Wheels within wheels.

[Kinser79]

EtI Wrote:It's research scientists and researchers have done

Okay where is this "science" and "research"?  It seems strange to me that one never hears about these awesome discoveries except from cranks like you.

EtI Wrote:Some of it is posted on that other thread in the appropriate place. Some of it was on the archived old forum.

 

The old forum is completely gone.  There is no archive.  I should have expected you'd not to know what a 404 error is.  Also I'm not going to dig around in your posts.  Honestly I have better things to do with my time--like anything else.  Either post actual scientific proof or don't I really don't care, cause what I've seen you to call science is actually at best pseudoscience and worse plain old quackery.

EtI Wrote:You ARE conscious, then? You admit that?

Considering I'm not comatose or dead....what do you think.

EtI Wrote:Silly, being conscious "does not prove the existence of some external mystical force." LOL Where did you get such a crazy notion? It proves the existence of an internal mystical force, that's YOU.

UH....not sorry to burst your bubble here but having a functioning brain is not a mystical force.

EtI Wrote:Whatever you claim is detected, you can call it dog shit if you want. You can call it spirit or matter.

We're pretty sure that the moon is made of rocks which makes it matter.  And yes it does matter if you call it spirit or matter.  Matter is important, the basis of all that we can truely know.  Spirit is at best some mystical force crack pots like you dream up to fleece the gullible.

EtI Wrote:No detection can determine whether what you detect is matter or spirit. None!

 

If something can be detected it is most likely matter or energy which is also a form of matter.  I've yet to see anyone detect spirit and the second someone does it will be on the nightly news.

EtI Wrote:I want your answer, not some kids' answer. What is "matter"?

Look at the website and you'll have it.  It should be dumbed down enough for you to comprehend, but for some reason I highly doubt it.

EtI Wrote:Hint: it's nothing so you won't be able to say.

 

You really need to stop Eric, all you're managing to do is amuse me at this point.

EtI Wrote:YOu have supplied no basis for your claim that what exists is matter.

I shouldn't have to.  But if you want evidence look at the chair you are sitting in, the computer you're typing at, the very air you are breathing.  All matter, all require no spirit woo-woo to exist.  All will exist long after you shift off this mortal coil.

EtI Wrote:So, admit you don't know, rather than label people like me crazy or to be reviled.

I don't know the mechanics or properties of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.  Neither do you.  But you're still crazy or at least extremely delusional. 

EtI Wrote:But you show no curiosity about your awareness.

Why should I be curious about such a thing?  It is no great mystery to me why I'm aware of the things I see, hear, smell, taste and touch.  Just because you failed 1st grade science doesn't mean I did.

EtI Wrote:Propaganda is not valid. No thanks.

Not propaganda actually a major theoretical work of Marxism.  Of course it was written by Lenin, and of course I knew you wouldn't read it which is why I let the link speak for itself.

EtI Wrote:Marx founded Marxism, and he did not do it in a 2T. And he had a following before the 2T.

Still completely wrong.  I've been over this several times with you already.  Bring something new or don't bring anything.

EtI Wrote:I didn't quarrel with your definition. That's fine.

It has nothing to do with the fact that Marxists seek political power. They do, and they did, especially in the last saeculum.

Whether or not you quarreled over the definition of materialism is irrelevant.  The quarrel was over the process of Marxism--Dialectical Materialism.  Marxism was, is, and shall be a school of materialism.  The day it ceases being materialist in philosophical outlook it becomes dead solipsism which is all idealism can ever offer.

EtI Wrote:Your current philosophy, all of it, has been proven not to work for a long time now. Trickle-down doesn't trickle. Classical liberalism is even more dated and falsified than Marxism. You have regressed.

  Trickle down economics is a school of economics separate to classical liberalism which is political.  Classical Liberalism does not require Reaganomics.

EtI Wrote:There is no such thing as "agency" in materialism. Everything is claimed to be explained by the behavior of nerve cells and muscles, as you claimed above. No, there is no free will in materialism at all. Liberty is strictly denied. YOu can be a classical liberal and a materialist, but not without accepting complete contradiction and cognitive dissonance in your mind.

  That is Behaviorism which is a psychological school.  It is a branch of materialism to be sure--one I find to be short sighted.  Suffice it to say that if a man has the physical capacity to imagine he has agency he has the capacity for it.  Just like a gallon jug has the physical capacity to hold a gallon of a liquid.  Now whether man has agency or not is a matter of opinion.  Whether a gallon jug is filled with liquid, partially filled or empty is a matter of condition.

