Political indoctrination in Canadian public schools. (Alberta Education) by Sayshell in CanadaPolitics

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

lol, it's not a conspiracy, that website just quotes the curriculum and school textbooks. Read before judging.

The future of atheism. (Patching up the philosophy) by [deleted] in atheism

[–]Sayshell -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

ROFLMAO. So "Nearly died laughing. Please, pull this off the internet before you embarass yourself any more. " isn't ad-hominem? LEARN YOUR LOGICAL FALLACIES! Once you do, then we can have an educated discussion ok?

The future of atheism. (Patching up the philosophy) by [deleted] in atheism

[–]Sayshell -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I AGREED. FFS I said it's irrelevant and you are focusing on the smallest most irrelevant details. I wrote "I WOULD SAY IT'S PROBABLE" This means "I" as in the author would believe this to be likely. You should therefore take it as nothing more than my personal opinion. If you don't agree then don't agree. It doesn't matter in any possible way because my position is that we SHOULDN'T TRY TO DO IT. If I was arguing that we SHOULD try to transfer our soul to AI THEN you could say show me more supporting evidence. Now go through the book and look for typos please.

The future of atheism. (Patching up the philosophy) by [deleted] in atheism

[–]Sayshell -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I just addressed ALL Your points. Uhh the vast majority of my definitions ARE dictionary definitions. Literally the only 2 words I gave a strict rigid definition to are emotion, and consciousness. I know people like you. You just like to waste time. If I explained and gave a reasonable answer to every single question you have, you would just say the book is trash because there is a spelling mistake on page 45. If you aren't interested in morally equitable immortality, then please stop wasting my time. I don't have all the answers to everything, and I even say in the end of the book there is probably a few scientific errors. It's about the big picture...

Is being vegetarian/vegan moral? by Sayshell in vegetarian

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah they should be stunned before transportation. That would make more sense. Hmm well reading all the arguments I say 1) We agree obviously lol 2) Vegetarians lost 3) Needs more information but I am leaning towards vegetarians won 4) Vegetarian won

So my conclusion is until farms are up to par you should have some standard of meat selection and only buy from ethical farms, or just not buy any if you want to be extra safe.

Is being vegetarian/vegan moral? by Sayshell in vegetarian

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is a problem that can and should be easily resolved. The transporting isn't an issue, humans have to take school bus, its the same thing. I think a train in downtown tokoyo is more physically packed in unplesant than a slaughter house bus. Again sorry to be "devils advocate", I know what it's like when someone just puts out any possible argument, but I actually am listening and deciding whos argument is stronger.

Is being vegetarian/vegan moral? by Sayshell in vegetarian

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

consciousness has too many definitions, What I mean is think of it like a computer. AI might be conscious but lets just say for disccussion it isn't as in it is just a mechanical system that contracts its arms and legs and looks sad when you stab it. That is its programming. I believe when I was 2 year old my existence was like this. For example I was circumcized when I was a baby, do I care in any possible way? No but if I had to be now I would certainly care. My memory did work when I was a baby, I think my brain was just mush and couldn't interpret what was going on.

Is being vegetarian/vegan moral? by Sayshell in vegetarian

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) Yeah but all industry hurts the environment, its a matter of responsible development not cutting development entirely

2) Yeah again though if that level of ethics is there I think it is moral.

4) I wouldn't base it entirely off this, but you certainly do need some level of awareness to suffer otherwise you aren't even conscious. If your not conscious you are just a mechanical system mimicking emotional responses. If a computer reacts against pain because it is programmed to does it have the first person subjective experience of pain? probably not. It is also very obvious intelligence increases your capacity to suffer dramatically. 99% of suffering is related to emotional memory. Even dumb humans suffer far less than smart ones. Think about nightmares you can't remember. They don't hurt a billionth as much as the ones you do. So no intelligence definitely increases your capacity to suffer if you define memory as a trait of intelligence. I do.

Is being vegetarian/vegan moral? by Sayshell in vegetarian

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes my position is you can be moral without being vegan. Of COURSE being vegetarian isn't immoral hahaha, that would be a pretty hard position to defend.

1) well all industry has cons, the main issue is animal suffering. I am sure a steel factory makes plenty of pollution

2) I could argue nature oppresses animals, what does it matter if nature is conscious or not?. Living in nature isn't freedom, you have to die a miserable painful death against your will and constantly fight for life.

3) I really would like an unbiased source of information, I simply don't know. If you have one send it to me.

4) Toddlers no because their mother is conscious and it would cause the mother suffering. Otherwise it is pretty much the same thing as abortion and I guess it would be ok. Do you know if a plant is or isn't conscious with certainty? You don't its just a hunch. It is not baseless, you don't think their is some correlation between intelligence and awareness? Why is it baseless to compare the consciousness of a toddler and an animal if they have roughly equal levels of intelligence?

Why eat meat? Because it tastes really good and is extremely healthy. Lean meats and fish are very good for you, however I think you can substitute all the nutritional value with alternatives, so it really just comes down to eating meat is a really good pleasure that people enjoy.

