Who believes in God?

[El Diablo Blanco]

What if today some man came floating down into Times Square proclaiming to be God's son and that his name is Bob Jones.  He performs a few parlor tricks to prove he is special.  Chances are 99% of the people will call this guy crazy and dismiss him as god's son, yet people trust and believe the bible without any hesitation.  It doesn't make sense.  They will believe a story from 2000 years ago but if the exact same shit happened today they wouldn't.

[Radical Plato]

. Oh and just so you know the times are so peaceful that my nephew has been trying to join the military for 2 years and has been turned down cause the infantry, armor division, or artillery is not hiring Idiots!

FIXED. Incomplete Sentence - your grammar sucks! maybe the Army has a basic literacy level and doesn't except red-neck illiterates

[Tito24]

hitler still lives on a remote farm in argentina

[El Diablo Blanco]

Please, direct me to the proper internet videos made by college students so that I can join the Enlightened Club.

No videos, just history.  Take a deeper look into the financial crisis in the USA and how countries in Europe, not banks but countries like Spain and Greece are collapsed. 

The common denominator for power is money and force.  The USA has a lot of both

[Tito24]

yes the rockefellars

[Radical Plato]

Please, direct me to the proper internet videos made by college students so that I can join the Enlightened Club.

Here's a good doco for starters "Manufacturing Consent", it will highlight why you are such an indoctrinated idiot who acts like a close minded fool when presented with alternate information.  It will be a good test of your brainwashed mind to see if you can tolerate the content!  I don't expect you to watch it though, as you want to remain in the Illusion of being "RIGHT" as opposed to KNOWING the TRUTH! - good luck with that!

"Let’s now look at the doctrines that have been crafted to impose the modern forms of political democracy. They are expressed quite accurately in an important manual of the public relations industry by one of its leading figures, Edward Bernays. He opens by observing that “the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society”. To carry out this essential task, “the intelligent minorities must make use of propaganda continuously and systematically” because they alone “understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses” and can “pull the wires which control the public mind.” Therefore our “society has consented to permit free competition to be organized by leadership and propaganda” another case of “consent without consent”. Propaganda provides leadership with a mechanism “to mold the mind of the masses” so that “they will throw their newly gained strength in the desired direction.” The leadership can “regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its solders.” This process of “engineering consent” is “the very essence of the democratic process,” Bernays wrote shortly before he was honored for his contributions by the American Psychological Association in 1949."
Profit over People - Noam Chomsky

[Parker]

13 pages and and no conclusive answer on whether God exists or not. I'm ashamed of Getbig for not having the definitive answer.

[Man of Steel]

jefferson airplane

AHAHAAH!!!

[avxo]

I think you miss the point - all private property laws are theft, as they take what is given to humans by nature

So cars grow on trees and are given to us by nature? And a pizza magically appears on your plate courtesy of nature?

What a ridiculous philosophy...

[dr.chimps]

13 pages and and no conclusive answer on whether God exists or not. I'm ashamed of Getbig for not having the definitive answer.

Maybe so. But there is one hell of a circle jerk going on with the intellectual wannabes. 

[Radical Plato]

So cars grow on trees and are given to us by nature? And a pizza magically appears on your plate courtesy of nature?

What a ridiculous philosophy...

No, Apples grow on Trees, Cars are made from the resources found in Nature - Nature provides the resources for EVERYTHING!  What is more ridiculous is that you think that things have come from another planet or some far off mystical place.  If they haven't come from nature, where in the hell do you propose they have come from.  I know your small brain might find this hard to conceive, but everything comes from nature - yes your car comes from the raw materials in nature, they are then manipulated my man and machines to become what they are, yes your pizza comes from Nature - I am truly in shock that somebody could be so disconnected from reality as to not make the connection from "Where things come from" like there is some portal to another universe where things magically appear from.  Everything comes from NATURE - I feel sorry for people who are so disconnected!  There is only one earth, and everything on it is from Earth! Pretty simple connection really, unless you are a FOOL!  Everything you possess, eat, own or consume originally started off in Nature!  The car that you drive, parts of it used to be buried in the Earth until mined by men and so on it goes, and your small brain might not see the other side of that, one day, your car will age, decay and become a part of the earth again!  Getbiggers! Geeeez!

