Cantousent

Ahh, you remembered. :D ...But I'm not being a relativist in this case. I have no argument against mathmatics. Hell, I'm just jonesin' to get to the point where I can express my extreme views. heh heh

The good thing about self evident reality as reality -- something like our mathmatics disctussion -- is that it is either completely true or so true that we have no choice but to accept it as bedrock of our existence. I can see exactly what you're saying Rosbjerg, but then we have every person in the discussion arguing for his version of reality. For instance, might we be in some sort of Matrix? Sure. Nevertheless, if we are, then we are so completely fooled that the Matrix is our reality and we might as well argue from the rules that exist inside the matrix. After all, could we live in a matrix built by computer in a world created by God.... and does God have a God who created him? It's just going to be awefully confusing in a short time.

Hmm. Mathematics have nothing to do with that. They are not negotiable. ...But still, we must agree that it is non negotiable. The fact that we have been arguing over mathmatics shows that it is arguable. Is it rational to argue over mathmatics? Probably not, but if it is the most basic principle of our reality, then it doesn't hurt to get consensus and then move forward. Until then, we have absolutely no shared foundation for further discussion, only fuel for continued disagreement.

Ouch 64 seats. It's worse for Labour than I thought. I'd probably be a Tory, but England seems to have done rather well under Labour so who knows? Looks like Labour took a pounding from both the Tories and the the LDs. I'd have to say the LDs are the only ones who scare me, but it's always easy to second guess the politics in some other country. Not wise, just easy.

Non violence is certainly an admirable goal, but I think we should come to some sort of agreement on basic realities before we can tackle morals and beliefs. Then we can get into the tougher issues such as moral issues and then, finally, argue about God. heh heh.

I sympathize with you, Rosbjerg. I just see your argument as circular. There has to be some level on which folks of good "faith" can agree, regardless of their views on God. We have to find at least one area upon which we agree if we're ever to isolate the areas where we disagree and the areas where agreement is impossible.

Movies should be judged on how well they entertain the audience. If the audience is happy, then the film must be a success. It's probably just as formulaic as everything. Eventually, everything starts looking formulaic, but that doesn't mean that it isn't entertaining.

I enjoyed Freelance quite a bit. Still, the single player campaign is just waaaay to quick. After that, the multiplayer just seems like more of the same over and over again. It was worth the money I paid for it, though. Great entertainment.

I get a kick out of folks suggesting that Buddhism is a non-violent religion. Christianity is a non-violent religion by the same standards. Christians can be quite violent. The core of Buddhism is non-violent, but there have been some notably violent Buddhists. They have great temples, though. The idea of tolerance should include taking a profession of faith as the core tenets of the religion rather than what some of the members have done in its name. When the idea of tolerance is used by "enlightened" atheists as a way to insult religious believers, then it ceases to lose any real meaning. The very term intolerance becomes ironic. For instance, I'm not going to persecute my neighbors and try to confiscate their property. So, while I agree that there was an inquisition, and that it was ugly and inhumane, I'm certainly not an inquisitor. I'm a Catholic. I admit it freely. ...But that doesn't mean that I don't recognize the mistakes my church has made in the past. You cannot blame an entire group for the sins of a few, often committed centuries ago. If that's the case, then you're all just as bad as the next guy. After all, we share our humanity if nothing else. Ulitmately, we're all in the same group. As for numbers, that's just a matter of language. The expression of the numbers is irrelevant. It doesn't matter how we express the self evident truths. 2+2=4, no matter how we express the equation. Moreover, it is a universally accepted and self evident truth. It is the reality in which we live. That we can express the same reality in different ways does not change the reality. ...And it's quite different from religion.

It's simply not reasonable to expect folks to prove a negative. It shouldn't be: prove to me that God doesn't exist. That's an unfair demand. However, I need apologize to no-one for my faith. I believe in God, but it is a matter of personal conviction. The objects of faith should never be easily proved. If they are, then faith does not exist. I won't assume that an atheist lacks a moral compass. I expect that a reasonable atheist won't assume that I lack intelligence.

Don't be a doofus, Gorth. I'm talking the flesh and blood variety. You know, not all networks are internetworks!

I didn't like the good priest so much as I thought his character was the best for the story. Ravenhome was spooky and it wouldn't have been what it was without Father Grigori.

