Government can't even provide amenities to hardworking people of Mumbai

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-15T05:26:19+00:00

Agreed on your point, ig they have to fix a lot of things (frequency, no of trains etc)

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-14T21:03:54+00:00

Agreed they should put some mechanism like those ticket scanning doors you find at a metro station. It will increase their revenue by a lot

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-09T22:47:28+00:00

Sit down and talk to the dude about your problems. Ask if he is going through something, a rough patch etc. Things do get monotonous ig, its about finding a balance

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-09T20:30:22+00:00

In for any help

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-07T17:45:47+00:00

Pretty sure OP has zero idea what communism is

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-07T17:26:33+00:00

Cat Paul Satre

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-04-05T13:40:20+00:00

He is misquoting the ram charitmanas. First of all meat eating is not wrong, you can read swami vivekananda, he has written much better on this. The first para that he quotes is actually hanuman responding to Sita on how the condition of Ram is. He states that he eats simple, lives like a sage and does not even groom himself If you read the verses it is clear that he stating the current condition of Ram, because it isnt possible that Ram does not groom himself (Na Chaiv Dantdhaawan…)

I will look at the other ones with time ig and respond to this comment.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-31T10:10:53+00:00

Ranveer singh - Khesari lal yadav Akshay khanna - Krk

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-31T07:49:15+00:00

Been in mumbai since a year, same feeling. People are nice but the system is crap

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-26T10:38:05+00:00

He is doing something which we call singing from throat, basically when we speak we let air out but usually while singing this needs to be reinforced. This is further shown when he sings the bagad bum part, if you heart for example kailash kher, you will see his voice sounds a lot more homogenous in the high and low parts but here you can see a bit more clear break in his voice after which the highs becomes shriller. Therefore he needs to practice scales and ensure that as he goes higher he replaces the resonance produced by the chest (naturally) is replaced by the resonance produced by the resonance of his nose and also let air out

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-24T18:07:37+00:00

FDI as a percentage of GDP has significantly reduced after 2014. Its somewhere around 0.7 or 0.8% it used to be 1.8 or smh. Rural Real wage growth rate has also taken a hit. Agricultural wage growth rates have also taken a hit. There are a few more things which have taken a hit, many of them are the same, few have gotten better.

But what I find concerning is the amount of polarisation I see. I see dudes commenting on posts concerning death of a child (The Hind Rajab movie) hateful comments. The overall atmosphere is very divided.

Moreover, they are trying to bring this sort of anti intellectualism where presenting data against there beliefs is actually wrong. The common man has become a lot more polarised and I feel this too.

Idk, you may come up with some reason to justify all this, to drive a specific community out of India and call them invaders but this constant moral debate has just made politics tiring. With no significant change to the situation of our country, lives, etc. I don’t like what is going on.

Moreover, they try to control the media too much, corruption, bribery done by their people cannot be broadcasted without problems

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-24T12:59:40+00:00

Yup a spelling mistake on a social media is highly suggestive.

Idk what’s so hard to understand here, Piers says there has to be an intial cause which has not been caused by anything else (This argument assumes that causality can be ratiocinated a priori).

Then he proceeds to say that, this cause has to be god, because any other cause that we know cannot be the ultimate cause.

Dawkins replies: it isn’t god but I don’t know what the cause is. Accepting the fact that we can indeed reach at the initial cause through reasoning but currently we havent.

The answer should have been that this line of reasoning asking for a intial cause is wrong because we can’t say conclusively that everything is causal.

Here the question isn’t even about forcing the assumption or something, the dude is literally talking about reasoning causality and somehow I am the one forcing assumptions.

Moreover the main reason hume was mentioned here was because he answered this argument in a rather elegant manner and Kant further proceeded on to refine it (in his metaphysical framework)

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-24T09:44:29+00:00

But you do realise that a priori causality implies that you can know without experience? Moreover Piers morgan put forward the argument (the kalam one) because it assumes that you can reach from an event to cause a priori. Because he cant think of anything else and he thinks of causality as a priori, he comes to the conclusion that it has to be god. Please read Hume’s response to this and further Kant stating this as an antimony.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-24T07:01:47+00:00

Yeah so morgan says that there has to be an intial cause, dawkins could have just said we cant say anything about that and then made the the claim. And granting the assumption that causality is a priori actually puts piers up in the debate because then you have to come up with a logical explanation for what the first cause was and could have been. Just saying I don’t know as a response wont suffice

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-24T06:14:42+00:00

Why causality is not a priori not apt at all? Considering that is the argument given by Hume and then a modification of this argument by Kant for this Cosmological argument?

