Discussion in 'Community' started by harpua, Jan 29, 2014.
I'd go with The Theist/Atheist Thunderdome: What a Bunch of A-holes
What about Theist/Atheist Thunderdome What a bunch of B(lack)-holes
Totally appropriate here
That makes me smile in such ways I didn't believe were possible.
So, Face Ripper Jesus?
@Anakin Solo Revanchist ,
@timmoishere wants you to post evidence that proves the sun revolves around the Earth (again).
That's not even ASR's biggest problem.
He's got to basically rework gravity so that objects with vastly heavier masses orbit objects with smaller masses (this ain't no Pluto-Charon orbit) or rework gravity and quantum mechanics so that somehow an object with such a huge volume has so little mass.
He'll probably say something like "The sun is smaller than the Earth! Look, I can cover it with my hand!"
The sun is all hot gas and stuff, it doesn't have any mass
@Anakin Solo Revanchist
Point Given... agent of Satan.
That's a really naïve classification metric and it demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of what philosophy is.
I mean, for example, Bertrand Russell was of the opinion that philosophy's primary purpose was to tackle questions science was not yet equipped/could never be equipped to address. So he would probably have contended that philosophy was more like attempting to find a black cat in a dark room because nobody's even dreamed of the notion of a flashlight. Massimo Pigliucci, who's a prominent contemporary philosopher of science, would probably argue that philosophy exists so that you can talk about that cat you're trying to find, or why you think this flashlight thing people are working on ought to be able to clarify the matter. Still others would contend that the philosopher is concerned about what might be outside the room, because it's just one room.
The metaphysics is just a mess - it's going for a really lazy neo-positivist position that amounts to a kind of diehard Humean take, but ignores the fact that there's quite a bit of active metaphysical debate that attempts to discuss mathematics and scientific theory. Not to mention, if you really want to get terminologically dicey, "the cat is not there" is a metaphysical assertion even when you've turned the lights on.
And to defend the odd man out: theology would be concerned with discussing the properties of a cat were one to be in the room, differentiated from religious studies by the presumption that the cat is both in the room, and is black, because there really isn't any other way to interpret the relevant passages of the Codex Felinicus. But some of them will still probably contend that the blackness of the cat is irrelevant and that the writers were attempting to describe all mammals but could really only get at "cat."
Some will say that it's impossible to really tell where the cat ends and the room begins. Or indeed it's impossible to properly describe the cat, because the cat is the room and the room is the cat.
Spinoza arguably took it to the extreme with his whole "All of us and the room are facets of the cat" take.
What if the cat was really a chihuahua?
Then it's an annoying yappy thing that must be destroyed.
That's the Aztec school.
Like this one?
Heartless fiends I tell you! Heartless!
I didn't play it
Orthodox chihuahans must be purged in accordance with the prophecies.
That dog in particular is psychotic. I do love chihuahuas in general though.
Yo quiero Taco Bell.
They shall be extinguished, in the name of the lord.