It is my view that each man has agency, within his physical limits, to act on the material world.  I suppose you will say this makes me an idealist.  That's fine, I really don't care what you say.  Since I already know that you are wrong.

EtI Wrote:You are so misguided. I and others everywhere have discussed this ad nauseum. The notion of "job creaters" (Dubya pronunciation) is so false it has long wooden noses growing out of it.

ROFLMAO!

I've never gotten a job from a poor man.  Simply put the poor lack the capital to hire anyone.

It is also obvious you didn't read my post.  I said that it is ludicrous that that surplus value (the basis of exploitation/oppression/etc) under Marxism and all other derivative lines of thought (one of which you obviously subscribe to--and no I don't care if you recognize that fact or not, you do) comes up with the whole "exploitation of the working class" thesis operates.  A man who takes a job sells his labor power for a given period--it is not rented it is sold.  As such after he is paid he is no more entitled to his labor power than Ford Motor Company is entitled to my car.

EtI Wrote:True, but they still happen, and such Marxists are as left still want, as they did before, to take over the means of production and put it in the control of the state, allegedly for the benefit of the working class.

And in every case where they are successful the results will be the same.  Everyone will be equal.  Equally poor, equally exploited, equally desperate, and equally depressed.

If the goal was merely employee ownership of the means of production it is far easier to get that under a classical liberal regime than it is after a communist revolution.  I would have thought a century of such revolutions would have proved that already.

EtI Wrote:You are the one who values bread over freedom, because you are a materialist. That's what materialists do, in all senses of the word

Pure projection on the basis that I maintain materialism. 

EtI Wrote:(on employer "exploitation") As a classical liberal, you now DENY this fact.

No I deny that it is a fact.  Employers are going to try to extract as much labor power out of their employees as they can, that is their interest.  Employees are going to try and extract as much compensation from their employers as they can, that is their interest.

What I deny is that this is exploitation.  Both parties know the game, and the rules of the game going in.  The presence of contradictory interests does not exploitation make.

EtI Wrote:It just means there are lots of Americans who prefer non-traditional spirituality.

Actually it doesn't.  Ever met these "spiritual but not religious" people?  I have.  I'm related directly to one, my sister.  She's neither religious nor spiritual (Like literally does not think about anything remotely spiritual, unless going to the weave shop is some how spiritual) but says she is because she thinks it is what she's supposed to say.  I could go on with other examples but the point remains with her alone, she is but one example.

EtI Wrote:Definition one agrees with me

No it doesn't.  It is the study of the interactions of separate identities and their physical surroundings.  If they are "all connected" if the nonsensical statement "we are all one" is true then it is impossible for there to be separate identities to exist much less study.

EtI Wrote:And yet you claim to know for certain that matter exists, and you are SO certain of this that you ALSO claim that anyone who disagrees with you about this is insane.

Everyone with eyes and has seen, everyone with ears and has heard, everyone who has a nose and has smelled, everyone who has a tongue and has tasted, everyone who has skin and has felt knows that matter is real.  They know it is real because they have seen it, heard it, smelled it, tasted it, and touched it.  Anyone who denies this reality must be insane by definition.

Insane:  in a state of mind that prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction; seriously mentally ill.

(I'll omit the informal definition, as it isn't relevant.)

EtI Wrote:Even despite the fact that science no longer claims that matter exists.

ROFLMAO.

I'll be sure to inform MIT's physics department that they are no longer needed because what they study does not exist.

EtI Wrote:Yes, it proves that you are not open to receive my message.

Possible.  However for that to be the case I have to make the following assumptions:  1.  Telepathy is real.  2. Eric sent me a message.  3.  Kinser did not receive that message because (reasons).

Or an equally plausible explanation:  1.  Telepathy does not exist.

William of Ockham Wrote:Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

Given the two competing hypothesis the one with the fewest assumptions is "Telepathy does not exist".

Now you can make up 20 or 30 different hypotheses as to why I did not receive said message but "Telepathy does not exist" is the correct answer unless one of those reasons is "Eric is lying about sending a telepathic message to Kinser".

EtI Wrote:I just sent it again.

Didn't get it for a second time.

So unless you are lying about sending telepathic messages to me, I think we know why I did not receive said telepathic message.

EtI Wrote:<snip> rant about EPA</snip>

I take it you've never had to deal with the EPA then.  Having worked in agriculture myself I can tell you point blank they do regulate such a thing.  And no cow shit isn't poison.  It isn't particularly pleasant either, but it isn't poison.