[gracie bjj]

no one knows for sure, my guess is that people wanna try to find comfort in believing that it aint over when its over.  i used to be into the bible alot but i got frustrated with it

[avxo]

Of course raw materials ultimately come from nature. But someone (or some group of people) took the raw materials and transformed them, adding tremendous value.

A handful of sand is useless to me. A fancy Intel processor isn't.

A handful of seeds are useless to me. Six pounds of vegetables aren't.

I you create something you own it.

[Radical Plato]

Of course raw materials ultimately come from nature. But someone (or some group of people) took the raw materials and transformed them, adding tremendous value.

A handful of sand is useless to me. A fancy Intel processor isn't.

A handful of seeds are useless to me. Six pounds of vegetables aren't.

I you create something you own it.

So what has that got to do with a small minority of the world dispossessing the rest of the world of natures Resources - and just because you find value in those creations, they would be seen as a burden or unwanted by others - for me the greatest lesson I ever learnt was chasing money, making as much as I wanted, and then realising that, possessions weren't a blessing, they were a burden and I spent years giving SH!T away as it was nothing but a pain in the arse - I am still trying to give Sh!T away - Nothing is so freeing as living a simple life with few possessions and good simple healthy food - it is a cliche, but the simple things in life are often the best, and there free.

What your talking about is the manipulation of Nature - the creation of things - if people want to turn there share of apples into a pie, thats there business, I just want my apples as well, plus I prefer them RAW!  And ownership is just an illusion - it's like building a sandcastle near the shore - it wont be long before nature reclaims it - people like the concept of private property because it helps provide an illusion of security.  All the great minds know we don't have security, the sands of fortune shift beneath our feet any which way they want, best not to own too much when they do!

Silicon can be used for more than just CPU's, it can also be used in powerful lessons, like this one!

Traditionally sand mandalas are destroyed shortly after their completion. This is done as a metaphor of the impermanence of life.

[avxo]

So what has that got to do with a small minority of the world dispossessing the rest of the world of natures Resources - and just because you find value in those creations, they would be seen as a burden or unwanted by others - for me the greatest lesson I ever learnt was chasing money, making as much as I wanted, and then realising that, possessions weren't a blessing, they were a burden and I spent years giving SH!T away as it was nothing but a pain in the arse - I am still trying to give Sh!T away - Nothing is so freeing as living a simple life with few possessions and good simple healthy food - it is a cliche, but the simple things in life are often the best, and there free

Others can see these creations as a burden they do not want; what they can't see is my property as theirs. I'm not forcing you or anyone to buy a car. All I'm saying is: "this is my car, not your car."

Now, to address your other point (which has substantially drifted): if you want to give away your possessions and live a "simple life", well... good for you! I won't stop you. But your desire to live this simple life doesn't mean that I have to be forced to live that life as well, or that it entitles you to use of my possessions.

Also I can't help but notice the irony, that even you, who say that to claim one owns something is equivalent to theft, still claim to have a few possessions - or, to put it differently, things that you own, in your simple life. I'll skip calling you a thief this time

[syntaxmachine]

Here's a good doco for starters "Manufacturing Consent", it will highlight why you are such an indoctrinated idiot who acts like a close minded fool when presented with alternate information.  It will be a good test of your brainwashed mind to see if you can tolerate the content!  I don't expect you to watch it though, as you want to remain in the Illusion of being "RIGHT" as opposed to KNOWING the TRUTH! - good luck with that!

