Sticky The Banter Thread

Smiley100P

you've heard of gaystripe now get ready for this
Likes received
312
Umbration

Innervation
Hooh boi thats some deep crap right there
I really have no advice to give so im just gonna shut up and talk to my twelve amino friends again
 

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
I wrote out a 4 paragraph detailed advisory on this matter then promptly deleted it. My views on this world are horrifyingly negative. I've seen, heard and even been people in worse situations and yet nothing I know or can tell you would help you. There is no right answer, no matter what you do or don't do you will have regrets. The only thing I can say is that no matter what happens, it isn't your fault. Don't let this ruin your life.
 

StickFreeks

Unicorn
Likes received
79
Umbration

Radiance
I haven't read anything in this thread. I just saw beanie babies listed in the available topics so here we go.

My favorite beanie baby is Sniffer. I carried him everywhere when I was 7~9. He formed a beanie baby freedom fighter trio with Fetcher and Foxie (Slick). Now the freedom fighters sit in the little pocket inside my car door, the idea being that if I ever die in a car crash by myself, at least I'll have my little beanie trio there. :'3

 

Zules

☕☕☕☕
Admin
Likes received
1,012
Umbration

Caprice
My favorite beanie baby is Sniffer.
Cute!
I carried him everywhere when I was 7~9.
Cute!!
He formed a beanie baby freedom fighter trio with Fetcher and Foxie (Slick).
CUTE!!
Now the freedom fighters sit in the little pocket inside my car door,
CUTE!!!
the idea being that if I ever die in a car crash by myself, at least I'll have my little beanie trio there. :'3
HORRIFYING
 

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
Anyone else have a severe deficiency in the typing department? Every time I go to write can I end up writing can't and vice versa. It's eating at my soul. The worst part is I don't notice until I've posted it. So many edits have been made in a hurry so that my post doesn't mean literally the opposite to what I meant it to.
 

Zules

☕☕☕☕
Admin
Likes received
1,012
Umbration

Caprice
Anyone else have a severe deficiency in the typing department? Every time I go to write can I end up writing can't and vice versa. It's eating at my soul. The worst part is I don't notice until I've posted it. So many edits have been made in a hurry so that my post doesn't mean literally the opposite to what I meant it to.
I usually proofread whatever I'm sending 2 or 3 more times than is reasonable... But I guess stuff like that still slips by! I just can't remember it happening recently.
 

Itunes Helper

Member
Likes received
111
Umbration

Cosmos
Hmm... nope, can't remember anything hilarious, per se... Although, that could just be because I haven't had time to play it in almost a year. Civ takes too long 😢 The last noteworthy thing I remember doing is beating Deity for the first time by abusing the world gen settings (Archipelago map with high sea levels really hinders the AI's ability to spread). I conquered half the civs in the game (all the aggressive ones, at least), and then went for a culture victory for funsies. All hail the power of anime!

What about you? Haven't you played it for cumulative months or something like that? Surely you've got some fun experiences worth sharing!
I became a Nuclear megalomaniac in Civ II (like Gandhi) in the 1910's (albeit with cheats and scenario editing)(also i had all tech)
and every civ still hates the people's republic of ramen for the mass nuking of every major greek and Zulu city
 

Itunes Helper

Member
Likes received
111
Umbration

Cosmos
Yet another philosophical topic: Can there be objective truth/reality?
 

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
Yet another philosophical topic: Can there be objective truth/reality?
This is a very loaded question disguised as small talk. I believe there is always an objective truth. Whether that truth is knowable by any one human is another question. However if we slightly reword your question we get a much larger philosophical dilemma.

Can there be an objectively true reality? Now this is a question.

It is well known that each human views everything thing in their lives through lenses tinted by their past experiences. It is my opinion and the opinion of many philosophers and journalists alike that no piece of text can be entirely neutral (text here meaning any medium made to transfer information from one human to another i.e. books, video, email, music etc.). This is due to the human inability to analyse the world without using past experiences as a reference point.

