This continuous rat-race: The Omnipotent skylord dogs are inferior meltdown

[Hypo]

Sentencing laws generally consider a number of factors for what crime has been found to have been committed.

Commonly, deterrence is one of them.

Sir Harley would chime in here.

[Tapeworm]

And the Russell tea pot example was him admitting that he himself also couldn't prove the non existence of God just like he can't prove that there isn't a tea pot orbiting the sun between Mars and Jupiter. Then later joking that he considers the existence of God just as likely.

What I'm taking away is that the inability to prove non-existence does not constitute proof of existence, but I haven't read the book.

I'd go a step further.  If you said there's no Big Mac on the table then I can't really ask you where.  Nowhere.  Prove it?  There's no further proof beyond it not being there.  It doesn't exist to manifest proof of its non-existence.  It simply isn't there, you'd tell me, since you ate it for lunch, and I may tell you that it is.  At which point all we have left is skepticism about our individual ability to see Big Macs which may or may not be there.  This makes asking for proof of non-existence a strong argument for me to demonstrate that you can't prove that I don't see a Big Mac, but this is not an argument which is going to make anyone see a Big Mac that they didn't see before so it's a poor argument to use if you want to change the other guy's mind.

[pellius]

"...if severe enough will change his mind."
I doubt that. Might not work on a strong individual.

Speaking of kids...
I certainly don't want to introduce a being to this insane dimension so to speak.

If someone wants to really do something he/she is likely to ignore all laws/rules.
The prisons are full of them minus the innocent.
A law/rule is no guarantee for specific behaviour.
That's what I basically wanted to say.

Well you could try to kill me but I doubt you will be successful.

I know there is a "power" but I refuse to give it attributes since it will be limiting to said "power".

English is not my native and I'm known to use too less words so communication might suffer.

Radical Plato is one of the most intelligent and wise here imho.
Opinions vary I guess.

I know you read my reply but it obviously it didn't sink in. I repeat:

You really believe that laws, rules, where there are consequences to violating really have no effect on behavior? Of course, no law or rule will ever completely eliminate a behavior but just because you can't eliminate all behavior it doesn't mean you shouldn't try to eliminate some or the majority of such behavior.

(Answer this question directly, no balonie around)
Let me ask you  that if there were no laws and no consequence to stealing, rape and murder would we get more of it. less of it or would it stay the same? I personally witness what happens when the laws broke down and the police just left for two weeks during the LA riots.

Since English is your second language I will give you a past on the metaphysical stuff.

You are saying some outrageously foolish things regarding the effect of rules and laws. Do you stop at a red light and drive on the right side of the road (or whatever side your country has determine to be lawful?).

I've read RP's post for a long time now and he never struck me as uniquely stupid so perhaps I was a bit hasty, I was just absolutely stunned at his shocking ignorance regarding economics. It's not a manner of opinion about how wealth is created. I minored in Economics at UCLA and I wasn't discussing any advance topics. Just basic themes. I even asked my 12 year old niece if she knew how wealth is created and how government gets money and it's effect on the economy. But she's kind of the brainy type.

[OB1]

Let me ask you  that if there were no laws and no consequence to stealing, rape and murder would we get more of it. less of it or would it stay the same? I

I don't know.
I guess it depends on the location.

[pellius]

What I'm taking away is that the inability to prove non-existence does not constitute proof of existence, but I haven't read the book.

I'd go a step further.  If you said there's no Big Mac on the table then I can't really ask you where.  Nowhere.  Prove it?  There's no further proof beyond it not being there.  It doesn't exist to manifest proof of its non-existence.  It simply isn't there, you'd tell me, since you ate it for lunch, and I may tell you that it is.  At which point all we have left is skepticism about our individual ability to see Big Macs which may or may not be there.  This makes asking for proof of non-existence a strong argument for me to demonstrate that you can't prove that I don't see a Big Mac, but this is not an argument which is going to make anyone see a Big Mac that they didn't see before so it's a poor argument to use if you want to change the other guy's mind.

Again, for the millionth time. No one can prove with concrete evidence that God does or does not exist. These are matters of faith.
These are matters of faith. These are matters of faith.

Faith is believing in something that you cannot, at present, prove. That may change in the future.

Conor McGregor said he will knock out Rafael inside of a minute in the first round. This a matter of faith. It's not a fact simply because it hasn't happened yet and you can't prove an event will happen until it, well, happens. The difference is that he will have a chance to prove his belief.

