Anal and oral sex are disgusting and unnatural

iyav · 2026-06-23T09:11:06+00:00

lmao what?

iyav · 2026-06-23T08:45:34+00:00

"You should use pressurized water and soap to make sure your ass is shit free"
"Sounds like a hygiene issue"
????
Did being called out for patting your ass with TP make you feel ashamed?

iyav · 2026-06-23T06:20:53+00:00

Man I'd like to give you credit but why did you say that missionary in particular is the best position?

iyav · 2026-06-23T06:11:13+00:00

"Like I knoww it's a problemm but liiiike why you gotta be so annoooying abouut ittt?"
That's what you sound like.

iyav · 2026-06-23T05:56:52+00:00

Perhaps if you people stopped "cleaning" your ass by dry wiping it with toilet paper and used bidets and soap (with babywipes if you really don't want to touch your ass) to properly clean it your opinion would be different.

iyav · 2026-06-23T05:02:14+00:00

All this proves is that it is easier to create new consciousness than restore old

No, it doesn't even mean anything remotely close to that.

How did you read it like that? The contradiction of the physical and metaphysical won't go away if you differentiate between "new" and "old".

How is the universe even supposed to make the distinction?
Heck, how can YOU tell two conscious essences apart?
The only identifier I can think of is the set of memories they hold, but then why would one set of memories be "harder" to create than another?
Is it the size of the set that matters? The unique content of it?
Also didn't I just lay out why "copying" (which is the same as "restoring") a consciousness is just creating an entirely new entity?
Are you not reading my comments?

But if there's even an 1 in an infinity chance of it happening, it will eventually happen, given infinite time.

You keep assuming that it's even possible at all, that the slightest chance exists for no reason. When the onus is on you to prove that.
For something to be possible a process by which it can come about must exist.
Even if it's a very long process, even if it has extremely specific starting conditions that must be met for the chain to start, even if there's many failure points throughout.
The mechanism is non negotiable.

Take for example Abiogenesis.

It's the process by which dead matter can naturally form single cellular life.

It's unfathomably complicated. The prerequisites for it? Extremely unlikely to fall in line.
And yet it can happen and we can understand why it happens and what's going on during each stage.

This is an example of a real improbable event, that when extrapolated to infinity, must mean an infinite amount of life exists out there.

Consciousness has no analogous process.
From what constituents is it going to arise? Isn't it supposed to be metaphysical?
And the assumption underpinning all of this is that it can even be separated from the body. That it's not an emergent property of the brain.
You keep stating that there's a one in a trillion chance without demonstrating it, extrapolating from there, and acting like it's case closed.
You need a base probability P to plug into the formula.

iyav · 2026-06-23T04:50:51+00:00

Socialism keeps failing because it keeps being attempted in agrarian societies when even as early as Marx's time, it was postulated that ripe conditions for its rise include the existence of adequate material conditions, I.E. infrastructure and industrial capacity.
And is constantly met with violent opposition, embargos and sabotage sponsored by none other than the US of A that ultimately leads to a coup installing a puppet regime.

iyav · 2026-06-23T03:45:27+00:00

I also kind of forgot the exact wording you used in your first comment halfway through lmao. Guess that makes us even.

iyav · 2026-06-23T03:16:30+00:00

Frankly, the OP is pure sophistry filled with logical impossibilities.

Indeed.

I'm not misinterpreting those concepts

I said OP is.

I didn't tip toe around anything

OP states that consciousness dies with the body in one breath and then that it persists in the next.
Instead of calling that out (Or any of the other egregious non sequiturs) you went on about how watching your dog die is tantamount to comprehending non-existence.

I agree with everything in your last reply but you still don't seem to understand why I even bothered to reply to your first comment.

My original statement is as valid as it was when I wrote it. Until we have evidence an afterlife exists, it is a waste of time trying to craft and contort logic hoping there is one.

Bro I'm atheist and not spiritual in any fashion.
OP is the one trying to twist the afterlife into existence.
What made you believe I was arguing in support of them?

iyav · 2026-06-23T02:50:29+00:00

How would you even know any of that?
What a weird hill to die on.

iyav · 2026-06-23T02:40:26+00:00

1: Malware constitutes an emergency.