But over all I want the whole works shut down.  If Commiefornia wants a big expensive bureaucracy because people there can't help but shit in their mess kit let them pay for it.  Also have I mentioned that the EPA is unconstitutional?  Environmental protection (if that is what they even do--doesn't seem like it to me) is not an enumerated power.

EtI Wrote:It was not a haircut EPA got. It was a hatchet job

Nah.  He didn't hire me to write the budget.  Of course had he I'd have fired half of DC in his first year.  I suppose he's gotta save people to fire in years 3 and 4.  A real hatchet job would have just abolished it.  Along with a whole host of unnecessary money sinks.

EtI Wrote:You don't give a tinker's damn about the environment we all depend on. Even less than a tinkle damn.

And you don't give a tinker's damn about the economy we all depend on.  Was that supposed to shame me or something?  That juju doesn't work on me Eric.  

EtI Wrote:<snip>long rambling rant about how Eric fails to understand classical liberalism</snip>

1.  I'm opposed to the importation of any further labor.  That means NO IMMIGRANTS of any kind.  I want to put a "NO Vacancy" sign on the door to the US.  Really that simple.

2.  Those cheap labor abroad trade deals were started up by none other than Bill Clinton and would have accelerated under HRC as they did under Obama.  These "trade deals" have destroyed the US working classes, and the middle classes that depend on them.  I support jacking up tarriffs sky high and I don't care about a trade war with China or any other lesser Not America countries cause they need us more than we need them.

3.  The budget blueprint cuts the DOT budget by a mere 13%.  Probably cutting the fat and getting rid of duplicate programs that the states already run.  Trust me there's lots of waste going on in DC, plenty of things to cut.

4.  Trump is definitely not Hitler.  But that's probably your TDS showing.  Since it will come up later TDS stands for Trump Derangement Syndrome.

5.  I don't listen to the fake news media.  Seriously turn off the CNN already.  Or do you prefer MSDNC?  Don't think I didn't hear about Mr. Maddow's scoop yesterday.

BREAKING NEWS:  Donald Trump pays taxes.  Twice the rate of Sanders!

I got a good belly laugh out of that yesterday.

EtI Wrote:Your point does not refute MY point. Paul wrote wisdom in the Bible.

No your point was that he preached wisdom which he did not.  He preached salvation, the wisdom came later in his letters. 

EtI Wrote:"No, you made a statement.  I want some statistics.  Statements =/= statistics."

Come on, pony up.

Don't need to....schizophrenia is a psychotic condition everyone knows that.  Mystical experiences being psychotic episodes is nothing new.  Next.

EtI Wrote:You haven't read my works. If you had, you'd know that YHWH is the name of God that means "I am that I am."

I knew that before I even knew you existed Eric.

EtI Wrote:You can call that "asshole," but that's just uninformed interpretation.

Apparently you've never read the Old Testament.  When he isn't bothering someone in the middle of the night he's wiping out whole populations.  How that is not the very definition of being an asshole I don't know what is.

EtI Wrote:Christianity at its root, is mysticism.

Actually there is a branch that thinks that.  They were proclaimed as heretics in the second century.  Christianity is best understood as an Hellenistic version of Judaism designed for gentiles.  Which you should already know since you apparently like Paul so much.

EtI Wrote:No generation "runs the show" at any time. I don't care who runs the show. It doesn't matter, despite what generation theory says.

In that case why are you even here?  Why even bother if apparently you don't even believe in the most basic of tenants of the theory.  And you have the temerity to tell me I don't understand it.  I don't know if I should laugh, cry or roll my eyes.

EtI Wrote:If Silents now have more than two in the Senate now, it's reasonable to predict that Boomers will have more than two in the 1T.

Yet you still persist in using the phrase "one or two in the Senate." You don't listen, or you can't. I'm not sure which.

Well for you, it is mostly don't.  I find that listening to you is a bad idea.  Essentially I've determined you exist for my sport.

Apart from McConnell those Silents are irrelevant.

EtI Wrote:I did though. I switched 180 degrees, but from materialism to spiritualism. I switched in the right direction. You switched from Marxism to classical liberalism. Both are wrong, but you regressed a century.

If I regressed a century you regressed far more than a mere century.  Assuming you're not being full of shit when you say you were a materialist, then you should have had a mid-20th century understanding of the world, and yet you changed that for philosophies and methods that were given up in the late middle ages!

Which one of us is going backward here?  Not me, I'm acting exactly as the regulator predicts I should....I'm going for the Classical Liberal tradition which runs deep in America.