I think you are thinking to deeply about Bertrand Russell's comment regarding a teapot orbiting the sun between Mars and Jupitor. Although no one can prove with absolute certainty and concrete  evidence we, or at least most of us considering the type of people on this board, can agree it's a highly unlikely. As an Agnostic, and his perspective regarding such things, he consider a God just as likely.

Get it? It was a joke with truth in it for him. It is highly unlikely that there is a teapot in space. He considered the existence of God just as likely. Both he admitted he couldn't prove but the likelihood of either is so preposterous that for all practical purposes he lived his life as an atheist.

[Radical Plato]

The laws of the US dictates that I believe in Christianity?

You're not conflating rules, laws of behavior, with someone's personal metaphysics, are you?

And I'm selling Communism... wait a minute, why am I even arguing with you. Your previous post to this one just confirmed to me that you are probably one of the most uneducated person on this board. I just printed out your post and can't wait to show it to a good friend of mine who is an econ professor at the University of Hawaii. It will make for a good hearty laugh and then a moment of sad introspection at the quality of people our society is producing.

How old are you and how much education do you have? Now if you are embarrassed to answer this question I understand and will stop asking but man I've just got to know.

You really have no idea just how ignorant you are. Not a clue.

And the laws of your country dictate that you believe in other people's sovereignty. Your original statement was "So you believe in laws that dictate what people should believe?"

And you lack a sense of humour don't you.  The fact you thought my statement regarding you selling communism was serious is a true indication of your intellect.  An inability to detect subtle humour is the sure sign of a poor intellect.  Any smart individual would have picked up the joke, as it was obvious you were anti communist and illogically linking some death toll to communist activities when it is patently obvious capitalist systems have been equally if not more oppressive.

[Radical Plato]

Is it just me or does anyone else here get the sense that Pellius takes himself a little too seriously.

[OB1]

Is it just me or does anyone else here get the sense that Pellius takes himself a little too seriously.

Only a little bit.

[Radical Plato]

Again, for the millionth time. No one can prove with concrete evidence that God does or does not exist. These are matters of faith.
These are matters of faith. These are matters of faith.

Faith is believing in something that you cannot, at present, prove. That may change in the future.

You are talking about blind faith.  One can have faith in the reliability of one's vehicle for instance based on its track record, statistics and science.  This type of faith is supported by evidence.  Blind faith is what morons have when they don't know any better or have no better choice (like using their brains)

[FitnessFrenzy]

Is it just me or does anyone else here get the sense that Pellius takes himself a little too seriously.

he is steadfast about beliefs that are subjective in nature. Not a good thing.

[Radical Plato]

he is steadfast about beliefs that are subjective in nature. Not a good thing.

I don't believe their is a god, but I don't give a fuck about it. I don't care if others believe as I do, I don't even know why people even care if their is a god or not.  It can be fun to debate, but that's it, it's just fun.  I have known god botherers who are enraged if others don't take their faith seriously, as if somehow you should take seriously the illogical arguments they have developed to support their faith.  I don't get it,  wouldn't a loving God want them to chill out a little bit and not get so worked up about it all.

[Yamcha]

He thinks beating dogs is the key to obedience.

Can't wait until our Nibiruvian overlords abduct him and beat him into submission.

[Radical Plato]

He thinks beating dogs is the key to obedience.

Can't wait until our Nibiruvian overlords abduct him and beat him into submission.

Yeah that style of dog training is based on a bullshit study done on wolves decades ago.  It was believed that in a wolf pack that a dominant wolf would emerge and become the alpha.  The research was carried out using non related wolves in captivity, when in fact, wolves in the wild live in families: two parents along with their younger cubs. Wolves do not have an innate sense of rank; they are not born leaders or born followers. The "alphas" are simply what we would call in any other social group "parents."

Positive reinforcement is probably just as effective and definitely a more loving way to treat a dog.  But the alpha model still resonates with the insecure and the weak who desperately seek an outlet for their need to dominate something weaker than themselves. That's not to say dogs don't display social dominance, it's just not so black and white.  Dominant behavior and dominance relationships can be highly situational, and can vary greatly from individual to individual.

[Yamcha]

Yeah that style of dog training is based on a bullshit study done on wolves decades ago.  It was believed that in a wolf pack that a dominant wolf would emerge and become the alpha.  The research was carried out using non related wolves in captivity, when in fact, wolves in the wild live in families: two parents along with their younger cubs. Wolves do not have an innate sense of rank; they are not born leaders or born followers. The "alphas" are simply what we would call in any other social group "parents."

