GENIUS FORUMS

Conceivers come and go. The nature of truth remains the same. Think about what that means Average. is because they have not considered what they mean by truths, and the type of ontology truths exhibit. So you're asking 'What is the truth about truth?' right? And then making your pronouncements as th...

Forget reading websites Faust. It's like 9/11; forget the hype and don't bother attempting to sift the wheat from the chaff of the information, misinformation and disinformation. Just have a look around you and have a damn good think about it yourself. The answers will come easily enough as it's pre...

Dave Toast wrote: I was distancing Wisdom from said Woman philosophy. Not that it is without meaning or truth. The trouble is, wisdom cannot really be separated from said woman philosophy, not without destroying the meaning and truth in both. This is because both deal directly with the ego's deepes...

It certainly seemed so.

Too much hard work.

My principle objection being, of course, that I think Quantum Physics is the modern equivalent of alchemy. Ok but this is a philosophical objection. With regard to the quantity and quality of scientific method applied in said fields of study, Quantum Physics is quantum leaps ahead of Alchemy. As yo...

Well, if I understand that correctly, you seem to have garnered the opposite meaning to that which I portrayed. I was distancing Wisdom from said Woman philosophy. Not that it is without meaning or truth.

Should sciences be required to be accurate, truthful, and consistent -- or is utility good enough? I think Quantum Physics and everything it has given us pretty much answers that question Trev. Utility is basically what it's all about. Personally I think you're barking up a worthless tree but I can...

Ok Trev, I can understand if you're just saying that the term Biology is a misnomer. It's an arbitary distiction but then, aren't they all. I think you use of the term pseudoscience a little misleading though, being as that refers to how scientific a method for investigating any given phenomena is. ...

Dun-dun-duuuuuuun!


----------------------
Edited for hyphons

-----------------------------------
Edited for spelling of hyphens

You miss my original point though Liz. This wisdom, which is freely available to everyone capable, where all the admins et al largely cross over in their thought, is irrefutable truth. There is no interpreting it, or tarring it with a brush dipped in the accuracy and veracity of any extraneous assoc...

It's pretty simple really Liz. The truth is the truth and there is no room for interpretation. If you have sound premises and valid inference, you get truth. Thereby, it is impossible for David or anyone to interpret truth. One cannot give another meaning to something which already has an exact mean...

There is no 'interpreting' truth.

It should be the other way around. Indeed. Evolution is a universal process, a particular recognisable subset of causality. Natural Selection (encompassing sexual selection, genetic drift, etc.) is a subset of the process of evolution. Biology is a pseudoscience, like alchemy and quantum physics. B...

I don't want to sound like Jonny Obvious but aren't all three of them admins here? Indeed the only admins on this board?

So how could they be addressed or refered to collectively without the usual inference?

*scratches head*

Why did Lao Tsu say this: Ever desireless, one can see the mystery. Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations. instead of this: Ever desireless, one can see the mystery and the manifestations. Ever desiring, one can only see the manifestations. hmmm? Here's a more detailed one from the Buddah w...

Z: If a scientist was asked to define and explain the structure of DNA, he would tell you about sequences and nuclear tides, their construction, how they work and so on...

What kind of science do you research?

Wtf are nuclear tides? They sound way cooler than boring old nucleotides.

Why would you assume that the only reason for not killing one's fellow man would be religious morality?

Nooooo, not the Monty Hall Problem!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan's_ass

Quote your sources please!

Here's the latest on the subject from The Lancet:

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/G ... is_new.pdf

Again, what on earth are you talking about? You think there is irrationality involved in choosing between two equally rational actions but you're barking up the wrong tree. There is as much rationality as there is irrationality. Again you infer negative meaning where there is only neutrality. Furthe...

I'm just talking about individual consciousnesses having enough time and resources to be able to contemplate their own mortality there mate, albeit in needlessly fluffy language!

average wrote:How's and Why's don't apply to Consciousness, since it is that which is aware of all these things.

Owned.

ROFFLE biscuits!!1!eleven1!

Fucks [sic] sake, what a waste of time. You can't even punctuate.

There is no rational reason to choose either, so no bias either way. One choice is no more rational than the other and is also no less rational than the other. And there is a rational reason to choose arbitrarily in the supposed paradox, as stated. Therefore the fully rational person follows their n...

For the record, my conception of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of the process of evolution. First there is distinction – me or not me (A or B) – this is the beginning of awareness. Awareness becomes more sophisticated with the addition of further distinctions – A or B, A or ...