0
   

If you could change one moment in history

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 06:19 am
Well-don't you think it would have saved a lot of trouble if Adam had practiced coitus interruptus.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 06:21 am
I'd shoot that goofy sumbitch Cristobal Colon . . . course, i'd likely be dead drunk in a shabeen somewhere as a consequence, but on the whole, i think the world would be better off.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 06:57 am
Slendius -

Are am not arguing for or against free will here. I simply see free will as inconsistent with the statement 'everything happens for a reason'.

Val -

God could certainly have free will in this case - however in the context of Bella's statement human free will - I think - is impossible.

I think I should make this it's own thread at the risk of jacking this excellent thread.

TTF
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 07:08 am
dupre wrote:
I would stop the destruction of the library in Alexandria.



The library at Alexandria was self destructing. It was going to disappear whether it was burned or not. The texts in the library were written on papyrus and in the humid costal climate of Alexandria they slowly degraded. To preserve them they had to constantly recopied, by hand. A monumental, expensive, and ultimately given the size of the library, futile task.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 07:36 am
ttf-

I'm not arguing anything at all.It isn't a question of arguing.

There are either non-physical states or there are not.The possibilities of non-physical states are probably infinite and beyond our grasp.The possibilities of physical states are biological,chemical and physical(in the physics sense) and very large.These are currently under investigation,and will remain so if there are no reactions,and they are in their early stages.There is no room for argument in this field,though there may actually be some,and there is plenty of room for argument in the field of non-physical states.In the latter case rhetorical skill and the fitting together of a reasonably consistent body of thought
commensurate with prevailing conditions are the main considerations.You get what happens.

In the study of physical states you get what nature has put there.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 07:38 am
Quote:
The library at Alexandria was self destructing. It was going to disappear whether it was burned or not. The texts in the library were written on papyrus and in the humid costal climate of Alexandria they slowly degraded. To preserve them they had to constantly recopied, by hand. A monumental, expensive, and ultimately given the size of the library, futile task.


Right. So then I'd simply tell them to copy everything onto stone tablets. Come water and fire, no danger.
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 08:59 am
Cyracuz, they should have moved the library. In the interior, up river, it is very dry and conditions for preservation of papyrus are excellent.. Archaeologist working in Egypt recover an amazing range of papyrus documents that have survived from Roman times in readable condition. They even have one with Cleopatra's signature on it.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 09:25 am
BBB
The birth of Abraham. The father of the three branches of the Abrahamic religions.

BBB
0 Replies
 
mags314
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Jul, 2005 11:52 am
I think when Mr. Hitler looked at Mrs. Hitler and said, "How bout a quickie, babe?"
0 Replies
 
4mrEd
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 02:49 pm
The invention of television. Propaganda device; makes minds into pudding; bad influence on kids.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 04:47 pm
You can't get more ignorant than that.

Or old fashioned.My grandad used to talk like that and he was a late developer.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 05:32 pm
Splen,

Are you okay? Or is your normal M.O. to sling doo doo all over a thread?

I am not sure who or what you are talking about but you seem like you need a break... or a hug... or something.

Maybe I have misread you.

TTF
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 06:04 pm
To what are you referring?

It isn't clear.I know it's easy but it isn't clear.
0 Replies
 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 06:05 pm
Your post above - it reads that a post before it is ignorant and that the person referred to is a late bloomer.

Am I misreading it?

TTF
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 06:16 pm
Didn't the poster slop doo doo over billions of viewers of television and say that all their minds are puddings.

Is that ignorant or not?It is certainly old fashioned.
0 Replies
 
diagknowz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 11:24 pm
brahmin wrote:
yalta?>


Brahm, that other post on Yalta hides the brutality that Yalta entailed, viz. the spread of the vicious Communist sickle and hammer over small countries and a whole segment of former Germany.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 11:38 pm
diagknowz wrote:
brahmin wrote:
yalta?>


Brahm,


i dont recall screwing up your moniker.

what gives you the right to do so?
0 Replies
 
diagknowz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 11:56 pm
My, MY, we are testy tonite, aren't we? :wink: <doing deeeeep obeisance> Many apologies; it was meant in a friendly way. Other people refer to me as "Diag," and if you look around, you'll find the same thing going on all around you (Setanta is "Set," and the like).
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jul, 2005 12:28 am
oh ok.

i have been "lockhorned" of late with many.. so was in suspicious mood/mode.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Jul, 2005 08:23 am
The invention of television. Propaganda device; makes minds into pudding; bad influence on kids.
That's 4mrEd.

Splen,

Are you okay? Or is your normal M.O. to sling doo doo all over a thread?

I am not sure who or what you are talking about but you seem like you need a break... or a hug... or something.

Maybe I have misread you.

TTF

Okay-
That's TTF.

Now-do you agree that television makes minds into pudding and that it is bad for kids.

Modern thinking is the entire opposite to those conclusions.Natural justice would say that with television being ubiquitous and watched daily by billions the conclusion that it makes minds pudding is ridiculous and represents an ignorant iconoclastic position to put it mildly,It isn't even worth discussing it is so stupid.

For you to then assert,and they are simple assertions,that I'm a bit touched and need a break or a hug borders on the infantile.You don't seriously think I,or any other intelligent threader,would allow your assertions ANY credibility do you?Those assertions constitute arrogance of a high order.All that such stuff does is pin you to the wall.

Where is this guy's evidence that television makes pudding out of minds and is bad for kids.Suppose some kid took it seriously and stopped watching television.His peer group would ostracise him for a start He would become a loner..He also uses the word "television" to cover everything.There are plenty of challenging TV programmes which teach people important things.And there's tons of stuff that is savage about our governments-so where does the propaganda come in?I would be hard pressed to squeeze that much crap into 14 words.
I wouldn't mind betting that the vast majority of surgeons,astronauts,architects and such like top people have watched plenty of television.Would all their minds be pudding.
Modern research is showing that kids who watch a lot of TV and play on computers are faster in every respect than kids who don't.

Your silly post is hardly the stuff to base a think factory on.It is a similar reflex action to that of young girls when they pull their tongue out and go mmmrrruhh!.It means nothing.Do you generally go around patronisingly offering to hug people and suggesting they need a break when they don't see eye to eye with you.That sort of thing is out of place on a philosophy forum never mind on one specific thread.It is doo doo goodstyle and seriously underestimates the readers on here.It is enough to bring Lola out in a fit of giggling.

You have misread me.

And never forget that you have a world wide audience on here and they are quite bright taken together.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 07:38:55