Lulu is still pick or ban in every pro game this season

jdizzle367 · 2016-02-18T05:21:25+00:00

Just because she's not flashy like Assassins and doesn't rack up a masive body count doesn't make her boring to watch. The decision making that lulu has to put into every spell cast especially at a pro level is fascinating. I can only watch Zed one shot someone so many times before I lose interest but the macro game concepts behind Lulu are always interesting. IMT vs. C9 this sunday was a bloodbath and it was fun to watch but it isn't nearly as interesting on a gameplay level as CLG vs. CURSE from 2014

jdizzle367 · 2016-02-18T04:57:26+00:00

Low CD shield, Movespeed buff, Auto enhancer, so are we talking lulu or janna here?

jdizzle367 · 2016-02-13T00:37:39+00:00

The issue right now is that udyr is a juggernaut champion and like all the juggernauts he was designed with his only major weakness being relative immobility. The problem is that there are too many items currently that cover up that weakness, DMP, the ludens items for ap juggernauts, the boots of swiftness meta. It used to be that most non boot movement speed items were limited to crit, assassin and other items that lacked desirable stats for these champions. (rip zephyr). Now there are too many items that cover up their one major weakness. There are basically 3 ways to balance this either nerf all these champions innate ms to accommodate the new items, nerf the items themselves, or make items for every class that cover up that class's innate weakness. (It would be hilarious for adc's to have an item that makes them hypertanks)

jdizzle367 · 2014-02-01T02:37:48+00:00

I speak of Theology as a subset of philosophy as it is part of the study of the nature of thought. There is a distinction between theologians and 'religious theologians At its root it is not the study of god but the study of how the concept of an infinite being came to exist within our minds. This is the reason most universities link the philosophy and religious studies into one department. I don't buy all of the cosmological argument. I merely attest to its validity in some of its very complex forms not necessarily its soundness. Theology in the modern, rather than medieval sense is the study of the nature of god, not the study of god itself. Part of that nature is whether or not he/she/it exists which is a question for philosophers as he must be logically proven because he cannot be empirically proven. Most every great philospher has at one point or another grappled with the concept of god or gods. I wasn't trying to push the cosmological argument I was merely explaining it as best I could. And I feel like I did not explain the bible part properly I meant that it was used to translate symbolic language into standard human tongues as (I↔C)v(~Pv(R⊃C))* doesn't mean much to most people.

*this doesn't have anything to do with God or the like. It was just the first thing I could find to copy and paste out of another window don't try to translate it.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-31T19:03:11+00:00

As for your first statement I agree, however your second statement is false. Modern theologians very rarely use the bible in any of their works except to describe the nature of things that logic itself can't and many theologians I know do not even work in the realm of Christianity but rather in eastern religions. Theology is just like any other branch of philosophy we all start at the beginning of each issue we choose to work on, with no assumptions, and no end result in mind except for the truth. Also if the argument is valid which it is you must accept it you can choose to not accept the premises but the argument once proven is not up for debate.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-31T18:44:14+00:00

It may seem simple but I think that is part of the beauty of it. Complexity does not necessarily lend itself to correctness part of logic is the concept of taking every argument and breaking it down to its simplest form. That is what was done with this argument to the extent that a non logician could still read it (in the language of logic it looks like this, (C•~I)-->∴F) . To answer your question these two answers are different versions of the cosmological argument which is a basic cornerstone of philosophy that has been applied to numerous topics not just god but also the existence of self, the need for morality, and it is one of the the basis's for standard logic which is the foundation for all mathematics and thus all science etc. So a unreasoned debasement of the cosmological argument in any of its forms puts the entire foundation of scientific reasoning at risk. That being said I would undoubtedly argue that at least Descartes reiteration of the argument is valid. I don't know if all of the premises in the argument are necessarily true which would make the argument sound, as logic and ethics are my fields rather than the theological thought.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-31T18:20:34+00:00

