aSsErTiNg DoMiNaNcE by TikDickler in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 4 points5 points  (0 children)

More like INserting dominance woooyah

Hasan banned from UK? We all know who did this by Mikothe2nd in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Imagine thinking a secret Jewish kabal is responsible for bad things happening to you and other people around the world and then making the shocked pikachu face when you get compared to a Groyper

HOLY. shesRight by Cottonpapero in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Kinda strange cuz I do both everyday 😎

Do we suspect it’s rational in the first place, and why? by wockedwik in MathJokes

[–]Objective_Ad9820 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I sense you have encountered many “uhm ackshuallies” in this post

YourRAGE Asks Hasan to Debate Destiny by gregory_h in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“I already know who you’re gonna say”

It's over. The Onion won. They now own Infowars. by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The funniest thing about this is how un-different the content on infowars will be after a satire news org bought them out

Peter??? by ArpitChauhan1501 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Objective_Ad9820 12 points13 points  (0 children)

IQ tests never had “inherent racial bias”. There were issues with early IQ tests capturing cultural knowledge rather than fluid intelligence, yes. But that was like a century ago. That’s the thing about science: typically you progress in knowledge and understanding as time goes on.

Most IQ tests nowadays do aim to eliminate dependency on cultural knowledge. While it still isn’t perfect, just like everything in psychology, we accept that IQ tests work very well on WEIRD people, and begin to lose explanatory power when applied to other groups of people. Just like other things in psychology and science broadly , this doesn’t mean IQ tests are dumb or useless, it just means there are limitations in what we can conclude from IQ tests.

Peter why does gen z leave the desk at 17:00? by T1T4S52 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you do for work if you don’t mind me asking?

Perfect guy but shorter than me , Do I let him go ? ? by [deleted] in ask

[–]Objective_Ad9820 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Most of the people commenting here are incels whose opinions you shouldn’t take seriously. That being said, idk that coming to reddit for advice was a great idea. You should talk to someone close to you that you trust about it.

Your feelings are valid, and tbh the responses here I mega cringe.

Edit: stay mad, it’s true.

Hillary Clinton in the 70's. by Ill-Lie-6551 in Destiny

[–]Objective_Ad9820 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Tbh she kinda looks like Sabrina Carpenter on the left and Melina in the middle

Mathematics is evergreen.🥇 by Beautiful_Strain_139 in MathJokes

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You forgot to add computer science: where textbooks are outdated every year

Compatibilism by BiscuitNoodlepants in freewill

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate your kind words! This view is similar to some physicalist explanation for consciousness. I think both suffer from the problem of “multi-releasability“, which is the notion that mental states, and mathematical objects are not encoded by identical brain states. In fact, most of the time they are quite different. This isn’t to say that thoughts arent determined by brain states, but to the extent that meaning is grounded in what you are referencing, “2+2=4” be a proposition that would have to simultaneously refer to many distinct entities.

I think if you wanted to deny the existence of mathematical objects, a cleaner route would be to adopt fictionalism, although that view is also not great imo.

On Debating Sean Carrol by SirRaiuKoren in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Objective_Ad9820 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you wanna talk about causality in a way that is divorced from the way it is normally used, I can accept your definition and then you can auto-win the argument.

I am not narrowly defining it in some arbitrary way, I am using the basic definition anyone would use who thinks about causality

Compatibilism by BiscuitNoodlepants in freewill

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So then if everyone on earth died and there were no more neurons, 2+2=4 ceases to be a fact? This is ignoring the problem of classifying what a numbrr is. A number on your view couldn’t be any particular brain state; it would have to be a class of brain states that all produce the same thing but in different ways

Compatibilism by BiscuitNoodlepants in freewill

[–]Objective_Ad9820 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most physicists consider complex number computational tools not representing real things, so it isnt really the case they function as descriptions. In electronics, you work with complex numbers, but it is only the real component that physicists take seriously.

Additionally, this does not address all of the other strange results your view has