dimreepr

The fact is, some people are better at some thing's; the problem is, some people can't accept that...

Resistance is futile, the clarion call of those that don't want to be questioned...

You're still dancing; why are you so certain, they're not welcome? Every choice has a consequence, we just don't know what it is yet.

The NHS provide treatment for trans patients, so I'd imagine the ethics Committee are happy with it's efficacy.

There you go again, tap-dancing around a strawman.

So, instead of an unhealty drug regime to become what they believe they are, they are given an unhealthy drug regime to treat their depression?

Sorry, I was mid wank; what's all this talk about gun's?

Why was this post neged? It seems a reasonable explanation... 😉

Great post +1... Why? When I wake up monday, England will have either won or lost... I'll therfore be happy, or not; but I can't be either; if we don't play...

Of course not; If I only want to win, I'm going to choose a guy in a coma... 😉

For priest, read teacher... Indeed, but if your teacher doesn't understand what they're teaching, the line of science/religion is blurred, however literal we try to make the explanations. Scientist's have understanding of the literal language of mathematics because they had teacher's, that literally understood the context of today's understanding; will that be applicable tomorrow?

It's not the religion that demands "scriptural literalism"... It's the priests, that don't understand the metaphors.

Indeed, so why can't they play?

No, I was thinking of the promotion of advancement, without the brake of philosophy. "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."

Indeed, but here we are?

Are you sure about that? As far as I can see, Science without philosophy has stripped our world of a future...

The point of a competition is to compete, we all want to win; but few of us (by few I mean, almost no-one) do. England's soccer team is in a final; who, in England, would give up an advantage, that happens to be female?

can be trained; does not equal, understanding...

of course there's a problem with the current system... That's it... 😉

That doesn't explain why it's better... Putting all our faith, in just one solution, is an ism and not very scientific.

I consider myself as a natural philosopher (not necessarily a good one), but I'm definitely not a scientist, my ignorance is plain for all to see; I couldn't even compose an essay.

That's an interesting phrase, since no science is required... 😉 It's an insidious generational problem, our society knows more now (better technology, that our parent's don't understand), ergo we're smarter.

Empiricism, is just another ism; if not used properly. I don't believe the child fully understands it's parents, yet... If I can't see it or measure it or predict it, it's not there...

Indeed, such-and-such a fact that is ignorant of it's ambiguity...

It depends on what we learn? What we know now, does not equate to; we know better...