The Fundamental Flaws of Modern Rationality

a reply to: Connell

Then go listen to pigs f*ck then. Nobody here is stopping you. You're obviously here just to talk sh*t anyway. Which along with your arrogance and narcissism makes you look like an ass and in the end will only alienate you from the people here. At first you seemed like you might be some what intelligent but maybe it's only because that's easy to fake online.

But nobody is making you come here or stay here against your will so feel free to leave any time you wish. I assure you that we'll get by just fine without you and whatever you have to say.

a reply to: Peeple

All we gave up was an outdated philosophy that didn't come close to explaining reality, reality itself proved positivism wrong over and over again. We're not blind believers, we're experiencers. The truth is that the materalists haven't the experience necessary to gauge if reality truly is materialistic because in the end they are sheltered and it is they who are believers. They just don't know and like religious people they won't be changing their mind any time soon. After all, the world does make sense to them from their point of view and their position is totally understandable given that the physical is all that they've ever known(as far as they know).

Well that's that and you'll either go; "Right on, I lived it!" or you'll go; "Woo this, and woo that, rational this and empirical that."

Liked the well written thread OP, welcome to ATS, a fine addition to our membership it seems.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: Connell

Then go listen to pigs f*ck then. Nobody here is stopping you. You're obviously here just to talk sh*t anyway. Which along with your arrogance and narcissism makes you look like an ass and in the end will only alienate you from the people here. At first you seemed like you might be some what intelligent but maybe it's only because that's easy to fake online.

But nobody is making you come here or stay here against your will so feel free to leave any time you wish. I assure you that we'll get by just fine without you and whatever you have to say.

Perhaps you should temper your sentimentality towards this website.

I don't make any claims to intelligence, if I did that would certainly be arrogant. In all likelihood I'm of average intelligence, not very different from most people you'd meet. A lot of what I wrote in the OP is simple BS encased in pretty words, I don't think anyone doubts that. There's some merit to the general theme of questioning the orthodoxy, but otherwise the stance I took in this thread doesn't matter. What matters is that you all came at me with the same old stuff, the same line of reasoning that I've seen a thousand times before. Dogged faith will always reign supreme in this world- you can claim to be rational, but you aren't. The pitiful hubris of human rationality doesn't need to be proved, it's quite empirical. Just look at this, such eloquence: "science has accomplished X, therefore you are wrong". Such refined and novel thinking.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

But you are clearly wrong, or simply misunderstanding science.
If your assertion were correct, we would not currently be working on dark matter or the Higgs Boson, or viewing galaxies billions of light years away.

Hell, if you were right, we wouldn't even have x-rays, nano science, infrared, or hundreds of thousands of other avenues of science.

You claim that we are fundamentally flawed because we only seek out knowledge for what we sense around us, but this is obviously false. We investigate theory, and we find results, these results then lead to breakthroughs.

Basically, evidence leads to revelation of new possibilities and further exploration.

You could have condensed your entire post down to a simple complaint that no evidence is found for the things you believe, and therefore science is wrong for not simply believing your beliefs.

I am the only one that has any right to be disappointed here- the only thing I appreciate was the fellow discussing math, which I am admittedly quite ignorant of. Plus the other girl, the homeless German beggar.

You can take my posting style as arrogant, but I simply don't feel the need to be polite here.

a reply to: Connell

You can take my posting style as arrogant, but I simply don't feel the need to be polite here.

HAHA, I understand.

I suggest your next screen name should be "Slightly Solipsist". It has a ring to it.

You don't have to decide now but when the time comes I ask that you keep it in mind.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Connell

You can take my posting style as arrogant, but I simply don't feel the need to be polite here.

HAHA, I understand.

I suggest your next screen name should be "Slightly Solipsist". It has a ring to it.

You don't have to decide now but when the time comes I ask that you keep it in mind.

Well, I hadn't thought of it before, but it's possible that I could have a tendency towards that. My OP was mainly geared toward inciting enough responses, so I may have been a bit gratuitous with certain ideas.

I personally feel like I lean towards Plato's idea of forms, though not entirely. Truth be told I really have no idea what I believe concerning this.

Playing the role of contrarian never ceases to be amusing, though.

a reply to: Connell

I have never cared for what was popular except maybe when I was younger but only with certain aspects. I am not really into philosophy either I tend towards what I can know to be true and I am fine with saying I don't know on things I simply can't know. I do find myself often citing the phrase "it is what it is" on occasion so there is that.

It has been sort of interesting following the thread, but I am not of the mindset and probably not qualified to debate it properly so I am not going to try. I am interested to see if you attempt another thread as this one seems to have reached an end for all intents and purposes, but that is just my opinion.

a reply to: Grimpachi

I think I will, just need something spark enough fervor in me to come up with another rant .

But yes, I believe this one has ran it's course. New fields to plow, just need to find them.

originally posted by: Connell
Lol at these internet pseudo-philosophers with 10,000+ posts attempting to explain anything. I'd rather listen to the sound of 2 pigs f*cking than believe the posts of some mediocre-minded peddlers of garbage thought.

Are you trolling out of boredom or does it bother you when people try to argue with you?

If you have the knowledge to enlighten people, I doubt you'd squander your insight by insulting anyone attempting to debate you.

Your attitude is a classic example of someone standing atop a flimsy argument--once their house-of-cards has been knocked-over, they resort to attacking rather than the use of reason.

Honestly, I was hoping for a good discussion and not mud-slinging.

a reply to: Connell

It looks like the time has come. Keep that screen name in mind I think it will be a good fit.

That way I will know your next thread.