User Controls
Posts by Glokula's Homabla
-
2018-09-15 at 9:45 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionthe point was that no chemical currently can attain that but with years of purposefully funneled engineering we could potentially find a chemical that hacks biochemical pathways so that people can always be happy to a certain degree
-
2018-09-15 at 9:36 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionim gonna wake up feeling absolutely terrible in the mourning
lanny's instinctual solution to this is just to drink more for indefinite years of time -
2018-09-15 at 9:33 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionit was more ancient sort of like this http://opiate.org/ and related to a lot of _drugname_.org sites which all had the same format where the author had a theory comparing how all of these chemicals would work in helping us obtain a permanent state of bliss
-
2018-09-15 at 9:23 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionthe state of permanent feelings of bliss created in the brain without any rebound effect, possibly supplemented by transhumanism. there used to be a website on how we can achieve global bliss in the future but i think it got taken down because im not able to find it now
-
2018-09-15 at 9:11 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by mmQ The 200 IQ guy was asked, is there a heaven? He said "yes." then he was asked how do you know, and he said "I don't."
Then he sort of explained some edgy weird shit that made him believe that we are definitely a continuance of all things and we definitely "continue" once we're dead. I don't know what he meant by heaven.
Originally posted by Glokula's Homabla inorite? the theory of multiple universes would mean every physics system is exactly the same as ours. its not like the contents of our brain follow a logic based on quark interactions no way its all aether!
(also includes heaven)
which could also be considered the ideal and ultimate state of pleasure we experience represented as a concept. maybe? ask lanny he knows more about the scientific properties of heaven -
2018-09-15 at 9:10 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 9:05 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 9:04 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 9:03 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention>upset
>emotion
rly im drunk and having a good time telling u how stupid you are -
2018-09-15 at 9 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by Lanny
Famous cripple non-philosopher tells mostly non-scientists and non-philosophers that philosophy is dead. Wow.
Skinner proclaimed cognitive psychology was dead in what, the 50s? You've heard of that yeah? And how Chomsky leveled basically his whole research project in a brief essay? And how cognitive science is still a thing today. And Skinner actually was a trained psychologist.
Funny how undefended claims about other peoples fields being dead don't work out so well
keep on posting your *contributions* to philosophy lmao. if i take a shit and wipe with toilet paper and put it next to a speech-to-text what makes that philosphy less valid? how can you prove it is less valid? please tell me -
2018-09-15 at 8:58 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionthe belief in understanding the fantasy world is supposed to based on science
but if you make the fantasy world as simple as you can, what are you left with?
you're left with the science that makes that fantasy world make sense -
2018-09-15 at 8:54 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 8:51 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 8:50 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by Lanny Your disdain for philosophy is probably the worst offense since you obviously don't even understand what it is, which makes your reasons for trying to dismiss it embarrassingly obvious: crippling insecurity.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8520033/Stephen-Hawking-tells-Google-philosophy-is-dead.html
and it is. you might want to follow outside his footsteps with people who have never contributed shit to the word besides the residue tar of their brains besides SCIENTIFIC contributions. you dont want to think that because it will invalidate your entire life -
2018-09-15 at 8:46 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by mmQ I mean this is a good example. A little bait post at Lanny. I think he DOES know what they mean, and I think HE knows what he means. It's just that, like you and logic pussies, you can talk about it, show about it, knowing dull well people aren't gonna necessarily know what you mean, or be able to solve your puzzle.
I'm sure it's fun to talk fancy with fancy people, but most people aren't fancy. Please die?? :) 🙄🤔😭😉🤣🐑🤣🐑🤣
having a concept expressed in the absolute simplest form possible via a nonverbal graph of <10 discrete objects
vs
inflating this concept with 10,000 words to make someone understand it but getting lost in masturbation somewhere along the way so its worthless
im offended you would compare my ability to work with PURE LOGIC to his ability to fuck around outside of the radius of any sort of central point over a billion letters of keyboard spam -
2018-09-15 at 8:39 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by mmQ Sploo you're just as guilty at times when you're tying to make yourself seem smart, you try to sound smart.
You guys are interesting. Two smart people at different ends of the spectrum.
like quoting articles out of medicine journals by using the same words for medical conditions they use? should i just make up my own slang for neuron anatomy like ill call an axon a zimmy and a dendrite a bundy
this is totally the same as using a bunch of big words over 700 pages to say "we never really know what we know mannnn" -
2018-09-15 at 8:37 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by mmQ You know you write at far beyond a high school level though. Maybe you can't help it. But if you want to get any point across, why not explain it simpler to people like me and the majority of people who don't know all the fancy words?
because he doesn't actually understand the big words it just becomes buzzwords in philosophy circlejerks where it catches on and they feel appropriately jerked "ontological" "epistemiology" "metaphysically" aka "real" "how to know" "in our minds" doesnt sound fancy enough for their facade of adequacy -
2018-09-15 at 8:33 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attentionexplain the simplest things in the most complicated possible way because alcoholism intellectual delusions
-
2018-09-15 at 8:31 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
-
2018-09-15 at 8:26 AM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Sploo Needs Attention
Originally posted by mmQ Which reminded me of something someone said, not sure who, something to the effect of 'if you can't explain what you're saying to a 6 year old, you don't know what you're saying.'
Obviouslt that isn't holistically true but it's a thing Ive always believed too kinda. If you're smart, explain things in the simplest possible way. There's no reason not to.
lanny is literally the opposite of this
