Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by MSC

  1. Oh! I never thought of it that way! For some inexplicable reason, I feel like perhaps you are the true leader science needs at this time. Teach us your ways please!
  2. MSC

    Political Humor

    I thought they were just letting the waste go out the top front part this whole time? Does he even need a colostomy bag?
  3. Yep. It's getting to the point where calling them the GOP seems wrong. LNP, Lame New Party
  4. They would probably be called RINO by todays MAGA Republicans. 😕 Would you have preference toward doing away with the supreme court or having any ruling made by the supreme court followed by a public referendum on the verdict?
  5. Because you'd be doubting all sense data about the external world including your thoughts, feelings, sensory data of your body. You'd doubt your own consciousness. If scientific facts don't matter or aren't worth caring about, then you're a type of Skeptic. However, it's a precarious situation to be in and a bit of a logic trap. Proving that the Cartesian Skeptics account of reality is true is only one side of it, proving you're a legitimate Cartesian Skeptic is the other side and is next to impossible.
  6. Then you're a Cartesian Skeptic I guess. Good luck with that.
  7. True, but in philosophy, especially if you're an empiricist, you have to pay attention to scientific facts. Philosophy and physics disagreements, justified disagreement, usually occur between fact and fact interpretation. Even then it's only really reviews of logic and semantics than any other branch of philosophy. A famous example; Interpretations of the theoretical Nothingness prior to inflation.
  8. How effective has this been? I agree. Does this mean the only legal mandate is to balance the courts? Can the number of justices be legally reduced to create an even split? This would give justices more incentive to work together and compromise to find more collaborative interpretation more as a judicial entity as opposed to individual or partisan identity? Does this apply to legislative acts that impact the structure of the judiciary? Could a majority of justices block the addition of a new justice office? Deferring to you on this because you clearly know more than I do and I quite mean that. What sort of senate majority would a government need to alter the judiciary branch? US specifically.
  9. Fair enough. I can probably ask for both answer types on one thread anyway. The Physicist answer and the Philosopher answer. The philosophy of science answer... Seems like a silly question now considering the forum 😄 Thanks for your time
  10. Interesting, I always thought it was suggesting a causal thread that ties into past and future events, and that all events or some events have multiple causes. I imagine a future where I tap you on the head. I tap you on the head. The creator of the piano imagines a piano. The creator sketches and plans to build a piano. The creator makes the piano. Are you familiar with the Character Bran from GOT? I think this relates to the concept of Non-Linear time.
  11. I agree. Term limits, peoples nominees. As things stand, it's not really the judges fault. Offer a man absolute power and it may corrupt him absolutely. The issue isn't the judges, it's what the constitution allows judges to do. That's why amendments, if it's broke, fix it. Another good example relates to free speech and social media. We can't reasonably expect the writers of the constitution to account for something like that, however they did leave language in there drawing attention to the idea of new technologies and advancements requiring constitutional laws to be amended. I forget where that is but I'll dig it up within a few days probably. True, this is about constitutional law too. The only variance in speed limit interpretation really is "did that sign back there say 40 or 30?". I'd still be pretty pissed though if a cop just followed me and fined me everytime I went 0.01mph over or under the speed limit of a given road. I suppose that's the danger of logic as a fallible human tool. Depending on the law, the original framing, the history of how the law has been challenged in court, dictionary changes, the present times and personal/group biases. All of these are fuel for a greater range of interpretation in the legal modality of a written law. Will a judge one day rule in favour of people being able to stockpile nuclear arms because "Right to bear arms" by interpreting the lack of definition of limits on what sort of arms, to mean all arms possibly imaginable?
  12. So it's an issue of law enforcement interpretation then?
  13. Zugzwang haha you've checkmated me in one move. Bravo. That being said... some thoughts do occur. Does that imply that there can be numbers and math involved in creating all types of law to create as MigL would say; "a proper law"? What if I'm going 2 miles over or under in a 30mph zone late at night, and depending on how each cop feels about the context of that, may or may not lead to my getting a ticket? Good response though, speed limits are definitely one of the most variance of interpretation resistant types of code/ordinance/law there is.
  14. MSC

