Jump to content

Soulja

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Soulja

  1. I CANNOT GET ENTROPY AT ALL!!!!! i read like a bazzilion articles on it, someone help this confused soul!!!!
  2. I've read more biographies on Machiavelli than you can imagine. I also read his play which is almost a porno lol. And his letters about him having sex with a bald old woman with a "watery cunt". And i also read Discourses, The Prince, The Art of War (AHHHHH boring!!!). But i havent read "Florentine Histories".
  3. History helps you understand where we are going and how we got here.
  4. You REALLY REALLY need to read the Prince by Machiavelli dont you?
  5. I have a question: Is it possible to blow the world up? I mean i was thinking of it, you could kill all life on the earth, but with all the technology today, can we blow up the world?
  6. I know they dont have nukes (at least Iraq) But all the countries with nukes, you just cant have them sitting there all the time. At one point they will be used, its inevitable. And once 1 person shoots the first weapon, then every country will be firing at each other.
  7. How can you hate history? History is the shit! I love history! :eek: Philosophy History and Science are my favorite subjects The History Channel Rules, Dont you like learning about: Gengis Khan, Napoleon, Marcus Aurelius, Atilla, Queen Elizabeth, Justinian?
  8. I need a good book on Logic, i bought "Logic: A Very Short Introduction" of Amazon.com, should come in next week.
  9. Yeah Dao De Jing is pretty good, but i like Kauthilya's Art of Wealth better. Its REALLY good, you should go get it. Thomas Cleary translated it. Kauthilya is the "Hindu Machiavelli and Aristotle". Also get "The Book of Leadership and Strategy" by Thomas Cleary translation. Its a Daoist classic, i like it better than the Dao De Jing aswell.
  10. If the universe is expanding, what are we filling up. It cant be space beacuse the universe is space right?
  11. A Philosopher keeps asking questions no matter what. A scientist only asks why.
  12. Ok, i have a question that my science teacher did not have the least clue. If enzymes speed up the chemical reaction of a "thought". Then do people that learn faster have more enzymes in the brain? Also, if you somehow added enzymes to the brain, would the brain be able to create thoughts faster?
  13. By The Way, Its a different chapter than on the other post.
  14. Chapter One: Creation and Destruction, Time and God What is real? That has been a question asked by many before and never answered. Before we get to this question, let us look at the definition of real which is “Existing objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language.” Before we get into what is real and what is not real, where do we get the idea of real? The mind created the idea. So, did the idea of real ‘exist’ before the mind created it? The definition of exist is To have actual being; be real. So something cannot exist unless it is real. The definition of create is To cause to exist; bring into being. So creation causes to exist, and to exist something must be real. This proves the idea of ‘real’ had to of existed before the mind created it. But if it did exist before the mind created it, when was the idea of ‘real’ created. So what is exactly is an idea then? An idea is according to Kant: a concept of reason that is being beyond the limits of experience and hence unknowable but not relying on or derived from observation or experiment. So can an idea be created? An idea exists, but does everything that exists have to be created? If perhaps everything that exists must be created, than the idea of ‘creation’ must be created. The idea of creation could not be created because creation could not have existent before it was created. Therefore, this proves the idea of creation cannot be created if time is real and ideas are real. This does not prove that ideas cannot be created. So ideas can be created if ideas are real and time is real, can ideas be destroyed? A definition of destroy is To put an end to the existence. If ideas are real they must exist as the first word in its definition of real proves. If time is real, and ideas are real, then creation would create destruction (which would be real, because all created things are real). Destruction could then destroy creation. Then, if destruction existed and creation did not exist, nothing could be created, and there would be the potential of everything being destroyed which would create nothing. Then there would be creation out of destruction. But creation was put out of existence, by destruction, and now it is back. Destruction is the only thing that creates creation and creation is the only thing that creates destruction. The cycle has to have a start. Now if “God” is the only uncreated being (in the God theory) this means that God would have to be both CREATION and DESTRUCTION. If God is both of these, and ideas and time are real, then this is the only logical explanation. What about God? The definition of God is a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe. If God does exist, he created everything other than himself. In the theory of God, God cannot destroy himself, and the only things that God cannot create are objects that he cannot control (for example God cannot create a stone that God cannot move). So if God created the universe, are we real or not? If God created the universe, then it is real, because all created things are existent so they are real. If this is true then time must be real, because without time, nothing can exist. Note that all created things are real, but to be real things do not have to be created. So if time is real and God is not real, time is not created. If God is real then God is not created and time was created by God (because God has no equals). If God is real and time is not real, then our universe does not exist. Assume that the human race’s bodies are real. This means that if they exist, if the human race dies out, and all dead bodies decay, in 100 years would it be a true statement to say “No human bodies exist now as in there form 100 years ago”. It would only be a true statement if time is real. Which means anything that is real, can be destroyed only if time is real. What if time is not real? If time is not real, then creation and destruction would not exist because nothing could be destroyed which would mean creation could not be created. If time is not real, nothing can be real, because creation and destruction would never exist. But if time exists, it would have always had to exist. God could not create time, because time would have to be present for the cycle of creation and destruction to exist. So my theory is that God is time also. God is time, and the cycle of creation and destruction.
  15. Yeah i guess 60 is more probable. Well one thing's for sure, in 30 years we run out of Tungsten so were not gonna have lightbulbs. Plus i just KNOW theres gonna be a nuclear war, its inevitable. You cant just have tons of weapons so you can "not use them".
  16. Well i dont give the world 20 more years to live anyway. I think that we will overpopulate from cloning, and have nuclear warfare, also our environment will be destroyed, and we will just die out... I dont give us 20 more years. We're living at the end of times. So the ice sheet is probably going to be nuked sometime in the future anyway.
