Philosophical Vegan Forum

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 5:30 pm

teo123 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 6:43 am

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Wed Sep 29, 2021 11:49 am

As religions shrink due to modernization, as well as little interest in philosophy, these places have also seen shrinking.

It is getting hard to find a site to discuss religions as their apologists are dropping like flies.

This place is also small compared to others.

Regards
DL

Do you think you understand special relativity? Can you answer my question?

I know a few things, but not that.

There are many science specific forums.

Regards
DL

Well, I asked that on Physics StackExchange as well. I am interested in what @brimstoneSalad, who seems to have studied a lot of physics, thinks about it.

teo123 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 6:09 am

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 5:30 pm

teo123 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 30, 2021 6:43 am

Do you think you understand special relativity? Can you answer my question?

I know a few things, but not that.

There are many science specific forums.

Regards
DL

Well, I asked that on Physics StackExchange as well. I am interested in what @brimstoneSalad, who seems to have studied a lot of physics, thinks about it.

I took a look and now feel even more stupid than usual. Thanks.

Kidding.

Regards
DL

@brimstoneSalad, I have started a Croatian forum thread about Jakov Labor textbook definition of 2LOT: https://www.forum.hr/showthread.php?t=1296563

In my latest YouTube video about atheism, I addressed this criticism "Souls are metaphysical things, so physics has nothing to say about it." by stating that metaphysics is a multidisciplinary field made both from philosophy and physics. And that, to usefully discuss metaphysics, you need to have some understanding of both modern physics and modern philosophy. And @Sunflowers appears to be profoundly ignorant of both.
Slightly related, many people on Internet forums whom I discussed my latest paper about toponyms with seem to have blind faith that informatics has nothing to say about toponyms, that toponyms belong exclusively to linguistics. It seems that people who say that are victims of the same fallacy that @Sunflowers was committing. I am not sure how to respond to them. I think that by stating "That k-r pattern in the Croatian river names is a coincidence." you are making the informatical statement "That pattern is not statistically significant.". Yet, my calculations show that the probability of that pattern occurring by chance is somewhere between 1/300 and 1/17. But, for some reason, that doesn't convince people.

Also, @Sunflowers, about the Descartes'es argument from divisibility... Do you think it doesn't make sense to say "Part of me wants to do something, but another part of me thinks it is a bad idea."?

Both science and religions now (boast) a Gods of the Gaps.

If not demonstrable and communicative, all Gods are garbage.

The proof of concept for any metaphysical, scientific or supernatural religious God would be the same proof of the many Gods concepts.

Regards
DL

P.S.
If God is the way the right wing sees him, reject his morals.

I asked a question about how Descartes responded to the argument "Why do non-human animals have pituitary glands if they have no soul?" on Philosophy StackExchange, and thus far that question has many more upvotes than downvotes. It's amazing to me there are still people, such as @Sunflowers, who believe in Cartesian Dualism. It was ridiculous back then, and it is even more ridiculous now.