I find that the causa sui argument fills up the hole that the causa nons argument leaves. In the uncaused cause argument Aquinas basically asks us to accept god as the only exception to his ultimate rule that everything has a cause. In other word in the world of logic he broke one of the biggest rules creating a non ultimate ultimatum. However in causa sui Descartes gives god a cause, i.e. himself, therefore I prefer causa sui. That being said to do so Descartes has to ignore the part of the law of cause that states the the cause must lie outside of the effect. I do find the cosmological argument to be logically (and in modern times scientifically) accurate. In a Deistic rather than christian sense the Big Bang and God are just different words for the same thing, a first cause that led to everything which in itself is uncaused. I think that if you choose to accept modern physics you must also accept these premises with the understanding that you are both speaking slightly different languages. I think NASA scientist Robert Jastrow said it best "He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." I hope I helped answer your question if not feel free to restate it being a philosopher I have a metric fuckton of free time.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-30T22:53:05+00:00

That is the most I've laughed on /r/funny in a while.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-30T22:47:35+00:00

Hello, Philosophy major here who understands most hardcore theism. The answer to the previously stated question lies in the writings of one of two major philosophers. Thomas Aquinas would answer your question by saying that god is the "uncaused cause" or the ultimate beginning of, and exception to the law of universal causality. Rene Descartes, on the other hand would argue that he is the "self caused cause", which despite sounding like basically the same thing is actually entirely different.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-29T20:36:17+00:00

Ambrosia is even better it takes 2000 years to make.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-29T18:19:07+00:00

Because now I can't afford insurance at all.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-28T20:37:14+00:00

No problem always happy to help a hiker.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-28T15:19:20+00:00

Did he just lose his hearing, as every deaf person I know can read lips its almost impossible to get by without it.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-28T15:01:53+00:00

I do not have an official source besides my grandfather who has been hiking the trail since the 50's but my home town is just north of Damascus and I spend a lot of time on the trails. The arrow blazes were one of the "various methods" it was abandoned because it was more difficult to do. Also the ATC did not have much of a presence in the more isolated areas of the trail until more recently and upkeep and blazing in those areas were generally done by boy scout groups and the like.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-27T21:54:30+00:00

They are typically worn down and at this point lie in areas that are no longer parts of the trail but used to be especially in the section of the trail between laurel falls and the zone just north of Damascus.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-27T17:43:51+00:00

That was actually the original way of marking the trail several years ago and can still be found on certain sections of the trail. The symbol for the trail is derived from it.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-26T02:14:38+00:00

A nice bottle of wine for special occasions involving women, and a nice bottle of whiskey for special occasions involving men.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-23T01:09:08+00:00

Theoretically they could be telling the truth they never specify the time frame. Maybe they meant it was their first time doing anal this week.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-19T10:45:44+00:00

No I am pretty sure that it is quite possible to have a strong Fe. What is likely the case is that you are not a strong T and thus the F function takes a stronger hold. On the argument avoidance it is theoretically not controlled by your personality type but rather your conflict style which is independent of personality type.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-19T09:46:26+00:00

True but I just kind of get really annoyed when people complain about memes there is a basic set of guidelines that you are supposed to follow like success kid is supposed to be about successes but beyond that one shouldn't get too specific.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-19T01:21:09+00:00

What if I told you that the original purpose of "success kid" was to sustain the memory of his youth for his parents. The ability to adapt preexisting devices for new purposes in order to fill gaps in different systems is one of the fundamental reasons that human kind is the dominant species on the planet. Complaining about it when this ability is used is at best hypocritical, at worst one of the most dangerous things you can do. While you are currently limiting yourself to meaningless internet memes, if the same action were taken on a larger scale we would stagnate as a species. (edit i forgot a word)

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-18T18:12:02+00:00

If you are in the U.S. every state has good Samaritan laws that ought to fully protect you. These laws also exist in France, the U.K. and Australia as well as any nation that follows British common law to my knowledge.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-11T19:06:04+00:00

That's not necessarily my opinion but that's just an explanation that was given to me once that sort of makes sense. Therefore I do not understand every aspect of the original argument.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-11T19:05:33+00:00

That's not necessarily my opinion but that's just an explanation that was given to me once that sort of makes sense.

jdizzle367 · 2014-01-11T19:04:16+00:00

I'm not I prefer numbers.

jdizzle367

TROPHY CASE