    Political Humor

    Does anyone here know how to make caps? I want a blue one that says D-MAGA Don't Make America Gag Again
  15. Do you know of any laws that are completely resistant to varying interpretations? Seriously asking because I'd say there are none, but you're welcome to try and change my mind.
  16. Can I post the same question in two different forums? Philosophy and Physics? Want both perspectives. Thanks all!
  17. Philosophy causes stress and anxiety too. Existential depression as well. Philosophy seeks to remove ignorance but I can safely say that some philosophers also prefer the universe they've made up in their heads. Metaphysics is full of ignorant and depressing mumbo jumbo, usually born from misunderstandings of language. It's not that metaphysics doesn't have it's place in context, it's just that it has a habit of making mountains out of molehills. I don't know about you, but I often find it difficult to speak to an old man who's standing on a molehill, pretending it's a mountain and that he can't hear me, even after I figuratively hit him with the spade I used to dig up and get rid of the mole hill. As for OP Life causes stress and anxiety. Science can reduce said anxiety by putting food on the table and a roof over our head. As can any worthwhile endeavour and hell even some of the non-worthwhile ones can do that. The ignorant want stuff after all.
  18. They just released data from a large Study that describes the effects on pregnant women. They are less likely to present with fever as the first symptom, but take longer to fend off infection and as such take longer to stop being infectious. So yeah, if you're pregnant, cough and sore throat is the symptom to look out for. You won't necessarily present with a fever. If you're a Dr, test on presentation of Covid-19 symptoms in pregnant women, even if they have no fever, as it is the least likely first symptom. - Study Conclusion
  19. This hits very close to home and while you are certainly not a teacher I'd say was part of the problem, the apology is appreciated even though you're clearly one of the consistently good ones and not the one who needs to apologise. That being said I completely see where you are coming from vis a vis aspirations. I am glad you posted this on the ethics forum however, as I don't think it is anywhere near so cut and dry as what you say here; You've made excellent points and I feel that most of what you are saying is true and pertinent. That being said, it's not the whole context but together we can come to a greater understanding of the structural context at hand. There are indeed mindsets which will contribute to stagnating or negative growth. Now you said, "Most of my colleagues accepted this without comment." Did you accept this without comment, reject without comment or did you openly object at the time? Obviously you rejected this in action but I want to know if you openly argued with teachers about this at the time? I know at the time that I should have lodged many formal complaints, both during Primary, Secondary and higher education. In one extremely violent and traumatic instance I could have straight up sued the school in question, I still can since there is no statute of limitations in Scotland on child abuse. We've entered into the ethics topic of Responsibility now. Of which there are two kinds worth mentioning. Causal responsibility and moral responsibility. Where blame is concerned, there is plenty of causal responsibility to go around. I was hurt by teachers and student. I didn't do a good enough job self-advocating to the schools or my parents. My parents didn't do enough advocacy for me at school, neither my parents or teachers got me help for ASD (Aspergers in the UK still) which I was diagnosed with at 23 due to my own actions of following it up with a psychiatrist. I chose to leave school at 16 before my exams due to my own perceived inability to be able to take bullying at school anymore. There is lots of nuance and lots of instances where I could draw on here, but it would make this comment far too long. Dealing out moral responsibility, where children are concerned should be done with a light hand. A three year old using a derogatory racial slur is probably not morally responsible for the impending harm of said slur, same with swearing in general. The words the three year old were exposed to was causally down to someone else and the child can't reasonably be expected to know the history, meaning or intent behind the slur. The adults in the childs life are morally responsible for it. All children are aspirational Not all aspirations survive childhood Our aspirations become our responsibility once we are old enough to truly know better. The problem. If not all aspirations survive childhood, how morally responsible can we hold each individual adult if they must be judged based on their knowledge and experience? This means, to me at least, that the