Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum
» ITT: I solve the most difficult philosophical/existential questions you have
  1. Results 121 to 138 of 138
  2. First
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
post 1584905671 07-29-2019, 04:37 PM
-
#121
  1. zknarc
  2. Registered User
  1. zknarc
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2016
  4. Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Posts: 16,421
  6. Rep Power: 44912
That I never chose to be born

Why horrible stuff happens to good people
If you can't handle me when I'm incel, you don't deserve me when I'm chad
post 1584905901 07-29-2019, 04:40 PM
-
#122
  1. jmurat
  2. Registered User
  1. jmurat
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2012
  4. Age: 35
  5. Posts: 84
  6. Rep Power: 602
Originally Posted By FailedPotential
Our intuitions are flawed about things, this is why we use tools such a mathematics to prove something is correct or not.

For everyday things, are intuitions and common sense/logic apply very well.

For other things, harder to answer questions, not so much.

Why is this? We evolved and adapted to things that helped us pass on our genes, and didn't develop abilities to know things that were not necessary for that task.

To think you can solve everything with your current tools, or conceive of everything with your current tools is just... trying to think of a word... I don't even know. The fking audacity! There, that sounds good.
Whatever you said doesnt make ontological sense .. rekt bro!

Lol .. the fkn audacity is right .. fkn philosophers forgot even their own daddy socrates: No1 knows nothing


Edit: above guys comment reminded me of this dawkins vid. Anyone curious/interested enough to be reading this crap thread should watch this instead: youtu.be /1APOxs p1VFw (ah cant post links; only remove the spaces)
post 1584906411 07-29-2019, 04:47 PM
-
#123
  1. l2ambo
  2. Registered User
  1. l2ambo
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2010
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 36
  6. Posts: 8,380
  7. Rep Power: 8260
Originally Posted By jmurat
Whatever you said doesnt make ontological sense .. rekt bro!

Lol .. the fkn audacity is right .. fkn philosophers forgot even their own daddy socrates: No1 knows nothing
We're all watching shadow puppets on a cave wall, yet to discover the world outside the cave.
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
post 1584906881 07-29-2019, 04:54 PM
-
#124
  1. Brozart
  2. dunno
  1. Brozart
  2. dunno
  3. Join Date: Apr 2007
  4. Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
  5. Posts: 27,524
  6. Rep Power: 313692
Originally Posted By wincel
Human brain has definite limits. You can only store so much information and compute things so quickly. That doesn't change the laws of logic, which impose strict constraints on existence.
Logic does not define existence, logic is the way by whichwedefine existence.

The obvious truth is that neither you nor I can understand what's outside the realm of our ability to understand. Naturally, that's the point at which it stops - if you subscribe to and understand logic, you must admit that logic is potentially completely flawed. Sure, the reality most of us agree upon is most likely real is, well, the most likely.

But to propose that human comprehension and reason is infallible can only logically be to say "we define the universe by logic therefore the universe is defined by logic".

Your argument is "a bee is called a bee because we call it a bee, therefore it's called a bee". In that example, you understand the context, that it's relative, that language is conceptual, that different languages work differently. But you're unwilling to accept that we also have a larger conceptual context, one we cannot escape.

I also subscribe to logic, I'm not religious, I think the scientific explanations we've built are probably the best we've got, but to ignore the fact that a belief in logic is necessarily a belief is ignorance, you've followed logic to a point and refused to go beyond it.

Reason and logic are not universal truths, they're systems of human thought. To suggest that there cannot possibly be anything beyond the realm of our comprehension, that the way in which we perceive and define existence is the entire picture, is simply ignorant. It's laziness, or fear, or an inability to accept that there are things you cannot know.
fukn Brozart
I'm a hugger
post 1584907981 07-29-2019, 05:11 PM
-
#125
  1. jmurat
  2. Registered User
  1. jmurat
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2012
  4. Age: 35
  5. Posts: 84
  6. Rep Power: 602
Originally Posted By l2ambo
We're all watching shadow puppets on a cave wall, yet to discover the world outside the cave.
I like your form bro .. no homo
post 1584908201 07-29-2019, 05:15 PM
-
#126
  1. Redfish225
  2. Hunter/Fisherbreh
  1. Redfish225
  2. Hunter/Fisherbreh
  3. Join Date: Aug 2012
  4. Posts: 69,167
  5. Rep Power: 903956
o+p=*******