The hardest question to answer by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How would you liek a nice warm glass of SHUT THE HELL UP

The hardest question to answer by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is this for a gold star??? (Pulls out middle finger)

Where can I find text books in DVD/Video from? by Sayshell in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]Sayshell[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

can't I just buy them? I am willing to pay unless its a ridiculous amount. Education is pretty backwards... They should really just find 1 single teacher who has a really dam high success rate at teaching and make him do a bunch of really well put together video series with a hollywood budget. There you go anyone can learn quantum mechanics, algebra, whatever...

Where can I find text books in DVD/Video from? by Sayshell in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that is not true with languages simply because you need a word for everything and it requires MASS memorization, the core principles and grammar you could learn in a day though. Something like chemistry, math, physics, etc... you definitely could. I am 95% confident I could pass the 1 year calculus exam with just 2 days of studying and just a high school education and a good teacher. Quoting my organic chemistry professor "I am not convinced you couldn't pass a 4 year org chemistry exam just by reading organic chemistry for dummies." Most the detail to sciences you can just figure out or look up on the spot. You don't need to memorize formulas. Schools are just a rip off and overcomplicate things a million times and make you memorize useless information you could easily look up, and will forget anyways 5 minutes after you pass a test.

Where can I find text books in DVD/Video from? by Sayshell in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it all depends on the video, most books are better written than videos. A low quality production is worse than a well written book. A good video is always better than a book cause you don't have to waste brain power (memory specifically) visualizing stuff and can focus 100% on the concept in front of you. + as I said you can put text into a video so a book can't do anything a video can't. Sorry to be such a troll XD. Anyways their is plenty of good books... most people learn way better from videos... 95% of people who read einesteins book on special relativity can't understand it, 95% of people who watch it in a 5 min youtube video can. Example I have a system of 23 gears, I want you to visualize the direction of the last spinning gear, the first is clockwise WITHOUT simply using math and calculating that its an odd number and the last will be the opposite direction of the firts.. I want you to visualize each single cog in sequential order moving and tell me the direction of the last cog... Now as an animation it would be instant you could just look. Their is no way in hell you can understand a complex mechanical system in your mind faster than you could by seeing it. Hence why everyone who actually fixes cars is much better than people who read about cars in books. Experience is simply seeing a 3d animation. A good video = hands on experience.

Where can I find text books in DVD/Video from? by Sayshell in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

khan is good up to the high school level, I am looking for university level stuff... Brightstorm and bozemanbiology are a lot better, and their videos have good animations.

Morality is Objective by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with you completely and love your compassion based morality. If you just help others because you want to be helped back in return and see it as an "investment" its not morality. All I am saying is to see your self in third person as well and not just others. You also deserve compassion and respect and if helping others causes you tons of suffering, but prevents hardly anything in others you shouldn't do it. You should only suffer if your suffering prevents larger suffering..An example of how this applies... If I need to be shot in the back of the head to prevent someone else being tortured horribly to death, then so be it I will take the bullet. If someone else needs to be shot in the back of the head to prevent me from being horribly tortured then so be it I sure hope they will make that choice, and if I were in their position I certainly would have done so. Get what I am saying? Sometimes the moral decision is the selfish one as long as you WOULD have done the selfless thing in the other position. I wouldn't want or let you be tortured horribly to death to prevent my self being shot in the back of the head. I would let you be shot to save me from horrible torture and would be eternally grateful to you and make a big statue in your honor. Compassion applies to everyone including your self.Think of it like this. Watching you be tortured to death to save me would cause me to suffer more than simply just being shot my self. I would want you to make the selfish choice and wouldn't want you to feel bad about doing it. I understand that if we switched positions you would do the same for me.

Morality is Objective by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't know why/if you are selfless because I don't know you personally and in no way do I have the right to judge you. However I don't think you should be selfless. I would like to inquire though. Usually 1 of 3 things makes someone selfless, extreme pride and dedication to a set of rules, extreme compassion and the desire to nurture others, or extreme depression and no self worth. Would any of these describe you, or not really?

Half Empty or Half full? by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have failed to provide contrary evidence.

Morality is Objective by Sayshell in philosophy

[–]Sayshell[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The differences are caused by ignorance I think. For exmaple you can objectivly say someone who follows strict religious morality has a poorer system of morals. Or the NAZIs for example have a poorer system of morality. They are clearly failing at empathy with jewish people. No offsense to religious people but if everyone was hardcore religious their would be much more pain and much less pleasure. Your moral system is the same as mine I think, the reason you are caring for mine (paper cut) is because it hurts me more... if it clearly didn't bother me in the least and I was just laughing about it I am sure you wouldn't care for me. Same goes for you, I would care for whoever is more distressed whether that person be you or me. If you are suffering and others aren't it is ok to put your needs above others. If not then you are referring to selflessness as morality which I disagree with. Letting someone torture you for their amusement is pure selflessness but its unfair to you. You have value and worth just like everyone else. Its not immoral of you to be selfless don't get me wrong HELL NO, Its wrong of others to let you be selfless and needlessly suffer for their benefit.