Positive reinforcement is probably just as effective and definitely a more loving way to treat a dog.  But the alpha model still resonates with the insecure and the weak who desperately seek an outlet for their need to dominate something weaker than themselves. That's not to say dogs don't display social dominance, it's just not so black and white.  Dominant behavior and dominance relationships can be highly situational, and can vary greatly from individual to individual.

THANK YOU!

[Raymondo]

Yeah that style of dog training is based on a bullshit study done on wolves decades ago.  It was believed that in a wolf pack that a dominant wolf would emerge and become the alpha.  The research was carried out using non related wolves in captivity, when in fact, wolves in the wild live in families: two parents along with their younger cubs. Wolves do not have an innate sense of rank; they are not born leaders or born followers. The "alphas" are simply what we would call in any other social group "parents."

Positive reinforcement is probably just as effective and definitely a more loving way to treat a dog.  But the alpha model still resonates with the insecure and the weak who desperately seek an outlet for their need to dominate something weaker than themselves. That's not to say dogs don't display social dominance, it's just not so black and white.  Dominant behavior and dominance relationships can be highly situational, and can vary greatly from individual to individual.

Exactly.

[pellius]

I don't know.
I guess it depends on the location.

Jeeze, can't you just give a straight answer. Sure, in corrupt countries where the laws are not enforced and it's easier to get away with breaking them then, yes, laws have little meaning.

But you know that is not what we are discussing. When we talk about laws in a meaningful way we must assume that it is a law that is enforced. You're playing your silly, coy, girlie games again.

"I don't know." Jesus motherfucking Christ! What kind of weirdo are you?

It's just like if I say is it cold when it's snowing and hot when it's sunny you reply, "Well, that depends whether you are indoors or outdoors? Is the heater or a/c on or off?

And don't be so sure I wouldn't be successful in killing you if there were no laws. You wouldn't be my first.

Brother, just answer the fucking question?

Where are you from? Are you from France?

[Radical Plato]

And don't be so sure I wouldn't be successful in killing you if there were no laws. You wouldn't be my first.

[Yamcha]

wtf...

[pellius]

And the laws of your country dictate that you believe in other people's sovereignty. Your original statement was "So you believe in laws that dictate what people should believe?"

And you lack a sense of humour don't you.  The fact you thought my statement regarding you selling communism was serious is a true indication of your intellect.  An inability to detect subtle humour is the sure sign of a poor intellect.  Any smart individual would have picked up the joke, as it was obvious you were anti communist and illogically linking some death toll to communist activities when it is patently obvious capitalist systems have been equally if not more oppressive.

How old are you and what level of formal education do you have?

Why do you avoid this simple and straight forward question? Do you have something to hide? Is there something you are ashamed of?

[Radical Plato]

How old are you and what level of formal education do you have?

Why do you avoid this simple and straight forward question? Do you have something to hide? Is there something you are ashamed of?

I avoid it because it is simply irrelevant and none of your business.  Your persistent need to ask offers insight into your level of maturity?

And most adults have something to hide or they are ashamed of.  In my case my level of knowledge and wisdom isn't one of them.

[pellius]

Is it just me or does anyone else here get the sense that Pellius takes himself a little too seriously.

I take this subject very seriously because it's a serious subject. Do you have a problem with that? Is everything just a big joke with you?

Seriously, how old are you and what level of formal education do you have?

[OB1]

Jeeze, can just give a straight answer. Sure, in corrupt countries where the laws are not enforced and it's easier to get away with breaking them then, yes, laws have little meaning.

But you know that is not what we are discussing. When we talk about laws in a meaningful way we must assume that it is a law that is enforced. You're playing your silly, coy, girlie games again.

"I don't know." Jesus motherfucking Christ! What kind of weirdo are you?

It's just like if I say is it cold when it's snowing and hot when it's sunny you reply, "Well, that depends whether you are indoors or outdoors? Is the heater or a/c on or off?

And don't be so sure I wouldn't be successful in killing you if there were no laws. You wouldn't be my first.

Brother, just answer the fucking question?

Where are you from? Are you from France?

LOL.
What exactly is your problem?
I don't think that the absence of laws will increase your chances...
Anyway thanks for the conversation.
Bye.

[Radical Plato]

Is everything just a big joke with you?

Most things yes. Getbig especially.

[Raymondo]

Oh brother

[Yamcha]

OP,

please rename thread to "Pellius meltdown thread"

Thanks