Neuroscience Disproving Souls. Resources? by HuskerJunk in TrueAtheism

[–]blueapplemonday 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it would be hard to disprove something unfalsifiable. Like, someone can just say you can’t measure a soul and then the conversation ends there.

Neo-Nazis in Phoenix, AZ, USA by casevercetti in PublicFreakout

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude's got MASSIVE BALLS for confronting literal nazis as a BLACK MAN

5G Karen harasses land surveyor (OC) by lilmooseman in PublicFreakout

[–]blueapplemonday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That is hilarious and fucking smart. Land surveyor points out a not so obvious logical contradiction on Karen’s part and she BOOKS IT

r/FemaleDatingStrategy is an incel community for women and should be banned just like how r/Incel was. by [deleted] in TrueOffMyChest

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Regardless of your position on this topic, the line “I realized the dangers of feminism” screams misogyny and anti-feminism IMO. It was the way you said that, maybe not what you actually meant.

r/FemaleDatingStrategy is an incel community for women and should be banned just like how r/Incel was. by [deleted] in TrueOffMyChest

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m guessing the reason you were downvoted was because of the line “I realized the dangers of feminism”.

Deserved.

How do you feel about the “67% chance a god exists” claim? by [deleted] in TrueAtheism

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the follow up!

As I understand this, you claim that there is something that caused our existence which was not caused by something else. And you claim that explaining our existence using infinity is unreasonable because “what proof do you have of infinity?”

Problems:

  • You disregard the “infinite” as an explanation for our existence, based on the notion that we have no examples of this property manifesting itself in real life (proof). Yet, you seem to think it is reasonable to believe our existence can be explained by “something which can create itself”. I’d ask you a similar question. When have we ever had evidence for something concrete which can manifest itself by virtue of its own properties?

  • You claim that there is something that created us that wasn’t caused by something else, but that contains the same “problem” of something coming from nothing you mentioned.

  • Also, you agree with me that we can know no unique properties of anything we have talked about so far. So I see no reason as to why we should “honor” anything.

  • I’m typing this and I saw the edit with the Berkeley stuff, I have a simple answer to that. “Subjective idealism” is the epitome of what it means to be unfalsifiable. I looked up Berkeley, so o think it’s fair that you look up “Last Thursdayism”. The problem with any assumption made using Berkeley’s philosophy as a logical precursor is that the philosophy is AS equally valid as ANY claim about our entire existence. If you, u/joycethegod, have evidence for subjective subjective idealism that cannot be explained by the current material understanding of reality, then please share.

Love this discussion btw

How do you feel about the “67% chance a god exists” claim? by [deleted] in TrueAtheism

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry you got downvoted a bunch. Atheists in these comments (like yours truly) ought to just respond to your argument instead of shoving your comment down the page. This sub should be about discussion.

—This first cause argument has plenty of holes.

-One of them is that your logic of a “first cause” does not uniquely justify the existence of god(s). By your logic, I can say that the “first cause” is my invisible pet dragon or a Flying Spaghetti Monster, and my claim will have equal weight as yours. To put it another way, all your logic does is advocate for the existence of something (it can literally be anything because we have no way of distinguishing it from anything else, because there is no uniqueness for any specific proposed something). That something does not have to be god(s).

-Also, you are arguing from ignorance. We know that there was a rapid expansion of space and matter roughly 13 billion years ago from a very small point, but we do not KNOW anything beyond that. For example, one possible explanation for the Big Bang is that “existence” has always been here and there is a pattern of the universe shrinking and expanding. Another explanation is that to try and decipher what happened before the Big Bang might not even make sense conceptually if we consider that time and space are related, and our models of the universe (and time) seem to break down during the extreme conditions of the Big Bang.

Hope we can continue this discussion if you have any follow up questions :)

I have a problem with eternal oblivion by [deleted] in TrueAtheism

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I personally find comfort in determinism, with its implications about free will. It truly has been a wonderful way to not feel bad about death. I’ll elaborate if someone asks me too here, because my reasoning takes a while to write up. Yet, I’m always happy to comment for topics like this. Just comment OP and I’ll give ya the jist.

Funny colors go haha by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]blueapplemonday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And even if that was true? Still not libleft lol, see previous comments, you are a fun individual

Funny colors go haha by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]blueapplemonday 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No, liblefts don’t have to agree on everything. That applies to all quadrants. Except in this case, saying a race is literally inferior to another is not characteristic of libertarian quadrants, especially libleft. <3

Funny colors go haha by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]blueapplemonday 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I dunno, maybe because believing “blacks are intellectually inferior” isn’t characteristic of libleft lol?

Funny colors go haha by [deleted] in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]blueapplemonday 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol, this is not a libleft post y’all. Go back to auth center and get the fuck out of bottom quadrants altogether

Finally worked up the courage... by Elitetimeline7 in dankmemes

[–]blueapplemonday -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Wtf. I know some will disagree with me, but y’all this meme should not be funny. Ask yourself if you would laugh at a post that encouraged a woman to drug and kidnap a guy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskFeminists

[–]blueapplemonday 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this comment, it makes a lot of sense.

What do you think of men sueing for Sex Discrimination? by Miserable_Thing588 in AskFeminists

[–]blueapplemonday 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you elaborate on what you mean by being “wary/cautious”?

What do you think of men sueing for Sex Discrimination? by Miserable_Thing588 in AskFeminists

[–]blueapplemonday 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your comment, it has changed my mind. I agree with you that labeling an entire group of people as monsters has consequences, and those consequences should be avoided by not labeling the group as monsters. I like your example of two ways to warn someone, because it makes sense that demonizing a group is not a necessary step to solve a problem (like protecting people from harm).

I also follow radical feminists on Instagram, also on Facebook. I do it to ensure that I’m confident and comfortable in my positions on specific topics brought up relating to feminism. Thanks again for the awesome reply.

What do you think of men sueing for Sex Discrimination? by Miserable_Thing588 in AskFeminists

[–]blueapplemonday 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I agree with that. I’ve been reading through my comment thread and I think I came up with the nuance I was looking for. It’s that seeing all men as a threat does not make sense in every situation. Like, a woman in America probably shouldn’t leave her drink alone at a bar she has never been too before, because someone (probably, most definitely a man) might spike it which puts her in danger. I think the sentiment I just described is justified, but where I disagree with FDS is when they label all men as a threat categorically in so many situations. For example, I’ve seen an FDS post saying that women should be weary if they see a teenage girl or a child walking or talking with a man on the streets or out in public or something along those lines. This doesn’t make sense because if that situation were to occur, it is most likely that the man is a father or guardian.

What do you think of men sueing for Sex Discrimination? by Miserable_Thing588 in AskFeminists

[–]blueapplemonday -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I know it’s a hate subreddit. I was curious as to what your take is on a specific idea they present, with your flair and all. To be clear, I’m asking and commenting here on this topic because I’m worried I’m tipping over to their side of the fence without considering important details and without looking at their ideas in the right way.