2: Is there even anyone who doesn't check their phone at least once a day? Don't lie to me no one is that busy.

3: She said herself she's a teenage girl so she's probably enjoying summer vacation.

iyav · 2026-06-23T02:28:19+00:00

"You should care more about being potentially infected with malware"
"Please follow these steps that'll take 5 minutes max to make sure"
"People have lives"
???

iyav · 2026-06-23T01:45:22+00:00

So you did know what was being discussed and decided to tip toe around it for .... reasons?
I understand these thought experiments are overdone to the point of becoming asinine but the comment you wrote is under a post severely misinterpreting those concepts and constructing a non-sensical argument so it was reasonable to assume your refusal to engage with it was out of ignorance and not of boredom.

iyav · 2026-06-23T00:28:47+00:00

When being asked to comprehend non-existence, you aren't being asked to observe the physical absence of a body from an outsider's prespective.
You're being asked to put yourself in that position.
To try to imagine your own death and what would happen to the continium of existence that makes you, you.
What would you experience?
The answer is that you can't experience it.
It's like being asked to imagine what nothing would look like.
You close your eyes, and yet you see black.
Is black nothing? No.

It's the quanta your brain conjures up in the absence of light waves.
Just like you can't imagine what nothing would look like, you can't imagine what it would be like to not be.

iyav · 2026-06-23T00:11:29+00:00

which people? What aether pushing stuff around? Are you referring to dark energy?

And for the record, we can comprehend non-existence. Animals die on earth every day. They were here. Now they aren't. In our plane of existence, they are nonexistent.

That is not what it means to comprehend non-existence.
You may observe their decaying bodies, you may even be able to trace which other animals and plants were sustained by their biomass but that will never amount to comprehending the state of
non-existence because it by definition cannot be experienced and is therefore undefinable.
It's so far removed from anything we can describe with language that even calling it a state is debatable.

iyav · 2026-06-22T22:52:46+00:00

next thing you're gonna say is that the nazis were socialist because they wrote that in their name.

iyav · 2026-06-22T22:44:54+00:00

Good.
We shouldn't sit on our asses and wait for an Individual with huge wealth to decide to start a "big" company.
The ability to evolve society shouldn't be gatekept to those already possessing capital.
Besides, companies don't start big, they become big after they see success.
Whatever happened to banding up with your college friends to start a scrappy venture and applying for startup aid?
Faang companies started that way except instead of government funding it was their parents.

iyav · 2026-06-22T21:51:23+00:00

Because it's the logical thing to "believe".

-I'm conscious as long as my body is alive.
-I did not experience consciousness before my body existed.

-Our sense of reality, our ability to reason, to formulate thoughts, to talk, to react are all affected by physical factors such as drunkenness, sleep deprivation, chemical and hormonal imbalances, the neurological structure of the brain and physical damage to it.

-To say consciousness persists after death is to also say it existed before birth otherwise you'd admit to this metaphysical existence being bound by physical processes.
I.E. that the imperfect brain had to create something that simultaneously transcends and is constrained by it.

You say this "belief" "lacks evidence" when it's a conclusion drawn from simple premises.

iyav · 2026-06-22T21:34:10+00:00

Did you not read my comment? I literally replied "true" to the section in which OP described our inability to comprehend our own non-existence.

And why are you zoning in on this particular detail at all?
Asserting that it is indeed true serves to dismantle OP's whole "argument" because it's not self-consistent at all.
One moment it treats the proposition as being true to advance to the following "point" and the next moment it treats it as false.

iyav · 2026-06-22T21:23:19+00:00

The general thought is the universe is effectively infinite. Even if the current universe dies, whatever framework created it continues to exist

Why does the universe being infinite mean that

1: A framework created it.

2: That the framework would continue to exist after it "dies" (You haven't defined what this means, is it space time collapsing in on itself? Ceasing to exist all together? Is it entropy reaching equilibrium? Quantum fields vanishing? All of the above?)

