In response to Pinback's NoMango

by **AArdvark** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:10 pm

At this stage of the game I am in need of a Tdarcos avatar. Can he do that? Please to post some kind of avatar.

THE
PICTURES WITH NO BIG WORDS
AARDVARK

by **pinback** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:40 pm

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:When you develop enough social intelligence to not ruin this community

He cannot. For someone who accuses him of Asperger's as much as you do, I'm surprised to hear you expecting him to develop social intelligence.

He has none. He will always have none. That's why it's funny.

And now you've taken that from us, as you've already taken so much.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:19 pm

Tdarcos wrote:
Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Paul.

You're at a 10 line limit or I am going to have to disable your account for a few weeks.

Come the fuck on, we agreed to this over a year ago.
Hey, cut this shit out right now. You did no such thing and you told me you were not imposing that requirement any more.

If you want to change the rules, again, fine, it's your place. But don't proceed to tell me I'm breaking a rule you removed. If you had left that rule in place before I would have complied. Okay, fine.

No, asshole, you cut this shit out, you piece of garbage.

I've officially reached the point where your attitude and posting needs to change, NOW or you're out of here forever. I am the only person that's ever decent to you, and you're such a hate-filled, entitled shitbag you are incapable of the slightest amount of respect.

I haven't run this place for almost 20 years to have your dumbass shit infecting every single thread. You're done. Just because we didn't SPECIFICALLY give you the rules on how to not post like a bore, it doesn't mean you can blather your nonsense for pages and pages at a time.

When you develop enough social intelligence to not ruin this community then you still can't come back because it never works. Jesus.

"I'm not Jesus, I'm Paul"! -- YOU

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 12:00 pm

Paul, why not just write less?

by **Flack** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:39 am

Or just a little less, and make it mean... anything?

by **AArdvark** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:08 am

Why not just write less and make it mean more?

THE
READERS DIGEST
AARDVARK

by **Tdarcos** » Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:04 am

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Paul.

You're at a 10 line limit or I am going to have to disable your account for a few weeks.

Come the fuck on, we agreed to this over a year ago.

Hey, cut this shit out right now. You did no such thing and you told me you were not imposing that requirement any more.

If you want to change the rules, again, fine, it's your place. But don't proceed to tell me I'm breaking a rule you removed. If you had left that rule in place before I would have complied. Okay, fine.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 8:56 am

Paul.

You're at a 10 line limit or I am going to have to disable your account for a few weeks.

Come the fuck on, we agreed to this over a year ago.

by **pinback** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 6:03 am

I guess you're right. I'll take the website down. :(

by **Tdarcos** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:01 am

pinback wrote:I didn't understand any of that, but I think I won this one.

The fact you admit you do not understand it indicates you shouldn't have tried to raise the issue and clearly don't know what you are doing. It strongly argues you are clearly wrong and quite likely you didn't even think about the issue.

But let me try to make it simple for you, and I'll even try to make it short. You're saying that what people do as the result of thinking is randomly generated and is not part of the conscious effort of the person, more-or-less because the person does not have a consciousness to produce that effort, the person can't really think because there is no true "person" there.

That is what you are claiming and you're wrong for one simple reason. Random thoughts without comprehension might work - maybe - in a 14th century situation where peasants don't do much more thinking than that needed to work fields 18 hours a day. It certainly will not work in a high-complexity, high technology civilization we exist within now.

Such a concept as you're claiming fails against the extreme precision and complexity needed for brain surgery, legal defense in a capital murder case, or some complicated software applications (as a few examples among thousands of complicated occupations). There are many things that require expert, professional work requiring extreme competence, and you won't get that without intelligent, precise thinking.

That is what I mean by "rolling dice won't provide new answers." The proper thinking in highly technical fields requires directed thought, mere accidental thought impulses as you claim are what thought in people's heads, won't cut it.

by **Molly Muffsweet** » Thu Jul 16, 2015 3:10 pm

pinback wrote:I didn't understand any of that, but I think I won this one.

Time to hand out a few nomango beer koozies and call it a thread.

Only the Sweetest,

Molly Muffsweet.

by **pinback** » Wed Jul 15, 2015 11:44 am

I didn't understand any of that, but I think I won this one.

by **Tdarcos** » Wed Jul 15, 2015 11:26 am

pinback wrote:Alright, let's try this yet another way. Surely one of these is going to make something click, yes?

A seed is planted, and grows into a tree. Is there someone in the seed making the decision to do this, or does it just happen?

You are confusing - possibly intentionally - the biological process of reproduction of an asexually reproduced plant with the systemic process of communication of the sexually reproduced single sentient species on earth and near-sentient animals.

