Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Rama Set

Pages: < Back  1 ... 316 317 [318] 319 320 ... 322  Next >
6341
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 08:43:39 PM »
I get where you are coming from, but it can be awfully hard to just give up on someone who you love especially since abusers are often in quite a bit of pain themself.

6342
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: King Henry VIII.
« on: December 10, 2013, 08:26:38 PM »
Well, that implies that every English King was egotistical, because they all did what he did.

Anyone who believes they rule by divine right probably has some ego inflation issues.

 
Quote
EDIT & yes, when those Scots attack w/o provocation whilst you are in France, they get what they deserve.

Spoken like a true Zionist.  You implication was that him killing 10,000 scots made up for him wasting money.  You must admit that sounds rather absurd.

6343
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 08:23:37 PM »
Where did I say men had not been killed by women?  That is twice in this thread you have put words in my mouth.  Can you find me a link that shows that men's chance of being killed or severely injured goes up by 75% when they try to leave an abusive relationship?  Anyway, I pasted that link because it discusses the myriad reasons why people stay in abusive relationships.

6344
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 07:31:35 PM »
And it's also not as easy as just leaving. Sometimes the abuse is so psychological that they can't bring themselves to leave, are too scared the man will stalk/more severely hurt her if she does leave, or believe they deserve the abuse.

Which is not helped by there being actual cases where women have left and were tracked down and killed.

http://www.safehavenshelter.org/what-keeps-women-in-abusive-relationships/

6345
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 07:25:43 PM »
What I was saying was that it is not a straightforward decision to leave someone when they are the parent of your child and your source of money.  Emotionally or logistically.

6346
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:59:44 PM »
Oh yeah?  This should be good.  Where did I say that?

6347
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: King Henry VIII.
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:55:58 PM »
My bad, I thought England had a standing army at that point.

6348
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:55:06 PM »
Also amusing you somehow think an abusive relationship is a good environment to raise a child as long as mommy gets money

Not nearly as funny as how you read this in to my comments. 

6349
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:54:14 PM »
My mom had a job.

Some do, some don't.  Staying at home as a parent is a valid and worthwhile choice.

Quote
Having babies you cannot support with an abusive partner is always a good idea.

Leaving aside the obvious lack of compassion you are displaying here, perhaps you should consider that you do not always know a partner is abusive before things like pregnancy happen.  You should maybe have a think about how complicated these situations are before you paint them all with the same brush.

6350
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:30:32 PM »
My point is men don't bitch and moan about it. They often can't even claim self defense because of the sexist nature of the courts.

Courts are sexist?  Oh, I thought it was you.

 
Quote
Lol financial dependence is far too common with women. I want a sugar momma, but it's so Butch easier for women to leech off men.

Because often men are stupid enough to let a woman leech, but lets say the woman being abused is a stay at home mom.  A worthy reason to be financially dependent.

I think what is most disturbing about your comments is that you think someone complaining of being physically abused is "bitching and moaning".  That's pretty fucked up.

6351
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:21:09 PM »
I've known women who've hit men, none of those men ever called the police.

What's your point? 

Quote
Women bring it on themselves for not leaving the crazy men.

It sounds like a simple solution in theory, but in practice there are many different and complicated issues in place, especially if there are children involved, or financial dependence.

6352
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: King Henry VIII.
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:17:50 PM »
As re: Ireland, NO English King has EVER been good. Under Elizabeth, 41% of Ireland starved to death.

That does not make him good, just equally as bad.

Quote
The building of the Navy was no more ecologically damaging than any military activity was in that century anywhere in Europe.

Again, just as bad... Not good.

Quote
The forced religious changes would never have been tolerated by a population that was fully armed if they had been objected to that highly. Say what you want about people being forced, but the majority of England either supported the religious changes, or didn't care much. & the religious changes allowed England to develop the centralised state that would be needed later.

This is a highly speculative contention.  There could be a great number of explanations, such as fear of reprisal against the general population by the better equipped and trained British Army.

Quote
I'll grant that he was prodigal w/ money. & yes, his French campaign wasn't helpful. But that is balanced by the Battle of Flodden, where 10,000 Scots (which included the King & most of the aristoracy) were wiped out.

Oh, so a massacre of 10,000 Scots is a redemptive act for wasting money.  Tell me more.

Quote
The Dissolution of the Monasteries, while harsh, also could have been resisted by an armed population. It wasn't. Henry enabled England to be truly English for the first time.

Again, highly speculative, and you are also assuming that a monastery is something that a populist movement might have frequent contact with.  Monasteries are not always in the center of a town.

Quote
I'll note also that the official language of government was switched from Norman French to English by Henry, thus allowing for the development of the language & nation along nationalist lines. This nationalist development was needed @ a time when, in order to survive & prosper, every other nation in Europe was doing the same. The fact that such radical changes in England were necessary only points out that EVERY country, even the RC ones, were enforcing religious uniformity. Ever heard of the Spanish Inquision? They were all building militaries @ frightful ecological costs. You can't judge Henry by 21st century standards. By 16th century standards, he was damned good, I think.

Why can't we judge him by 21st Century standards?  Just because he may not have been a tyrant back then, does not mean we have to absolve him of the things he did.  We do not absolve Britain and America of its history of slavery just because it was the 18th & 19th century.  This kind of relativism undoes to whole notion of learning from history.

6353
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Zimmerman could be innocent
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:08:33 PM »
Sounds like a psycho girlfriend.  Hopefully she gets charged with filing a false police report, etc, and Zimmerman ejects from that relationship.

A friend of mine got screwed by a similiar psycho girlfriend.  She was blacked out drunk, flipped out and assaulted him, called the cops, and the feminist cops who showed up ignored the marks on his back from being shoved into the dryer because he was too tanned, naturally sided with her story, and arrested him for domestic violence.