Using that as a basis, it can be argued that each human live in their own ever changing reality based on their personal history of experiences. Is any of these realities universally true? Simply put... no. None of them can be, since they are fabrications of the human brain in an attempt to cope with our own existence and sentience.

That's not to say there isn't a true reality, there has to be one, just that no human could begin to comprehend it.

Just my two cents on the matter. I could go a lot further but more qualified people have literally wrote tonnes of books on the subject.
 

Avidro

Deimon Master
Admin
Likes received
866
Umbration

Corporeality
Yet another philosophical topic: Can there be objective truth/reality?
Looking at this from a logical tack, if the answer to that question is "no", doesn't that mean we can't even be certain that that "no" is really true? Paradox! On the other hand, a "yes" response is totally self-consistent. Therefore, the simplest answer is that yes, there must exist an objective truth.

Really, doesn't logic itself become essentially meaningless if you don't presume the existence of objective truth? And then we wouldn't have computers, and that would be sad. 😢
 
Reactions: Tee

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
Looking at this from a logical tack, if the answer to that question is "no", doesn't that mean we can't even be certain that that "no" is really true? Paradox! On the other hand, a "yes" response is totally self-consistent. Therefore, the simplest answer is that yes, there must exist an objective truth.

Really, doesn't logic itself become essentially meaningless if you don't presume the existence of objective truth? And then we wouldn't have computers, and that would be sad. 😢
I love this response. It's very human.
 

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
This is getting a bit too close to religion. A topic I know most of us here share different views on.

Since I would rather avoid a heated discussion in the banter thread, I will only answer briefly.

It's my opinion that everything is the way it is because it is the way it is. If conditions were different then the things in those conditions are different and we would think those were intelligently designed since our intelligence would have been based in those conditions.
 

EstherTb

Goddess of Fire
Likes received
463
Umbration

Duality
This is getting a bit too close to religion. A topic I know most of us here share different views on.

Since I would rather avoid a heated discussion in the banter thread, I will only answer briefly.

It's my opinion that everything is the way it is because it is the way it is. If conditions were different then the things in those conditions are different and we would think those were intelligently designed sijce our intelligence would have been based in those conditions.
Interesting view! :yayaya: Although I do disagree. :badliar:
 

Avidro

Deimon Master
Admin
Likes received
866
Umbration

Corporeality
In my view, intelligent design makes more sense than the alternative, which is that all of the mind-bogglingly complex universal and biological structures we can observe just sort of happened by chance. Is that possible? Well, sure, the traditional argument is that, given a sufficiently large universe and a sufficiently vast timespan, life had to spring up somewhere, right? I'm not so sure. As with anything chance-related, no one can say for certain; all I know is, the list of conditions that had to be just so in order to give rise to life on Earth is pretty staggering. We didn't just win the cosmic lottery; we won it again, and again, and again, millions of times over billions of years. Oh, and if at any point, we had lost just one of those lotteries, well, say goodbye to the human race.

Now, logically (heh), that rhetorical analogy doesn't prove or disprove anything. However, I think what gives most people pause with the Intelligent Design notion is that A) it isn't testable/provable with known science, and B) a lot of people who put stock in it treat scientific theories in general with a certain lack of respect and/or understanding. Point A is valid, and I'm sure there's plenty of discussion to be had on that particular topic. Point B is fallacious, since there are plenty of reputable scientists who believe in Intelligent Design, and who are capable of holding a rational discussion about scientific topics (see Esther's link above).

