12-13 at 12:20 AM UTC
Originally posted by Tyrant Using epistemic nihilism to deny the validity of verifiable fact is retarded and anyone who does it should fucking kill themselves
Can you point out "4" for me in a picture without use of language. Or symbolism of any kind?
I can point out trees and rocks, find me this creature in reality plz. -
2021-12-13 at 12:26 AM UTC
Originally posted by Nile Can you point out "4" for me in a picture without use of language. Or symbolism of any kind?
Does the very proposal of the picture itself not count as some kind of symbolism?
Where "in a picture" can anything be except as a representation of that thing? At a microscopic level they are just dots.I can point out trees and rocks, find me this creature in reality plz.
When you say "trees", why use s plural? You see a tree and a tree and a tree and a tree. You see 4 trees. And of course we call a tree and a tree, 2 trees. And thus when we have two "tree and a tree" pairs, we have 4 trees. -
2021-12-13 at 12:27 AM UTC3 is still the auperior number
-
2021-12-13 at 12:29 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 12:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by Tyrant Does the very proposal of the picture itself not count as some kind of symbolism?
Where "in a picture" can anything be except as a representation of that thing? At a microscopic level they are just dots.
When you say "trees", why use s plural? You see a tree and a tree and a tree and a tree. You see 4 trees. And of course we call a tree and a tree, 2 trees. And thus when we have two "tree and a tree" pairs, we have 4 trees.
Didn't read. -
2021-12-13 at 12:48 AM UTCthis is a primary school level thread which means wariat is not legally allowed to post in it
-
2021-12-13 at 1 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 1:03 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 1:04 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 1:04 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 1:05 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 1:08 AM UTCLooks like we got a catch 22 situation goin on
-
2021-12-13 at 1:08 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 2:01 AM UTCNile's posting style is just like wariat and has the same pedophile vibes. Could he be Wariat's alternative account?
-
2021-12-13 at 2:05 AM UTCWhatever, just don't call me polish.
-
2021-12-13 at 2:07 AM UTC
-
2021-12-13 at 2:08 AM UTC
-
2021-12-17 at 2:16 PM UTCDepends on the context, 2 women + 2 men could equal many many more humans than just 4.
...and this is the humanities forum.