Yes, I’m right.
I loe e.
post 1584908301 07-29-2019, 05:18 PM
-
#127
  1. Cass40
  2. Quarantined Finja
  1. Cass40
  2. Quarantined Finja
  3. Join Date: Oct 2013
  4. Posts: 29,243
  5. Rep Power: 441318
Originally Posted By Brozart
Logic does not define existence, logic is the way by whichwedefine existence.

The obvious truth is that neither you nor I can understand what's outside the realm of our ability to understand. Naturally, that's the point at which it stops - if you subscribe to and understand logic, you must admit that logic is potentially completely flawed. Sure, the reality most of us agree upon is most likely real is, well, the most likely.

But to propose that human comprehension and reason is infallible can only logically be to say "we define the universe by logic therefore the universe is defined by logic".

Your argument is "a bee is called a bee because we call it a bee, therefore it's called a bee". In that example, you understand the context, that it's relative, that language is conceptual, that different languages work differently. But you're unwilling to accept that we also have a larger conceptual context, one we cannot escape.

I also subscribe to logic, I'm not religious, I think the scientific explanations we've built are probably the best we've got, but to ignore the fact that a belief in logic is necessarily a belief is ignorance, you've followed logic to a point and refused to go beyond it.

Reason and logic are not universal truths, they're systems of human thought. To suggest that there cannot possibly be anything beyond the realm of our comprehension, that the way in which we perceive and define existence is the entire picture, is simply ignorant. It's laziness, or fear, or an inability to accept that there are things you cannot know.
Even now whatever that Steven Hawkins guy has come up with, there will probably be someone even smarter than him in the future, and even if humans would never come up with anything more, there probably is something more powerful than us considering how little we know or maybe will ever know.
But of course how we define God is just made up by humans but that doesn't mean there's nothing more powerful or more intelligent than us out there.
post 1584908311 07-29-2019, 05:18 PM
-
#128
  1. HayZues Christi
  2. Registered User
  1. HayZues Christi
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Oct 2007
  4. Age: 40
  5. Posts: 33,178
  6. Rep Power: 232547
How much of my happiness should I sacrifice for others?
Ol' 71st street. The devil that birthed me.

606 G0D.
post 1584908921 07-29-2019, 05:31 PM
-
#129
  1. l2ambo
  2. Registered User
  1. l2ambo
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2010
  4. Location: Canada
  5. Age: 36
  6. Posts: 8,380
  7. Rep Power: 8260
Originally Posted By jmurat
I like your form bro .. no homo
hehe TY man
"Movin' ahead so life won't pass me by."
post 1584909191 07-29-2019, 05:35 PM
-
#130
  1. Pqlamzn
  2. Registered User
  1. Pqlamzn
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jun 2017
  4. Posts: 100
  5. Rep Power: 909
Originally Posted By Kev1972
But with homosex always resulting in a dead end you would think whatever causes it would eventually be bred out of the population. Like our tails did.
Whatever causes homosexuality, just by being a possibility in our genetic code means at any point in time it can come back as a random mutation. People can still be born with tails.
post 1584909391 07-29-2019, 05:38 PM
-
#131
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Brozart
Logic does not define existence, logic is the way by whichwedefine existence.

The obvious truth is that neither you nor I can understand what's outside the realm of our ability to understand. Naturally, that's the point at which it stops - if you subscribe to and understand logic, you must admit that logic is potentially completely flawed. Sure, the reality most of us agree upon is most likely real is, well, the most likely.

But to propose that human comprehension and reason is infallible can only logically be to say "we define the universe by logic therefore the universe is defined by logic".

Your argument is "a bee is called a bee because we call it a bee, therefore it's called a bee". In that example, you understand the context, that it's relative, that language is conceptual, that different languages work differently. But you're unwilling to accept that we also have a larger conceptual context, one we cannot escape.