Let's look at the situation. With humans the male and female each release 23 chromosomes, producing an offspring containing 46 chromosomes, as opposed to about 24 total in a mighty oak tree. This provides for potentially trillions of additional capabilities because of additional genetic material.

That isn't the whole answer or the 76 chromosome maple tree would be the dominant species of this planet instead of us. It is that we have the capacity to have many traits which plants usually don't have including ability to move and sentience, among others.

But, you still haven't accounted for the differences in people; to argue all thought is spontaneous and lacking volition should therefore produce little or no variance in said thoughts.

The funny thing is usually those arguing predestination are arguing in favor of a belief in God. I find it very strange for an atheist such as yourself to have such an opinion.

Oh, and skip the bullshit that you don't have opinions. When you express a consideration over a vnon-provable subject, that's an opinion. It may well be possible you are correct, but as to whether thoughts are externally generated (from some other means), or that we do our own thinking, it's a metaphysical question which cannot br proven.

If you want to argue that people are basically automatons you ignore the need to respond to the conditions of reality, which randomly generated thoughts without conscious direction will not provide. Rolling dice will not provide new answers.

by **pinback** » Wed Jul 15, 2015 10:58 am

Bitch!

by **Molly Muffsweet** » Wed Jul 15, 2015 10:14 am

We learn, we laugh, we bond. Oh, how I've missed this place.

Only the Sweetest,

Molly Muffsweet.

by **pinback** » Wed Jul 15, 2015 4:48 am

Alright, let's try this yet another way. Surely one of these is going to make something click, yes?

A seed is planted, and grows into a tree. Is there someone in the seed making the decision to do this, or does it just happen?

by **Tdarcos** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:08 pm

pinback wrote: Unless you can show me on a diagram of a brain where the "you" is who's starting this

I don't have to. I present the following evidence: I am here, I exist and I respond. Now, you still have not qualified what represents evidence and as such there would basically be nothing you would accept as evidence, therefore you'd probably just reject anything I did say.

I don't have to cut open an engine to prove the car moves nor do I have to cut open a radio to prove it makes sound. How about you show me in your computer where the web browser is. Your demand is about on the level of asking me where Firefox is in my computer. Examine it and you won't find any of the displays of websites I claim to see on my monitor. Cut my computer apart and you still won't find the websites I view.

So, show me. Where is the thing called "Paul" which makes the decision and starts firing the neurons?

I can actually answer your question. I will be happy to show you exactly in my brain where "I" am as soon as you come up with the roughly $5,000 for a pet scan, cat scan, EEG, MRI and Computerized Tomography map of my brain where it will show the activity taking place through thought

I don't need to see it, I am here and this proves it. You want evidence beyond that, you can pay for it.

What is really happening, and of course you won't believe me, is that the thought occurs by itself, the action occurs by itself, and then the mind creates a conceptual story about it, in the form of "I decided to do this!" And it does this, all by itself, leaving us with the illusion that there is someone there making decisions.

Oh, why didn't you say so. That's very simple and easy to understand. I didn't know you believe in the religious concept of predestination.

Now since you claim this, please proceed to explain what evidence you have to prove this, since you demand it as such in my case. Please excuse me while I go grab a bag of popcorn, I expect this to be very entertaining.

by **Molly Muffsweet** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 3:10 pm

pinback wrote:Can a brotha get a ten-line limit up in this piece!?!

Kiss him already.

Only the Sweetest,

Molly Muffsweet.

by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:04 am

Paul, we're getting to the point where you might need a break for the summer, pal.

by **pinback** » Tue Jul 14, 2015 9:26 am

Can a brotha get a ten-line limit up in this piece!?!

Tdarcos wrote:
Where is the one who is deciding to do all of this?
Inside my brain, triggering a small number of neurons, which then automatically send neurochemical transmitters to dozens of locations and trigger hundreds more transmitters and so on, in a cascade effect, the way one ping-pong ball can set off a cascade of ping-pong balls in a room full of loaded mousetraps.

Yeah, except you're making all of this up. Unless you can show me on a diagram of a brain where the "you" is who's starting this cascade of ping-pong balls, and which particular "small number of neurons" "you" are deciding to trigger, then you are just making this up. There is no such thing. Again, unless you have some religious belief in a "soul" or some such nonsense.

So, show me. Where is the thing called "Paul" which makes the decision and starts firing the neurons?

What is really happening, and of course you won't believe me, is that the thought occurs by itself, the action occurs by itself, and then the mind creates a conceptual story about it, in the form of "I decided to do this!" And it does this, all by itself, leaving us with the illusion that there is someone there making decisions.

In response to Pinback's NoMango

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: In response to Pinback's NoMango