"Let’s now look at the doctrines that have been crafted to impose the modern forms of political democracy. They are expressed quite accurately in an important manual of the public relations industry by one of its leading figures, Edward Bernays. He opens by observing that “the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society”. To carry out this essential task, “the intelligent minorities must make use of propaganda continuously and systematically” because they alone “understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses” and can “pull the wires which control the public mind.” Therefore our “society has consented to permit free competition to be organized by leadership and propaganda” another case of “consent without consent”. Propaganda provides leadership with a mechanism “to mold the mind of the masses” so that “they will throw their newly gained strength in the desired direction.” The leadership can “regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its solders.” This process of “engineering consent” is “the very essence of the democratic process,” Bernays wrote shortly before he was honored for his contributions by the American Psychological Association in 1949."
Profit over People - Noam Chomsky

I've read every single one of Chomsky's books, excluding the lectures in print form and books that only contain interviews.

1. Quoting the assertions of a single man in the public relations industry does not constitute evidence for the theory of mass control being presented. The vision of the man who successfully marketed cigarettes and was instrumental in popularizing them, while interesting, bears little to no relation to the actuality of how elites (a vague term as is) operate. Chomsky gladly (and rightly) criticizes this standard of evidence when it is deployed to prop up views contrary to his own; further, the standards of reasoning he adheres to in philosophy (e.g., his critique of behaviorism) and linguistics (what he is famous for in the first place) are exceptional. This makes his use of such shoddy reasoning in politics all the more fascinating and it is is a marvel he does not see the log in his own eye in this regard. It is genuinely amazing that the human mind can be compartmentalized in this fashion.

2. I'm sure that you think I believe America is amazing and perfect, and that I automatically attack any contrary notions. I'm sure of this because you consistently misattribute views to anybody who disagrees with you, including assuming Onetimehard is an American (he isn't), assuming I am "brainwashed" (how could you possibly know this?), and so forth. This shows just superficial your thinking is. The great irony here is that I have already read all of the works under consideration and critically evaluated them, while you have clearly spent little to no time with the arguments (such as they are) in favor of American hegemony. This means that you are the sheep here, because you mindlessly mimic Chomsky like a devoted acolyte and fail to consider relevant alternatives. Shame on you for attacking others for doing exactly what you are doing.

3. In contrast to the "mythical me" that you are attacking, I recognize that business is extremely influential in American society, that in some instances the influence would be better curtailed, that American foreign policy has killed hundreds of thousands, that such policy is not primarily (or even secondarily, oftentimes) geared towards promoting human rights and democracy, and so forth. All of this is readily understood from a pair of courses: economics and international relations. That you think all of this is somehow kept a secret is very revealing. Yes, some people are stupid and accept everything the government and business interests shove down their throat. The existence of these people does not entail some massive conspiracy, however.

[Radical Plato]

Others can see these creations as a burden they do not want; what they can't see is my property as theirs. I'm not forcing you or anyone to buy a car. All I'm saying is: "this is my car, not your car."

Now, to address your other point (which has substantially drifted): if you want to give away your possessions and live a "simple life", well... good for you! I won't stop you. But your desire to live this simple life doesn't mean that I have to be forced to live that life as well, or that it entitles you to use of my possessions.

Also I can't help but notice the irony, that even you, who say that to claim one owns something is equivalent to theft, still claim to have a few possessions - or, to put it differently, things that you own, in your simple life. I'll skip calling you a thief this time

Under the current paradigm, of course I "OWN" things, but I do not consider them MINE! I am not suggesting that there be a free for All LOOTING party, I am saying there are other paradigms out there which don't use POSSESSION but rather a more community minded system, like a Resource based economy, or like a Library for a more simpler definition!  Obviously the system isn't going to change, and I would not force my beliefs on anyone, like I said, I have had access to a lot and found it VOID of meaning, essentially EMPTY, I actually feel sorry for those wrapped up in the chasing and consumption of this Emptiness, why would I want to take someone else's BURDEN!  The possessions I own have become pretty much necessities to live a modern life, they are used only for the purpose of living a simple life and contributing to society!  My only great luxury, is the Internet! A classic example of a SHARED RESOURCE! but some would even say this has become a necessary must have of the 21st century, it definitely makes my life easier!

