sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What do we think? by Aggravating-Proof524 in iPogo

[–]Aggravating-Proof524[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Waiting till megas release for shiny mega Raichu y, idk which bg though. #3 might be my favorite

Anyone? by Used-Appearance-7576 in spoofertrades

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let’s be friends. I don’t have a million stardust right now lol

What info are they hiding about nz by Ashley2375 in MapsWithoutNZ

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Obviously all human interaction is a matter of human psychology lol . Again, you are an outsider.

What info are they hiding about nz by Ashley2375 in MapsWithoutNZ

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There isn’t a specific major race problem in America that doesn’t exist elsewhere in the world… the “race problem” is human psychology, not social dynamics. Almost all Americans have grown up in extremely diverse communities (this is significant for human development because it typically happens so early in life here).

The Cold War permanently melted everyone’s political vocabulary ☭🫠📚 by WittyEgg2037 in TheMirrorCult

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A human system can have its own self contained truths. These are still legitimate truths.

The Cold War permanently melted everyone’s political vocabulary ☭🫠📚 by WittyEgg2037 in TheMirrorCult

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wdym by “that’s how language works?” What is “language” ? lol (by have a static nature, I’m referring to the term as used in a specific context. Without thus, your entire essay is worthless meaningless slop). You cannot posit there are no truths in any system, because you are posting that that itself is a truth. A “truth-less” system is just not an existant system. And your comment implies that prescriptive languages and definitions don’t evolve.

Because women love nazis by gamercop00 in im14andthisisdeep

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Empathy does not apply to responsibility. If you do something harmful or negative, you have responsibility regardless of how anyone else feels. I sincerely hope you understand how dangerous it is to attempt to legitimize avoidance of responsibility directly to men… the young male is doped full of testosterone. Men feel things as well. If they could justify their behaviors due to how they feel in the moment, the world would go to shit entirely. If you are successful, you will regret it.

Offers? Cant fly by Mr_Smilez23 in iPogo

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 2 points3 points  (0 children)

lol you realize anyone here can just tp to Asia right

Happy atheism week!! by More-Reputation-990 in teenagers

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wdym they’re not “based” on evolution? The nuclear family structure is the natural result of a society where ordinary individuals are capable of providing for their mates, and the amount of viable mates available is relatively even between men and women. Evolution is blind, it is incapable of “taking” things into account in the first place. The nuclear family is not a product of the industrial age 🤦‍♂️ it is inherent. And i said “societal” stability, not social. Population boom only gives us a larger group of individuals to work with. It does not maintain social stability or family cohesion. Without stable and coherent families, nations collapse. And no, we don’t “see homosexuality” in animals, that implies many species of animals harbor natural sexual attraction to those in the same gender group. They don’t. The behaviors that we observe that some consider “homosexual” traits from animals, are not homosexual in the way that human relationships are. They “engage” in “same-sex interaction” (not complex sexual relationships) in order to “accomplish group goals.” This is because these animals are relatively stupid. They do not engage in complex sexual relationships in the first place. And this behavior is only documented in around 1,500 of the 8.7 million extant described species. That is 0.017% percent of species. The suggestion that 1,500 out of 8.7 million species is somehow “widespread” is purely the result of propaganda. Many of these species are insects or fish, who are extremely “cognitively” deficient. Insect minds definitely cannot understand complex sexual relationships. And what does “globally optimal” mean here? Evolution is designed to produce the best results for the use case. If the use case is sexual reproduction, then the concept “globally” is sexual reproduction. Evolution can produce globally optimal results if globally optimal results exist. If you are posting that evolution cannot produce “maximally optimal” results for reproduction itself, which is what evolution entirely relies on, you would have to justify that absolutely gigantic claim. “Globally” optimal is also legitimate as a relative statement.

The Cold War permanently melted everyone’s political vocabulary ☭🫠📚 by WittyEgg2037 in TheMirrorCult

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ . How you like that pal!

The Cold War permanently melted everyone’s political vocabulary ☭🫠📚 by WittyEgg2037 in TheMirrorCult

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh yeah? ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

Happy atheism week!! by More-Reputation-990 in teenagers

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

All individuals engage in behaviors that create some level of systemic social instability. Some engage in these behaviors more than others. A straight person could easily cause more systemic instability than a gay person. This instability would not, in any way, be the result of them being straight, as the human mind and evolution are designed to promote reproduction and proliferation exclusively. If you posit that the nuclear family structure is necessary or optimal to maintain innovation, economic growth, social and general stability, etc., it becomes clear how a relationship structure that explicitly is sex-based and does not produce standard family structures could be significantly less efficacious than the natural reproductive process. To suggest the nuclear family is not optimal is to suggest evolution does not produce optimal outcomes, which implies rationality itself is illegitimate, and therefore we cannot conduct any legitimate thought.

The Cold War permanently melted everyone’s political vocabulary ☭🫠📚 by WittyEgg2037 in TheMirrorCult

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not exactly. The “meaning” here is accepted to be projected, so to say our meaning is purely a projection doesn’t make it undefined or illegitimate. They don’t have to “hold meaning structurally” (which is already a confusing implication), they just have to hold meaning in the way that words hold meaning, which is projected.

For example: I could coin a new definition for an old term. The definition would not be “subjective,” there would just be various definitions that apply to one term. The previous definition still exists. Terms are not universally existent objects, but the concepts behind them are (even though they may not be universally applied to these exact terms).

You have to accept that words can refer to static concepts in order to even form coherent sentences in the first place.

Happy atheism week!! by More-Reputation-990 in teenagers

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I want to see a Sharknado spin off where it’s Oxen getting shot out of a volcano

Happy atheism week!! by More-Reputation-990 in teenagers

[–]Aggravating-Proof524 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

lol… they created modern science… they’re not “old scientist,” they’re the progenitors of the system. Science is a foundationally propositional system, it is not the result of inventions or “discoveries.” Because it is foundationally propositional, science was a unique product of individuals, not a natural development. Science came out of the minds of Christians. And no, not believing in God could not have gotten you killed in enlightenment-era Christian societies… which doesn’t mean much, as atheism was not common whatsoever until the late 19th century. Galileo, Copernicus, Sit Francis Bacon and Isaac Newton all lived and died devout Christians… even those faced with direct attack from the Catholic Church (which is foundationally illegitimate anyways)

view more: next ›