>>14714
Suicide is just an escape from an intolerable existence. Given a choice between a life that is good and a life that is horribly unbearable and painful, anyone would choose the good life yes. But choosing between death and the painful life, most would choose death. The only thing that stops them is if they were brainwashed as children into believing that this will only bring them to an afterlife that is worse.

>>14688
I'd say the free will argument is mostly predicated on the idea that some aspect of reality is "goal-oriented," or teleological. Which means that if something has a goal as a property of what it means to exist, then that necessarily entails an "exclusion" of other goals in the way that it actualizes it's own potential.

So, let's say my goal today is to drive to the liquor store and buy some Maker's Mark for my underage girlfriend. For me to have that goal, I have to reject the other places (even in a general sense) that are NOT the liquor store, and reject all other things that are NOT Maker's Mark. This means that, at the moment I make the choice, I am considering an array of options, and have made a choice to take one, to the exclusion of all the others that I have knowledge of.

The alternative to this is to take a materialist position (a very common one among post-Enlightenment philosophers), which is that all proximate and remote causes are random and non-conscious, which means that all the effects of those causes are random and non-conscious. The problem here, of course, is the mind, being goal-oriented, seems to be the exception to that rule, which means that reality is at least partly goal-oriented, if only because the mind is literally in reality. That seems to lead to some kind of dualism, which has it's own problems. Some philosophers have endorsed "panpsychism" as a way out, while others have simply doubled-down on materialism.

Noam Chomsky famously wrote that no one can define these terms meaningfully enough to even form a question relevant to the problem, so it essentially doesn't matter. Philosophers like Ed Feser and some others disagree, and so do I.

I personally endorse the freedom of the will, but only because I believe the intellect is partly immaterial, which is also the position endorsed by Ed Feser and James Ross.

Christianity says that God has predestined everybody. If that's so, then free will is a bribe to make people suck the pastors dick.
Honestly, Christianity reeks of copium and white narcissism.

What are you on?

Any model of anarchy simply results in small collectives of power that over time coalesce into larger collectives, which become governments. This is how society happened the first time around. Why would you possibly think you can prevent this should it happen again? You can't just NOT HAVE ANYONE IN CHARGE; a civilization cannot function that way. Hell, a book club with five members won't function that way.

You'll note that there really isn't any such thing as anarchist movements in countries with good social welfare systems. In those countries, their taxes actually go to stuff they use like free higher education, state healthcare, and city beautification; they have no problem paying their taxes. Contrast that to in America, where taxes go to bailout corporations, to line the wallet of billionaire CEOs, and fund the military industrial complex. Plus there are no worker protections so everyone ends up underpaid and overworked.

Really, the question I will provide is actually a rhetorical one: why the fuck are you proposing eliminating government, when the reality is you just want a government that functions properly?

Cooperatives, yay or nay?

Deep.

>Can a total eradication of all life on earth be moral in the same sense euthanasia is?
>In my opinion, humanity, no, LIFE will simply degrade into such a pathetic state that commiting global genocide would be merciful and a deserving death.
Your problem is your mixing a morale dilemma with a subjective opinion. A morale dilemma needs to be presented with a neutral tone in order to merit discussion.

>Thinking this way, can omnicide be moral?
Thinking this way, you may, but using a preordained thought process leads to many atrocities being committed in the name of morale behaviour.

If you were forced to kill your child or another persons child, which one would you choose? If you refuse to choose, you will be tortured for eternity.

The choice you make depends on whether or not you can live with either unfathomable despair (killing you own child) or relentless, depthless hatred (experienced by the person whos child you killed).

>>5920

>>14610
A more accurate description is to say Russels teapot is made from dark matter (and filled with souls) as it can't be detected by any means and only exists as a claim.

Of course, any scientist worth his salt, doesn't claim dark matter exists to begin with as it only exists in theory.

Dreams don't exist because this defies the physical concept of heat death I was taught in 3rd grade

thanks science, won another argument

File 162510814988.jpg - (326.84KB , 760x749 , Boltzmann Brain.jpg )

When someone mentions the soul, they are mentioning a device that has been sort it out between the present and past. Usually the dates are momentary to the construction of 1855-1901. In a way the soul relies in the past through evolutionary construct while the present it involves a certain lost generation dimensions that are usually given in the history of the 20th century with the beginning of the world at war like a tale of Conrad.

Here is a picture of theorized construct sort of like the soul but in the lost generation knowns athe Botlzmann Brain of humanity

I want my degree for this.

This is a logical argument if you take all animal references away.

This is a philosophical argument if you climbed to a woman.

THis is a math problem about surrounding a oops as a triangle is enough for goop.

File 162200158787.jpg - (143.69KB , 1300x1130 , q5h.jpg )

I'm a sikh and no he is not. You can tell it easily because it many ways he explains things he uses I you he she they etc. That's duality. If you are a good member of the panth you make points without saying those things. He knows this.

Tri lef legy pilllll
6 4 5 5 GRIN
GREEN OR YELLOR OR NUMBER HIM
2. 1.

7.

Badack.

I am an elef