Wow where to begin:

Taking a woman's claim seriously considering the genetic differences between men and women in regards to physical stature, and the long, long, long history of men abusing women, does not make one a feminist.

When you miss a mark on someone because of their tan, this is not ignoring.  Ignoring would be registering that he had marks on his back, and either not thinking anything of it, and/or not acting upon them.

Women rarely get charged with domestic violence, but that's probably cause men don't bitch and moan about it like women.

No, I think it is because men beat on their women more.

6354
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What Religion are you?
« on: December 10, 2013, 06:03:18 PM »

It's more about there being an amount of uncertainty in the relation between two quantities; the most famous being position and velocity. The most accurately you know the position of a quanta, the more uncertain you will be regarding its position and vice versa. But it is possible to know an approximate value of these two quantities.

There's a big difference between velocity and momentum in quantum mechanics.

The Heinsberg uncertainty principle is similar to what you've describe however it's the measurement of momentum and position that's uncertain. The more you know the likely position of a particle the less you know the likelihood of it's momentum.

Quantum mechanics deals with probability, not certainty, you can't 'predict' it.

The set, if completely counted would be extremely large, no doubt, but countable nonetheless. I am not sure what you are getting at.

I'm trying to explain that there are an infinite number of 'sets' that could apply to a quantum system, it's unpredictable. Schrodingers cat is a prime example, until you 'measure' the system you can't predict weather the cat is alive or dead. It's unpredictable.

Turbulance and a chaotic system is another example of a system that's unpredictable within the laws of physics.

You can predict the probability of certain events occurring and given a large enough system in time or space, you can assert that an event is statistically certain to take place.  This is the type of prediction I maintain could be made about the spontaneous creation of the universe.  As Roundy passive aggressively pointed out, there would be no one around to make the prediction, but as a metaphysical possibility I think it stands that predicting a probable outcome, and given a system that makes the occurrence a statistical likelihood, renders it non-accidental.  This might degenerate in to a semantic discussion of accidental, which is fine, I just wanted to clarify my original point.

6355
Well, it wasn't just the British who brought civilisation. The French did too. Looking @ the current situation in the Central African Republic, the French are having to go there to hopefully put an end to the mess going on. If they'd never left, this probably wouldn't have started!

Well thats impossible to know.  Perhaps it would have been replaced with an even worse situation.

6356
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Official Sports Thread
« on: December 09, 2013, 10:10:19 PM »
As promising as the Pats young receivers are, without Gronk they lack a real, "you must plan for this guy or else" weapon. It's looking grim for the Pats, but the Broncos also lost Welker for who knows how long. It feels like a coin-toss to me in the AFC. I am not sold enough on Baltimore to throw them in as the AFC champ yet.

6357
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What Religion are you?
« on: December 09, 2013, 08:11:47 AM »
Accidents are unanticipated. If you have a set of laws that can predict the set of possible outcomes and each one in the set I s arrived at by a causal set of events then it would be an anticipated possibility.

Why do laws have to predict the set of possible outcomes?

The theory of quantum mechanics relies on the fact that you can't predict it's outcome but it's bounded by a set of laws.

Quantum mechanics does not predict a single outcome, but it definitely predicts the set of possible outcomes.

Explain to me the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It's premise is based on the fact that you can't be certain.

It's more about there being an amount of uncertainty in the relation between two quantities; the most famous being position and velocity. The most accurately you know the position of a quanta, the more uncertain you will be regarding its position and vice versa. But it is possible to know an approximate value of these two quantities.

Quote
A 'set' of possible outcomes. What is that set? There is a probability, within quantum mechanics, that I could transport  and sit beside you while your reading this. That probability is extremely small to the point where it's never gonna happen, but the possibility is still there.



The set, if completely counted would be extremely large, no doubt, but countable nonetheless. I am not sure what you are getting at.

6358
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What Religion are you?
« on: December 09, 2013, 05:15:36 AM »
Just so I am on the same page, is the ontological argument the same as the Kalam Cosmological Argument?

6359
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What Religion are you?
« on: December 09, 2013, 03:19:27 AM »
I agree. You can't prove a negative. & in this case, proving the positive is also impossible. Allow me to kindly point out that nowhere have I advocated you believing in God. What a non-Jew believes or does not believe is again, above my pay grade.

Proving the positive is not impossible and of course for God, it would be trivially easy to do so. For example he could rearrange the stars before my eyes to say "sup"? Or he could destroy the universe before my eyes, while keeping me alive, and then recreate it perfectly. Both of these things would make me believe.

6360
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What Religion are you?
« on: December 09, 2013, 02:49:33 AM »
Like I said, I was making a general statement. Making up a statistic would be saying something like '1 in 6,596,312 chance'. But if you prefer, drop numbers. I believe the odds are small that an ordered universe could come from nothing. Like I said, ever play 52 Pickup? You believe otherwise. Since theism is the default position of most people in the world, the onus is on the atheist to prove us wrong. Ultimately, the question can't be resolved w/ certainty, obviously. And yes, to answer your implied question, I have 2 degrees & a graduate degree, thank you.

Well for someone with so many degrees you seem to have a terrible understanding of how proof works. Let me help you: it is impossible to conclusively prove something does not exist. That being said, I have never experienced a conclusively supernatural event in my life, humans are clinically proven to create false positives in their cognition, humans are prone to wishful thinking and neuroses as well. Based on these facts, it seems plausible that humans imagine supernatural beings and events, and this seems much more plausible than there being a short period of time when a god intervened and no longer does.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 316 317 [318] 319 320 ... 322  Next >