I also subscribe to logic, I'm not religious, I think the scientific explanations we've built are probably the best we've got, but to ignore the fact that a belief in logic is necessarily a belief is ignorance, you've followed logic to a point and refused to go beyond it.

Reason and logic are not universal truths, they're systems of human thought. To suggest that there cannot possibly be anything beyond the realm of our comprehension, that the way in which we perceive and define existence is the entire picture, is simply ignorant. It's laziness, or fear, or an inability to accept that there are things you cannot know.
I am fully aware there are things I cannot know. My point is there are things God cannot know either. Mathematics and logic are universal. It is evident in the fact that a thing cannot be both true and not true somultaneously. Were that the case, then wvery single statement would be true.
post 1584910261 07-29-2019, 05:54 PM
-
#132
  1. Travis99
  2. Philosophy Crew
  1. Travis99
  2. Philosophy Crew
  3. Join Date: Jul 2011
  4. Posts: 12,076
  5. Rep Power: 81603
what if when you die you wake up?
There is no they…
post 1584910741 07-29-2019, 06:02 PM
-
#133
  1. rectifryer
  2. enlightened
  1. rectifryer
  2. enlightened
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Posts: 25,634
  5. Rep Power: 208783
Originally Posted By wincel
You would eventually reach a singularity. Any notion of time and space beyond a certain point fails to make sense.
Yet since it's widely theorized that this has happened multiple times there must be a secondary accounting of the rate much like time. I don't think it's unreasonable to confuse the two at first glance.

Tis mystery of the abyss.
Boycott foodservice industry crew
post 1584911031 07-29-2019, 06:06 PM
-
#134
  1. rectifryer
  2. enlightened
  1. rectifryer
  2. enlightened
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Posts: 25,634
  5. Rep Power: 208783
Originally Posted By BigBallsMcgee
What's the argument against suicide for those with crap lives that haven't improved with time and effort?
I've learned to appreciate the time and effort it takes to achieve some things I'll never be the best at. I call those things hobbies.
Boycott foodservice industry crew
post 1584912991 07-29-2019, 06:34 PM
-
#135
  1. 3Reich
  2. Registered User
  1. 3Reich
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2018
  4. Location: Arlington, Texas, United States
  5. Posts: 1,414
  6. Rep Power: 17156
Originally Posted By KirkMcquest
If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
Does a bear chit in the woods?
HTC crew checking in (LTC, skinny bishes, BBW's, thicc chicks all welcome)

Manchester United 4life

Snailrus Crew
post 1584913261 07-29-2019, 06:36 PM
-
#136
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By jmurat
Bruv i aint a philosopher so to hell with ontology lol... i was more implying the quantum decoherence phenomenon. A particle only takes its classical physical shape upon an information transfer event. Like the cat: ? before, then dead or alive upon observation.

Dont sit on your philosophical arguments to massage your ego. I was more arguing about why evidence should trump logic.
The cat is not both alive or dead. The cat is either alive or dead, but the result is not defined until the measurement is done. That is the point.
post 1584913541 07-29-2019, 06:40 PM
-
#137
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By rectifryer
Yet since it's widely theorized that this has happened multiple times there must be a secondary accounting of the rate much like time. I don't think it's unreasonable to confuse the two at first glance.

Tis mystery of the abyss.
I don't think the cyclic model is highlt regarded or widely theorized. In physics, normally, if there is no way to tell things apart then it is usually a bad idea to treat them differently. Seems to me that if things truly are periodic in the sense of poincare recurrence or something, there is still no way to know what cycle you are in.
post 1584915211 07-29-2019, 07:02 PM
-
#138
  1. 3Reich
  2. Registered User
  1. 3Reich
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2018
  4. Location: Arlington, Texas, United States
  5. Posts: 1,414
  6. Rep Power: 17156
Originally Posted By Chrysippus
would you rather your son be a vegan or a feminist?
For a male, they are one and the same.
HTC crew checking in (LTC, skinny bishes, BBW's, thicc chicks all welcome)

Manchester United 4life

Snailrus Crew
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts