Dualism hasn't met the burden of proof.

[Damaged Eagle]

You dont form very coherent arguments, stick to cartoons and videos bro.

I think you should stick to sharpening your pikes and stakes since you can't stay on topic and have no clue about the how world operates around you.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[G.T.]

You dont form very coherent arguments, stick to cartoons and videos bro.

View attachment 246754

I think you should stick to sharpening your pikes and stakes since you can't stay on topic.

*****CHUCKLE*****

I stayed on topic.

You veered off to claims of radiation having intelligence, and argued against dualism while thinking you were arguing for it, and misapprehending WHY, and how come physicalism was brought up.

Just fuck off, or add something to the topic in a coherent way.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

You dont form very coherent arguments, stick to cartoons and videos bro.

View attachment 246754

I think you should stick to sharpening your pikes and stakes since you can't stay on topic.

*****CHUCKLE*****

I stayed on topic.

You veered off to claims of radiation having intelligence, and argued against dualism while thinking you were arguing for it, and misapprehending WHY, and how come physicalism was brought up.

Just fuck off, or add something to the topic in a coherent way.

You're the one that brought up Physicalism... which is a totally different topic BTW.

My thoughts have been coherent and correct the whole of the discussion while you fail to know the difference between matter and energy, along with you're being incapable of staying on topic.

Perhaps if you had actually studied in school instead of sleeping or skipping out to attend your pot smoking rap sessions you'd be able to keep up.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[G.T.]

You dont form very coherent arguments, stick to cartoons and videos bro.

View attachment 246754

I think you should stick to sharpening your pikes and stakes since you can't stay on topic.

*****CHUCKLE*****

I stayed on topic.

You veered off to claims of radiation having intelligence, and argued against dualism while thinking you were arguing for it, and misapprehending WHY, and how come physicalism was brought up.

Just fuck off, or add something to the topic in a coherent way.

View attachment 246760

You're the one that brought up Physicalism... which is a totally different topic BTW.

My thoughts have been coherent and correct the whole of the discussion while you fail to know the difference between matter and energy, along with you're being incapable of staying on topic.

Perhaps if you had actually studied in school instead of sleeping or skipping out to attend your pot smoking rap sessions you'd be able to keep up.

*****CHUCKLE*****

That was a good emo post, and a long and winded way to say that you still cant speak to, or understand, dualism.

This thread wasn't for you. It was for folks who like to share ideas and pick brains, not argue because theyre some derpy twat on the internet that catches a butthurt from the flamezone and bleeds it all across the internet.

Yes - I brought up physicalism. Thats because you pointed to something physical (neutrinos) in order to preserve dualism, which is absurd because dualism is the positing of a non-physical mind. Neutrinos are phyiscal, theyre a sub-atomic particle which, thanks to the particle collider, was discovered to have mass.

Sorry that's too much book larninn' for ya jethro, but your stupid coloring books ...followed by some moronic youtube link and a physically typed out facial expression (who does that?) should never be mistaken for intelligence. They're a disturbingly obsessive posting style on the internet which alludes to a mental disorder.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

That was a good emo post, and a long and winded way to say that you still cant speak to, or understand, dualism.

Mine are generally less windy than your tap dancing evasiveness.

This thread wasn't for you. It was for folks who like to share ideas and pick brains, not argue because theyre some derpy twat on the internet that catches a butthurt from the flamezone and bleeds it all across the internet.

And there you go again letting your FZ inadequacies exhibit themselves.

*****CHUCKLE*****

Yes - I brought up physicalism. Thats because you pointed to something physical (neutrinos) in order to preserve dualism, which is absurd because dualism is the positing of a non-physical mind. Neutrinos are phyiscal, theyre a sub-atomic particle which, thanks to the particle collider, was discovered to have mass.

The subject is Dualism not Physicalism. You stated in the OP and I quote...

"Dualism is an interesting belief - that mind and body are separate and that there are material and immaterial realities in that sense."

No where does it say that the material and/or immaterial part of the mind has to be inside the body for Dualism. As far as you know the brain is simply an antenna picking up signals to pass to the body. Therefore you're inability to comprehend your subject is readily apparent.

Would you like to try for Double Jeopardy?

Sorry that's too much book larninn' for ya jethro, but your stupid coloring books ...followed by some moronic youtube link and a physically typed out facial expression (who does that?) should never be mistaken for intelligence. They're a disturbingly obsessive posting style on the internet which alludes to a mental disorder.

Does that disturb you???

*****CHUCKLE*****

Time for you to pick up your prize....

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[G.T.]

Youre dumber than dark fury so I dont see anything coming of this conversation. You said that radiation has intelligent intent. Ignore.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Youre dumber than dark fury so I dont see anything coming of this conversation. You said that radiation has intelligent intent. Ignore.

Coming from you I'll take that as a complement since there was nothing to start the conversation with in the first place.....

Does this mean you're going to place me on ignore????? Please!!!!!!!

*****FLAMING ROFLMAO*****

 

[ZZ PUPPS]

Youre dumber than dark fury so I dont see anything coming of this conversation. You said that radiation has intelligent intent. Ignore.

