dimreepr

What things do you think I'm talking about? This shows that you don't understand my answer; for instance, do you think you're the same person even though all of the atoms that make up you today, are different from the atoms you were born with?

There's certainly a hefty cultural, religious and, to some extent, scientific argument that suggests, periodic starvation/fasting, is good and healthy; in many different ways. Food is one of the most insidious of addictions, especially when hunger has no part in the taste equation, who can't manage that "wafer thin mint"?

I'm the same, I prefer to wait until I'm hungry enough to enjoy the food, the longer I wait the better it tastes.

Yes, let's vote with our lack of interest, the apathy aproach to democracy... In the words of the late great Douglas Adams "Apathetic bloody planet, I've no sympathy at all."...

All of them...

Computer's aren't, even nearly, complex enough to get to an algorithm that's good enough to mimic a simple brain like a bee. For instance a bee can seem to (almost) solve the travelling salesman problem, but what would that same algorithm do about the threat from a hornet attack?

The point of philosophy, especially in this context, is to ask and answer what is real. It's like the same river that can't be crossed twice question, to which the answer is, the bridge hasn't moved and nor has the river...

Trump just wants a deal, he's like a second hand car dealer that wants his name on the, dealer of the month, wall. Putin knows that all he has to do is wait for the last day of the month, and Trump will practically give it away.

A loop that has no cause must be a paradox...

Like a traffic jam that starts with a flash of brake lights on a busy road? Some say this is how our brain deal's with reality. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a variation of the tree making a sound in a forest?

This is write large here in the UK, I have so many friend's that grew up in a council house and went to the local school free of charge; then Margret Thatcher happened, she decided to sell the family silver and enjoy it now rather than invest it in our 'children'. Now we've got tub thumping flag wavers, that grew up poor, pulling up the drawbridge and hoping they survive the siege.

Marx was just pointing out, that we can expect a black swan event

Not at all, philosophically they are examples of different attempts to put a saddle on the beast; you can't separate philosophy from economics, any more than you can separate philosophy from science. Lack of sufficient funds to sustain my me/family is a reason for conflict, the resolution is often a desperate struggle; philosophy is for after...

Money is a fundamental part of human society, you can't divide it into haves or have not; philosophically it's the same. For instance, Nietcshe assumed that Jesus was fundamentally wrong bc it was based on a slave mentality, and that a greater understanding will logically follow bc we're better than that...

That seems to be the mistake that Hitler made with Nietcshe.

How can it be (bolded mine), that's like saying Jesus ignored the money lender's bc money has nothing to do with our lives, or that Mohamed didn't include it in Shariah laws. Dialectic materialism is an excuse, not a reason.

Marxism is a philosophy based on the economic 'false' god, money, and the potential for it to be our downfall. A secular religion depends on your definition of religion, a secular society is certainly capable of a dogmatic faith in it's doctrine. Pretty sure. Islam seems a closer fit, given shariah law in the banking sector.

But what if it was raining really hard? 😉 Do I really have to explain the joke, given that we fundamentally agree? OK, I sort of agree with you, but since you're talking bollox I can't...

Why so extreme? 😉

It was raining 😁

Of course 'they do'...

I wonder, can you spot the deliberate mistake? Your recent downvote tirade is a badge of honour, thanks for that...

If you really want to have fun, try hiding under a bridge...

Indeed, but I have no doubt that most religion's started with ideology, absolute truth is a post hoc ergo propter hoc. At some point Marx will be proved right, most of the argument's up till now is, it hasn't happened yet.

Except a religious confession is a private affair, in order to forgive oneself for being a flawed human; besides I see nothing wrong with editing ones doctrine when confronted with an error.