onus of moral responsibility is on higher education and other forms of adult training programs, need to be reminding people that they once had Aspirations and that the people who told them they shouldn't have had those particular aspirations, were mostly wrong. How can I be sure of this? Well I just described what you are currently doing as a teacher. You remind me of Samuel Beckett. In terms of what is and isn't an adults fault; Damage to their aspirations during childhood was not their fault. Not listening to you or others who are trying to repair those aspirations, is their fault. Also I'd really really like to thank you so much for starting this discussion. It's helped me realise some things and you've helped me come up with a solution to the Is/Ought gap problem in moral philosophy! Will start a thread on that soon. Edit: Self-Correction, this is in the general philosophy thread not the ethics thread. Should maybe probably be in there.
  20. Has anyone ever been found to have more than one of these in each knee? Allowing their knee to bend slightly inwards in a bow shape?
  21. Laymen are like any student. They are arguably more passionate than most undergrads, in being so self directed. I have a question for you. How many of the individuals you speak to online, have personally self identified themselves to you, as either a layman or an expert in a given field? How are you judging and determining who is who? Really? Without an exception? That doesn't sound like Laymen at all. It sounds like atheists, with zero appreciation for the literary arts and the power of writing. I've met plenty of researchers from Atheistic, Theistic to Agnostic, who had the same lack of appreciation. Let's say you are right, as a little thought experiment. So some Laymen behave in the way you initially described. So do some scientists and other formally educated scholars. What truly frustrates you is that so many students either do not reach or leave the stage of student development, Educational Psychologists would describe as Contextual and committed Relativism. The growth of understanding You might enjoy reading this. Perrys original work is also a good read, but this summarises it nicely enough. How do you know they aren't viewing it personally, as something they acknowledge they don't know, but something potentially worth their time debating as if it is true? I've been in a debate team, sometimes you get given something to argue for, you might not agree with it but it's helpful and educational to take part in. Forces you to step into another's shoes by making it competitive and it is just one of many tools at a teachers disposal to help educate their students. Hell, if we wanted we could agree right now to switch who debates for your claims and who debates for mine. I could take a turn at coming up with arguments as to why all Lay people are uninformed buffoons. I personally think there is nothing wrong with identifying meaningful and pragmatic insights from scripture or literature. Bible, Qur'an, Torah etc. Hell, the reason I politically identify as a contextual centrist is because of the Story of Prophet Joseph. I took deep political meaning from that and I've read every version.
  22. I'm gonna air some beef here. I took issue with Obama over at least one thing. Obama and Scottish Independence Obama commanded a fair amount of respect in Scotland. I can't help but feel a little sore as to this interference, as it was a really close vote. It would be interesting to hear what he may have to say about the idea now, seeing as he was saying this during a time when The UK had not yet voted to leave the EU and he was critical of the idea of the UK leaving in the first place. I wonder if he'd speak differently about it now. I personally thought that staying tied to the British Parliament would be an odd thing for any American to advise, without sounding comically and historically hypocritical. That being said, I cannot even begin to quantify my preference for Obama over the Orange One.
  23. MSC

    Political Bias

    Agreed! Dude has to be senile to have conveniently forgot what non-partisanship is all about. If I was on that committee, even if I supported Trump, I'd sure as shit not tell a Senator (even one I was "Friends" with) that, if I wanted to keep my damn job. All Bob Dole has done is confirm that the commission is actually doing a moderately decent job of keeping their private political leanings out of their professional lives. No different than what a decent civil servant is supposed to do.
  24. Too true. I'm holding out my hopes for those senatorial retirees. It's not like they have to worry about pissing off voters if they swing the vote away from the Republican Majority. If not, Biden will probably have to add more justices or pass term limits, if he wins and doesn't lose in what will probably be a non-peaceful transfer of power.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.