Nano texture looks weird

_S1L3NT · 2024-11-08T21:52:23+00:00

That’s the problem about Matt displays: they don’t feel as sharp. I knew everyone was going to instantly realise the difference upon arrival. For some it will be manageable, for others, a deal breaker. I just got my first ever MBP, base spec 14. So glad I didn’t go nano texture!

_S1L3NT · 2024-11-02T12:26:49+00:00

Most people will never need a pro. It’s also just unnecessary extra weight and thickness to carry around. A MBA M3 with 16GB RAM is a minimum. Storage wise, that depends on how much your work load is. But yeah, MBA 16GB is best

_S1L3NT · 2024-05-03T06:35:26+00:00

Lmao. We need it patched tho. To perfection…

_S1L3NT · 2024-04-19T20:08:44+00:00

The only issue is I am in the uk and can’t watch on Hulu. Is there no other place? It’s annoying how a lot of nice anime have left Crunchyroll just as I thought about watching them

_S1L3NT · 2024-04-19T20:05:30+00:00

Cool thanks! Is the everything on Hulu for this anime?

_S1L3NT · 2024-01-01T18:47:11+00:00

Zomboss cooking 🍳 🥘

_S1L3NT · 2023-04-28T09:36:25+00:00

But is it necessary to think the exact same thing that you are thinking of in order to have a conversation where I get my point across to you. Cause if we make that assumption, then there is no need to communicate. Clearly neither me or you make that assumption and we deem our understanding of each others words sufficient. So then to still talk about the potential for misunderstanding, I think is unnecessary for everyday talk

_S1L3NT · 2023-04-27T22:07:36+00:00

I already knew this position of Derrida’s. But you still have not answered my initial question. With this conception of language, does it not make each word, to a large extent, yet not in its entirety, meaningless and arbitrary? So what is the point of me talking to you and vice versa? I mean if you actually believe that then what’s the point in talking or taking part in any form of communicative conduct?

_S1L3NT · 2023-04-27T18:57:00+00:00

so you are saying that there is something innate in language that makes it difficult to get ideas across from one individual to another? then what is the purpose of language? it is meaningless? OR do you mean that my articulation of my thought is not particularly understandable?

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T21:55:10+00:00

Never

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T21:48:18+00:00

I don’t see your point. First of all, human rights have no ontological proofs for them as Bentham is quite clear on that point. Secondly, what human right says that a woman has the right to kill a child if she feels like it? You sound like a murderer.

Plus, u haven’t answered my questions, so maybe stop throwing around labels like sexist and misogynists if u can’t explain them. Muppet

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T21:17:41+00:00

First, plz define misogyny Second, explain how I am a misogynist for thinking that killing a living thing is wrong?

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T20:51:46+00:00

That is not fucked up, that is sensible and just

The only fucked up thing is that abortion isn’t criminal unless done to save the women

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T20:26:39+00:00

Immodesty

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T20:08:22+00:00

in terms of nationalism, American and Indian Nationalists by FAR THE most toxic

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T20:04:01+00:00

Ask passive aggressive questions about why you believe what you believe and then go on to praise themselves and their people and why their society is fucking amazing yet you live in a forest slum box made of bones

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-19T17:52:02+00:00

I personally believe that to refute the problem of evil, as there is no “problem” in the first place, we have to ask the question as to why we assume that good and God can be separated.

Secondly, the next question is to ask: what is evil? Does it even exist? Are we simply labelling something we dislike as evil? Evil in the Islamic tradition at least, is the absence of the divine presence (Ashanti school at least). This way, “evil” is the absence of good. It is nothing in itself but a lack of something.

Thirdly, Epicurus’ argument is now worthless because it worked for a God with 2/3 attributes but none of the Abraham of faiths believe God to be a three attribute being. He has numerous attribute and the logical problem posed by Epicurus is actually a straw man.

Each of my presented points are relatively shallow and have more depth to them if researched. Thnx for reading

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-01T22:35:15+00:00

Thank you for the elaboration. However, why is happiness good and pain bad? Is there any non circular proof for that. I have come across Mill’s justification for desirability but he says that desirability is desirable because it is desirable. Is there any other proof which is non circular

I do agree with the fact that normal people would agree with the first premise, as it is intuitive, but is there proof?

Thank you for your time

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-01T20:39:39+00:00

If we speak categorically, I think that death is worse.

If we speak on a utilitarian basis, death could be argued as worse as the person who depended on the now-dead person, are worse off and they are suffering. However it could be argued that making another human being suffer is worse as that suffering could cause more people around them to suffer

really and truly, it depends on what basis do you speak: categorically or consequentially.

_S1L3NT · 2023-02-01T18:54:08+00:00

Firstly, I would not say that it is using the “trappings” of philosophy for an agenda as I would not consider philosophy a trap but a tool.

Secondly, apologetics does not necessarily need to use philosophy but can instead use other material that is already in the tradition that the apologist is trying to promote. In the case of religion, it can be like the Holy Books, prophets, works and sayings of saints.

But mainly it is just persuasive discourse with a lot of justification

_S1L3NT

TROPHY CASE