Everything you think, do or say is a neurological process. Outside of that, everything else is perception - since it is processed by said neurological functions.

Trying to transcend that is well...

 

[ding]

Either the material world was created by spirit or spirit was created by the material world.

There are no other options because all other options will reduce down to one of these two boundary conditions.

 

[G.T.]

Either the material world was created by spirit or spirit was created by the material world.

There are no other options because all other options will reduce down to one of these two boundary conditions.

Of course theres a 3rd and 4th option. That was a false dichotomy.

 

[ding]

So when I say spirit I am talking about the incorporeal.

We know the incorporeal exists in the material world. So from that standpoint duality does exist; the corporeal and the incorporeal.

 

[ding]

Either the material world was created by spirit or spirit was created by the material world.

There are no other options because all other options will reduce down to one of these two boundary conditions.

Of course theres a 3rd and 4th option. That was a false dichotomy.

Can you prove it by offering an example of how the material world didn’t proceed from spirit and how the incorporeal didn’t proceed from the material world?

I think it is safe to say that everyone accepts that there are incorporeal that proceeded from the material world, right?

So my question is what boundary condition exists that does not reduce to one of these two mutually exclusive boundary conditions; everything proceeded from spirit or everything proceeded from material.

 

[G.T.]

Either the material world was created by spirit or spirit was created by the material world.

There are no other options because all other options will reduce down to one of these two boundary conditions.

Of course theres a 3rd and 4th option. That was a false dichotomy.

Can you prove it by offering an example of how the material world didn’t proceed from spirit and how the incorporeal didn’t proceed from the material world?

I think it is safe to say that everyone accepts that there are incorporeal that proceeded from the material world, right?

So my question is what boundary condition exists that does not reduce to one of these two mutually exclusive boundary conditions; everything proceeded from spirit or everything proceeded from material.

I'm not interested in a discussion with you.

If you cannot think of any other options than the 2 in your false dichotomy, you can rest with that all day long. Here's some basic logic for you, to start, and then you can wonder why at first you said spirit, and now in this post you said incorporeal. I had hoped for folks who can add something to the discussion on dualism, and I've never seen you add anything to a thread except devolving it over time into whiny bickering, and then sophistry. Go somewhere else and do that, por favore. Thanks.

All spirits would be incorporeal.
All incorporeal would not be spirits.

 

[ding]

Either the material world was created by spirit or spirit was created by the material world.

There are no other options because all other options will reduce down to one of these two boundary conditions.

Of course theres a 3rd and 4th option. That was a false dichotomy.

Can you prove it by offering an example of how the material world didn’t proceed from spirit and how the incorporeal didn’t proceed from the material world?

I think it is safe to say that everyone accepts that there are incorporeal that proceeded from the material world, right?

So my question is what boundary condition exists that does not reduce to one of these two mutually exclusive boundary conditions; everything proceeded from spirit or everything proceeded from material.

I'm not interested in a discussion with you.

If you cannot think of any other options than the 2 in your false dichotomy, you can rest with that all day long. Here's some basic logic for you, to start, and then you can wonder why at first you said spirit, and now in this post you said incorporeal. I had hoped for folks who can add something to the discussion on dualism, and I've never seen you add anything to a thread except devolving it over time into whiny bickering, and then sophistry. Go somewhere else and do that, por favore. Thanks.

All spirits would be incorporeal.
All incorporeal would not be spirits.

I have tried to think of more than two and they all reduced down to one of the two boundary conditions.

Yes, not all incorporeal would not be spirits. This is the boundary condition where everything proceeded from the material.

The other boundary condition is that everything proceeded from spirit.

These are the only two options and they are mutually exclusive.

 

[ding]

Either existence was created by spirit and everything proceeded from spirit or existence was not created by spirit and everything has proceeded from material. In the latter case things like spirituality only have an origin from the material world.

 

[G.T.]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

 

[ding]

So duality either has an origin from only the material world because the incorporeal only proceeded from the material world or duality proceeded from spirit because everything proceeded from spirit.

In either case, duality does exist. The only question is what is the origin or source of our spirituality.

 

[ding]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

Honest men can have honest differences of opinion without being afraid to express their differences or act like jerks towards each other.

Growth filled communities should explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth.

 

[G.T.]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

Honest men can have honest differences of opinion without being afraid to express their differences or act like jerks towards each other.

Growth filled communities should explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth.

I agree, that's been the case here so far with Ringel and Old Lady (well, honest women as well).

 

[ding]

Peace bro. Have a good day at work. 2 outta 5 respondants here interested me so far - so this thread's not a waste of my time. And yupp, this another one of those shamelesssss bumps that go ratt tatt tatt tatt in these dangerous slums, ohhhhhhh I like my kevlarrrrrrrr...but the shots still burn I like my kevlarrrrr...the hypocrisy burns

Honest men can have honest differences of opinion without being afraid to express their differences or act like jerks towards each other.

Growth filled communities should explore all sides of an issue to arrive at objective truth.

I agree, that's been the case here so far with Ringel and Old Lady (well, honest women as well).

No one is all good or all bad. You should stop treating them as they are.