[Radical Plato]

I've read every single one of Chomsky's books, excluding the lectures in print form and books that only contain interviews.

1. Quoting the assertions of a single man in the public relations industry does not constitute evidence for the theory of mass control being presented. The vision of the man who successfully marketed cigarettes and was instrumental in popularizing them, while interesting, bears little to no relation to the actuality of how elites (a vague term as is) operate. Chomsky gladly (and rightly) criticizes this standard of evidence when it is deployed to prop up views contrary to his own; further, the standards of reasoning he adheres to in philosophy (e.g., his critique of behaviorism) and linguistics (what he is famous for in the first place) are exceptional. This makes his use of such shoddy reasoning in politics all the more fascinating and it is is a marvel he does not see the log in his own eye in this regard. It is genuinely amazing that the human mind can be compartmentalized in this fashion.

2. I'm sure that you think I believe America is amazing and perfect, and that I automatically attack any contrary notions. I'm sure of this because you consistently misattribute views to anybody who disagrees with you, including assuming Onetimehard is an American (he isn't), assuming I am "brainwashed" (how could you possibly know this?), and so forth. This shows just superficial your thinking is. The great irony here is that I have already read all of the works under consideration and critically evaluated them, while you have clearly spent little to no time with the arguments (such as they are) in favor of American hegemony. This means that you are the sheep here, because you mindlessly mimic Chomsky like a devoted acolyte and fail to consider relevant alternatives. Shame on you for attacking others for doing exactly what you are doing.

3. In contrast to the "mythical me" that you are attacking, I recognize that business is extremely influential in American society, that in some instances the influence would be better curtailed, that American foreign policy has killed hundreds of thousands, that such policy is not primarily (or even secondarily, oftentimes) geared towards promoting human rights and democracy, and so forth. All of this is readily understood from a pair of courses: economics and international relations. That you think all of this is somehow kept a secret is very revealing. Yes, some people are stupid and accept everything the government and business interests shove down their throat. The existence of these people does not entail some massive conspiracy, however.

I have never mentioned SECRET or Conspiracy, It is you who constantly make this allegation as if it is coming from me,   It's frustrating that people call ideas outside of their realm of understanding a CONSPIRACY!  You will never hear me describe the CORRUPT manipulation of the Financial Markets a Conspiracy, or that America lies to it's people so it can profit from WAR a conspiracy, or that a handful of ELITE and powerful corporations and families effectively rule the world a Conspiracy.  You will hear Repeaters like yourself calling it a CONSPIRACY over and over and over again, but you will never hear me say that, a true conspiracy would never be detected, thats what a conspiracy is.  This stuff is out in the Open and can easily be discovered through Curiosity and a critical analysis of History from many angles.

The fact you claim to have read all of Chomsky work is Bullsh!t - the mind control theory isn't just validated by one public relations man - Chomsky uses many sources - like I said, I didn't expect you to watch anything - I am more than happy for you to believe the nonsense you do, just don't expect others to believe it!  Unfortunately Chomsky is advocating for peace, the opposite to peace is war! there are no other alternatives, either you are at war, or you are not!  Some times in life things are just Black & White - do you have an alternative!  Some times a PEACE Advocate is just a PEACE Advocate!

[Radical Plato]

lmao. Thanks man.

P.S. The proper term is "pseudointellectual." HTH

It's called "Being a WANKER!"

[Griffith]

Oh, ok. Do you think we should keep using the language of morals or is it too misleading?