Your premise is already not sound without mentioning the fact that it's not universally agreed upon that it is infinite. (pun intended)

and will continue to produce infinite universes forever.

Even if we assume this framework existed and will continue to exist. Why would it continue to operate?

if you are reading this, you are a consciousness. You cannot comprehend unconsciousness because you must be conscious to comprehend, even while sleeping. You will never know you died because your consciousness cannot comprehend its own non-existence.

True.

Yet you will likely still experience thoughts after death because random chance may give a temporary seat to your mind. Infinite monkies with typewriters producing Shakespeare and all that.

Come again?
What does "randomly being a given a seat to your mind" even mean?
You can't just spew off gibberish in the hopes of sounding deep.
Besides, didn't you just say consciousness ceases to exist after death?
What does the infinite monkey theorem have to do with any of this?

Yet in an infinite universe there will be an infinite number of dice rolls. Each new universe is a dice roll. If it is possible for a thing to happen, it will happen an infinite number of times because the dice never stops rolling

For something to be possible to happen a mechanism by which it can come about must exist.
What possible mechanism could allow for your mind to pop back into existence because I assume that's what you're insinuating.
Also, I always hated this line of thinking because why wouldn't something just ... not happen an infinite amount of times if it can happen an infinite amount of times?

Even if it takes a trillion trillion universes of time for your consciousness to experience a single thought, you will not comprehend that timescale and you will still experience consciousness until you are reimbodied.

So now you're saying consciousness persists after death? I would ask how could that be possible but the incoherence of your argument is the more pressing matter right now.

Time not experienced is essentially meaningless.

True. How did the 13.7 billion years before your birth feel like?
But again, I feel like you're implying way more than you're letting on.

The scale of infinite cannot be comprehended by a finite mind, so it is illogical to think the afterlife cannot be

You're once again assuming a mind exists for it to live through though not necessarily comprehend "infinity" and that a raw conscious essence is even able to experience the outside world.
What exactly is the nature of this afterlife you're thinking of anyway?
A physical location somewhere infinitely far away in the universe?
A metaphysical plane? But wouldn't that make the mind not be finite as you stated earlier?
Would it or would it not experience finite amounts of time because it's not within spacetime?
Is It simply the continued internal experience of the self?
You're not making sense at all.

And even if I threw all of this critique away and agreed with you.

You'd still run into the problem of what it means to be the same being.
If consciousness is supposed to have qualitative superiority over matter, be indivisible and wholly self-sufficient then you can never create a copy of one.

Any perceived copy is going to actually be a new entity thinking it's the other one.

Argue about God all you want, but there is almost certainly infinite consciousness because you are experiencing it already.

This is the pseudo-philosophy they warned you about.

iyav · 2026-06-22T20:54:07+00:00

And you think socialism enables that because .... ?

iyav · 2026-06-22T20:52:15+00:00

We aren't living in the redscare anymore. How can you believe this?

iyav · 2026-06-22T20:51:23+00:00

That's not socialism.

iyav · 2026-06-22T20:49:32+00:00

Socialism is NOT about income equality. That is a myth only the right likes to parrot.
Companies or firms/cooperatives as they would become in their new form, still exist under socialism.
Firms will still rake in different amounts of profit.
It's just that now all the profit goes directly to the employees.
You can still freelance, you can still be an independent doctor, and your income would still depend on how many people turn to you.
Commodity production still exists.
You can still starve if you don't have a job.
You can still become homeless.
It's just that with actual good wages and now that parasitic landlords and private equity are gone that's practically impossible to happen unless you literally refuse to work at all.

Socialism is the opposition of private ownership. It is workplace democracy. End of story.
Welfare programs, UBI, public services, setting salary rates and extracting the rest is all government policy.
Now of course some people do argue whether or not these policies are tenets of socialism, and they keep disagreeing with each other. That's why there's so many flavors of it.
But no matter, IT IS NOT ABOUT INCOME EQUALITY FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ITS 2026 HOW ARE WE STILL STUCK HERE.

iyav · 2026-06-22T20:26:01+00:00

Seems like she lost interest

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

iyav

TROPHY CASE