  17. Interesting, thanks for telling me. Anyway I was going by the dictionary definition of "God". If you have any other info tell me.
  18. I believe it can be done too. Im going to try it. Lao Tzu had a pulse of 5 bpm, levitated, and lived to 120. (supposedly) i actually believe it happened or could happen.
  19. Alright, i like you already Ima go check it out and then respond.
  20. Chapter One: Creation and Destruction, Time and God Is this world real? That has been a question asked by many before and never answered. Before we get to this question, let us look at the definition of real which is “Existing objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language.” Before we get into what is real and what is not real, where do we get the idea of real? The mind created the idea. So, did the idea of real ‘exist’ before the mind created it? The definition of exist is To have actual being; be real. So something cannot exist unless it is real. The definition of create is To cause to exist; bring into being. So creation causes to exist, and to exist something must be real. This proves the idea of ‘real’ had to of existed before the mind created it. But if it did exist before the mind created it, when was the idea of ‘real’ created. So what is exactly is an idea then? An idea is according to Kant: a concept of reason that is being beyond the limits of experience and hence unknowable but not relying on or derived from observation or experiment. So can an idea be created? An idea exists, but does everything that exists have to be created? If perhaps everything that exists must be created, than the idea of ‘creation’ must be created. The idea of creation could not be created because creation could not have existent before it was created. Therefore, this proves the idea of creation cannot be created if time is real and ideas are real. This does not prove that ideas cannot be created. So ideas cannot be created if ideas are real and time is real, can ideas be destroyed? A definition of destroy is To put an end to the existence. If ideas are real they must exist as the first word in its definition of real proves. But if time is real then the idea could of existed and then stopped existence. Therefore, this proves: If ideas and time are real, then ideas can be created (except for the idea of creation) and ideas can be destroyed. Assume that the human race’s bodies are real. This means that if they exist, if the human race dies out, and all dead bodies decay, in 100 years would it be a true statement to say “No human bodies exist now as in there form 100 years ago”. It would only be a true statement if time is real. Which means anything that is real, can be destroyed only if time is real. What if time is not real? If time is not real, and ideas are real then no ideas can be created or destroyed. All ideas would have to coexist with each other, which means the idea of creation could not be created, and the idea of destruction could not be destroyed. Which would mean no ideas could exist if time was not real. If time was not real, nothing could exist because the idea of creation would not exist and therefore mean nothing could be created. So if we do exist, then time is real. What about God? The definition of God is a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe. If God does exist, he created everything other than himself. In my research I asked many religous experts about God’s attributes and I was told that God cannot destroy himself, and the only things that God cannot create are objects that he cannot control (for example God cannot create a stone that God cannot move). So if God created the universe, are we real or not? If God created the universe, then it is real, because all created things are existent so they are real. If this is true than time must be real, because without time, nothing can exist. Note that all created things are real, but to be real things do not have to be created. So if time is real and God is not real, time is not created. If God is real then God is not created and time was created by God (because God has no equals). If God is real and time is not real, then our universe does not exist.
  21. I cant prove you wrong i know it. And you cannot prove yourself right either.
  22. I correct my hypothesis: Ideas can be created or destroyed if time exists other than the idea creation. And Ideas cannot be created or destroyed if time does not exist.
  23. So can an idea be created? An idea exists, but does everything that exists have to be created? If perhaps everything that exists must be created, than the idea of ‘creation’ must be created. The idea of creation could not be created because creation could not have existent before it was created. Therefore, this proves Ideas cannot be created or destroyed. But does this prove creation cannot exist?
  24. I think philosophy and science go hand in hand. As for Nietzsche's quotation, i have commented on it before, here is a little slice of what i said: Nietzsche said “There are no facts, just interpretations.” A fact is defined as “Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed, something believed to be true or real”. So if there are no facts, nothing exists or is believed to exist or, is true or is real. The definition of nothing is “Something that has no existence, not anything.” The first word of the definition is ‘something’. The word ‘something’ indicates that ‘nothing’ is a thing. And a ‘thing’ is of existence. So logically this evidence would prove that ‘nothing’ exists, but there is a contradiction when it has ‘no existence’. So we have a paradox, a logical contradiction. The evidence that nothing exists is the ‘something’. And the evidence that it has no existence is the ‘no existence’. So it is impossible to prove or disprove that “There are no facts, just interpretations,” but in the second part of the definition it says “not anything”. Anything is defined as “Any object, occurrence, or matter whatever.” So if nothing exists, than no object, occurrence or matter exits. This proves that if there are no facts this world is not real. This proves that it is logically possible for nothing to exist. If we look back at the definition of a fact it says “something believed to be true or real”. The definition of belief is “to accept as true or real” and real is “Existing objectively in the world regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language.” This proves that if there are no facts, nothing is believed to be true or real. Therefore, a fact does not have to be true, just believed to be true. This means that in order for there to be no facts, no one must believe in anything. People do believe in things though, this proves Nietzsche’s statement wrong.
  25. Prove that you are real then. I mean really sit down and think of real and unreal and existence and you will end up seeing that the concept of 'real' is illogical in alot of ways, and the same with 'unreal'. It is probably beyond the minds comprehention, so i may never prove anything and i may prove something.
×
×
  • 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.