You yutz! My numbered friend, just because I am a Catholic and I am inferior does not necessarily mean that all Catholics are inferior. However, my cranium is not small. My head is huge but my brain is vacuous.

I always get a kick out of these threads. Str: 10 I was pumping iron until my doctors told me it was unwise. Heh, one doctor says "lose weight" and the other says "no strenuous activity." Rat bastards. Can I say that on TV? Still, I'm about average on a 3-18 scale, which shows how pathetic our population is. Dex: 11 I used to have excellent reflexes. All things of this world are fleeting, but I'm saddened to find that I move a little slower than I did even a few years ago. A sedentary lifestyle, ill health, and age all conspire against me. Con: 8. I'm not on death's door, but I've got a pain in the side that the doctors say is built for a lifetime. I've managed to ruin my liver with youthful indiscretions. I can't walk between the parking lot and the Humanities building without being covered in sweat. A hundred years ago, I'd've been buried next to Gromnir. Int: 12. heh. I was given a series of tests when I was younger. Allegedly, I was a genius. All's I can say to that is: 1) I don't believe it. 2) If I am a genius, God wasted it on me. Better that someone worthy have it than me. I think I'm a bit above average. Wis: 8. You don't end up where I am by being particularly wise. Cha: 14. I'm actually popular with folks. I have an outrageously busy social schedule. I have built networks of friends where they did not exist. Hell, even when I move on to something else, the ties I've created between people endure. If I have pride over anything in my life, this would be it. I know, it's pathetic. A smiley for the hell of it: :cool:

Phosphor

wow, what a fruit cake. This guy is a veritable cornucopia of fruit. A few observations, though: Is sodomy a crime? I mean, it must already be a crime to be decrimanalized, right? That sounds weird. I've always wondered how folks managed to enforce something like sodomy laws. What the hell is he saying with the Tsunami stuff? I didn't really go through all of his source materials, but it seemed as if he were saying the Swedes had more killed in the Tsunamis than other Europeans. I've been called a devil for being white, American, and Catholic. I just wonder what's next? If we ever colonize space, the colonies will refer to Earthling devils and the Earth will refer to the evil savages in the colonies.

I think mister Foolery left the building.

All of this ignores that the U.S. economy still drives the world economy. Sweden doesn't owe the great per capita income to its own actions nearly so much as it does to U.S. domestic policy. I can hear the howls already.

Tom foolery

I look at the economy as a whole and not the per capita income. The size of the economy and its growth are far more important. More important, however, is the underlying reasoning I gave you. Rosbjerg beat me to the punch, even.

Capitalism might not be the answer to everything, but it's the best answer we have at the moment. Take a country such as Sweden... I've liked most Swedes, but they tout their economy as suggesting that they've really been on the ball. This completely ingores the larger geo-political environment that has allowed them to enjoy their bounty. There was a time when most Europeans would admit that the United States provides a defensive umbrella under which most nations can thrive. Sweden and Canada have simply not been forced to invest in defense to the degree that the United States does. Now, it seems many Europeans complain about the same military that stood watch on the borders of communism. It seems, more to the point, that many Europeans think communism is the answer. Do you really believe that the world would be better with a Soviet system? Face it, you can afford to have a more or less socialist system when the stability in your entire region is ensured. Then there's another factor: diversity. Sweden has a smaller, more homogenous population. Hell, compared to the United States, so does Canada. (Yes, yes. You can cite Michael Moore about how Canada has as much ethnic diversity as the United States. I need a laugh.) The fact is, there's a lot involved in Sweden that depends on what goes on the in United States. There's a lot that goes on in the United States that depends on what happens in Europe, also. Finally, the United States has the largest and fastest growing Economy of any of the so called first world countries. Countries such as China are growing fast, but such growth comes by introducing more capitalist elements, not less. EDIT: Comedy. Rosbjerg beat me to the punch.

Spoken like a true Jedi.

I'm with taks in thinking it's a terrible system, although I shy away from the term evil. Socialism is not the answer. Still, the survey does show that most folks agree on broad issues. The details throw eveything askew.

Apparently, we've found the person who wrote the questions for the survey in question. He's even come here to share some new questions he intends to put into the next survey. I'm sure we'll get an equally legitimate outcome for that survey as well.