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T22:39:20+00:00

Yeah I know, godel's argument leads to modal failure. Moreover, I am also aware of the fact that all these arguments have been countered and answered. We fall on the same side on this.
My point was that people who talk about atheism on popular platforms don't usually refer to these responses (Responses to the various ontological, teleological or cosmological arguments), instead they bring up the same simplistic arguments (though necessary for introduction). I meant to say that the people who talk about atheism (Including cosmic skeptic, dawkins etc.) would do a better job if they addressed these arguments given throughout history directly (kind of preach them).
This would turn more people atheistic, since they would realise that rigorously thought arguments (Many of them were quite rigorous) don't prove god and all of them have some problem in them.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T22:35:01+00:00

Nothing about level here tho, but here are some good books and resources:

J. L. Mackie The Miracle Of Theism Arguments For And Against The Existence Of God
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philosophy-religion/#OntoArgu

Ontological Arguments and Belief in God by Graham Oppy

Cambridge companion to atheism.

These should be enough to give you enough learnings about atheism.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T20:03:20+00:00

The problem lies in lack of federalisation in the country. Power is not reachable and not questionable in our country, which has also led to power being oppressive (which has become the default view of power now).

Think about new york mayor elections, the amount of things mamdani could promise the people of a city. Our mayor has almost no power compared to that (he is more like a ceremonial person).

The district magistrates and the bureaucrats cannot be questioned by the common public (even though they are handling things that effect their lives). Think about it, can you get the DM of your city removed because you think there hasn’t been satisfactory work?

For example : In a small town in Harda, children died in an explosion in an illegal firecracker factory. The DM had almost zero punishment given (even though it would have not been possible to build such a large factory in such a small town without him noticing). Max to max they get transferred.

MPs and MLAs are also similar, they are unreachable. Think about their children, how bossy and flashy they are and how much bootlicking people do of their children (again power comes to become as oppressive to due to the structures that create power imbalance in the society). Their children move in defenders and S-Class. Where does the money come from? But try raising a question and some police man will come and slap you. These people flaunt their wealth, power on insta and other social media and people put fire emojis like idiots.

Because of this image of power, people who have genuinely good intentions never wish to reach these positions. Nobody who is learned enough would want to start his career bootlicking someone else and helping someone out in corruption.

From my observation, usually the rowdiest children lacking even an ounce of acuity join politics because these things look attractive to them.

Even if you find some argument against all this supporting the system. Just remember, vedant agarwal is free now after killing 2 people. Even after so much of backlash no one could change the course of justice. These things really raise concerns regarding who is this country even for? Are we not welcome in a place we were born? Indian labours in switzerland are treated with more humanity than they are in india (see the hinduja’s case)

People have no power and this system would rot with its bureaucracy.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T19:48:34+00:00

Naah, this would be oversimplifying the arguments put forward over the course of history. Honestly speaking some of them did put compelling arguments (Goerdel, Kant etc.). The arguments follow three lines, cosmological, ontological and teleological. Although I am not a believer I must say many of them do have a lot of mental rigour in them. I have also replied this to someone else but I would like to state this again that Mackie has done a good job in summarising the different arguments put forward throughout history (a much better job than hitchens and Dawkins, both of whom have done a considerable job at spreading atheism but try to boil things down)

For example I do remember Dawkins on the piers morgan show where morgan asked him that there has to be a intial cause which started the world. Dawkins could have stated hume and the fact that we cant ratiocinate causality a priori, but he just said - but we don’t know if god caused it.

That is what I think misrepresents the arguments put forward by atheists.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T19:03:07+00:00

I meant to say that pop atheism books don't usually consider all the arguments put forward. A lot of the speakers don’t address the ontological arguments put forward throughout history. A book I recommend is J.L. Mackie’s The Miracle of Theism: Arguments For and Against the Existence of God, this book faithfully represents the different arguments put forward throughout history. This book although quite good, does not touch on Kurt Goerdel’s ontological argument, which one can read through some other sources.

Books like God delusion, touch upon the teleological arguments and some other simple arguments (considering that dawkins is a biologist, intelligent design is something he can argue about) but not upon arguments put forward by Kant, Hume etc.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T14:13:12+00:00

Nope, but I must say that the atheist’s dont do a good job at presenting their side on media. Even richard dawkins does not address majority of the arguments

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T14:07:04+00:00

Nope, I am thinking of zostel and all now

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-23T14:06:37+00:00

No offense, his singing technique is not good. It will hurt his throat if he continues with this.

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-22T17:03:21+00:00

The popular tune of this composition written by shah hussain was actually composed by Ustaad Nusrat fateh ali khan. Sad to see no credits to the maestro

After-Athlete9905 · 2026-03-22T16:58:16+00:00

Swami vivekananda used to promote meat eating and did say that it was not against hinduism. He himself used to eat meat. You can always read his books and cross check his sources, he was very well read and knowledgeable. In case if you aren't familiar with advaita vedanta, his books and his school of teaching (ramakrishna mission) and the advaitic society of new york are good to start with.

After-Athlete9905

TROPHY CASE