When I ask how you would describe the Holocaust , I mean the descripion you would personally come up with to explain the moral status of the event. Would you say, 'It was wrong but I only say this because I've been conditioned as such,' or would you say 'it was neither right nor wrong, because there is no such thing'? It might not look like it first glance, but there is a huge difference between these views.

I don't believe anyone can ever claim anything as being 'moral' or not. Who can say what is or is not? So no, I don't believe in using 'the language of morals'.

With regards to your question, in the big scheme of things (the Universe) I don't believe there exists a right or wrong.
Bacteria wipe-out other bacteria so that their type is stronger. They are living beings, so what's the difference?
Human beings have self-awareness and intelligence, so I think its more for practical purposes that such actions should be prevented.
We're smart enough not to want such actions on ourselves so therefore should not tolerate it happening to others either.

I think the world would be a better place if people were more concerned about how they themselves would like to be treated instead of whether something has been determined as 'right' or 'wrong' by others. Or even worse, the so-called 'morality' of their actions.

[syntaxmachine]

I have never mentioned SECRET or Conspiracy, It is you who constantly make this allegation as if it is coming from me,   It's frustrating that people call ideas outside of their realm of understanding a CONSPIRACY!  You will never hear me describe the CORRUPT manipulation of the Financial Markets a Conspiracy, or that America lies to it's people so it can profit from WAR a conspiracy, or that a handful of ELITE and powerful corporations and families effectively rule the world a Conspiracy.  You will hear Repeaters like yourself calling it a CONSPIRACY over and over and over again, but you will never hear me say that, a true conspiracy would never be detected, thats what a conspiracy is.  This stuff is out in the Open and can easily be discovered through Curiosity and a critical analysis of History from many angles.

The fact you claim to have read all of Chomsky work is Bullsh!t - the mind control theory isn't just validated by one public relations man - Chomsky uses many sources - like I said, I didn't expect you to watch anything - I am more than happy for you to believe the nonsense you do, just don't expect others to believe it!  Unfortunately Chomsky is advocating for peace, the opposite to peace is war! there are no other alternatives, either you are at war, or you are not!  Some times in life things are just Black & White - do you have an alternative!  Some times a PEACE Advocate is just a PEACE Advocate!

That's fine, we can dispense with the "conspiracy" terminology if you like. The word can be used to write off alternative opinion without actually evaluating it. I tend to use it as a placeholder for the longer expression, "theory with little evidence that persons of a certain psychological disposition flock toward and treat as sacrosanct without genuinely critically assessing it." This means that a majority of the theories you advocate fit the bill, but again, we avoid the "trigger word" that apparently makes you upset.

Let's take a specific theory so that we can get more concrete here: you mention above that corrupt manipulation of financial markets takes place. Of course, some degree of corruption is evident in any such system, but I don't think that is what you are referring to. Just what are you referring to (a specific instance, or a pattern of behavior) and what is the evidence that this theory is right?

[Man of Steel]

What if "C-A-T" really spelled "dog"?

[OTHstrong]

FIXED. Incomplete Sentence - your grammar sucks! maybe the Army has a basic literacy level and doesn't except red-neck illiterates

Are you fucken stupid or something, do you know how to read, I said my nephew not me.

[King Shizzo]

Am I too late for the circle jerk? I can be the conductor.

[avxo]

I don't believe anyone can ever claim anything as being 'moral' or not. Who can say what is or is not? So no, I don't believe in using 'the language of morals'.

Really? Let's examine what this other guy (we'll call him Larry) wrote in the same post as yours:

With regards to your question, in the big scheme of things (the Universe) I don't believe there exists a right or wrong.
Bacteria wipe-out other bacteria so that their type is stronger. They are living beings, so what's the difference?
Human beings have self-awareness and intelligence, so I think its more for practical purposes that such actions should be prevented.
We're smart enough not to want such actions on ourselves so therefore should not tolerate it happening to others either.

Larry seems to disagree with you... As a matter of fact, that last sentence of his is a moral principle. Smart guy, that Larry.