I realize there are more reasons than these why some people reject Intelligent Design, but I'll leave it at that for now. To @Tee's concern about religious discussion: it's allowed, but only as long as it abides by the Forum Rules (Rule #1 in particular). Keep it respectful, folks! :)
 

Zules

☕☕☕☕
Admin
Likes received
1,012
Umbration

Caprice
I've argued the Kalam cosmological argument with a couple of atheists, on separate occasions, before. I still have the exchanges saved, so if someone is interested in seeing them, please message me privately, and I'll send them your way :)
 

EstherTb

Goddess of Fire
Likes received
463
Umbration

Duality
In my view, intelligent design makes more sense than the alternative, which is that all of the mind-bogglingly complex universal and biological structures we can observe just sort of happened by chance. Is that possible? Well, sure, the traditional argument is that, given a sufficiently large universe and a sufficiently vast timespan, life had to spring up somewhere, right? I'm not so sure. As with anything chance-related, no one can say for certain; all I know is, the list of conditions that had to be just so in order to give rise to life on Earth is pretty staggering. We didn't just win the cosmic lottery; we won it again, and again, and again, millions of times over billions of years. Oh, and if at any point, we had lost just one of those lotteries, well, say goodbye to the human race.

Now, logically (heh), that rhetorical analogy doesn't prove or disprove anything. However, I think what gives most people pause with the Intelligent Design notion is that A) it isn't testable/provable with known science, and B) a lot of people who put stock in it treat scientific theories in general with a certain lack of respect and/or understanding. Point A is valid, and I'm sure there's plenty of discussion to be had on that particular topic. Point B is fallacious, since there are plenty of reputable scientists who believe in Intelligent Design, and who are capable of holding a rational discussion about scientific topics (see Esther's link above).

I realize there are more reasons than these why some people reject Intelligent Design, but I'll leave it at that for now. To @Tee's concern about religious discussion: it's allowed, but only as long as it abides by the Forum Rules (Rule #1 in particular). Keep it respectful, folks! :)

My favorite way to present intelligent design is to tell it simply. I’m not really a science nerd or anything like that. So the people who believe that life sprang from nowhere over a super long period of time think that everything happened by chance. But since I do not believe that I wish to tell what I think is right. I’m going to try and use a logical argument to try and see if y’all agree or not. (Respectfully of course 😉)
Take a book as an example, maybe one one the complications of rocket science. Now we all know for a fact that somebody wrote that, right? Well how about the most complicated book of all? The book of life, our DNA. It literally determines everything about us, our looks, our personality, and even some of our physical limits! It’s crazy how complicated those tiny strands are! Now take that complicated book right? How do you assume something like that had no author? (Not implying somebody is stupid if they don’t believe that). I don’t think even in 500 million years that something this complicated could happen by chance.
 

Tee

The seeker of Knowledge
Likes received
342
Umbration

Cognizance
I value the people on this site more than I value sharing the truth.

At least that is the conclusion I came up with after writing what feels like a novel and then deleting it.

Maybe one day I will write "un-becoming christian: a guide to undoing christian indoctrination".
Until that day this post will suffice in informing you of how I feel about religion.

So to clarify a am aggressively agnostic. Highly against any current world religion. I'm just sick of all the lies and hypocrisy.
 

Avidro

Deimon Master
Admin
Likes received
866
Umbration

Corporeality
Well how about the most complicated book of all? The book of life, our DNA. It literally determines everything about us, our looks, our personality, and even some of our physical limits!
DNA is crucial
We must understand it
In the human genome
We will find your logo


(Also yes, totally agree with your points)

I value the people on this site more than I value sharing the truth.

At least that is the conclusion I came up with after writing what feels like a novel and then deleting it.

Maybe one day I will write "un-becoming christian: a guide to undoing christian indoctrination".
Until that day this post will suffice in informing you of how I feel about religion.

So to clarify a am aggressively agnostic. Highly against any current world religion. I'm just sick of all the lies and hypocrisy.
We all have our own reasons for believing what we believe. I, too, came from a religious upbringing and became agnostic, for a wide number of reasons. Everyone has their own story, and I know ours are probably quite different. Suffice it to say, I am decidedly no longer agnostic, for a very wide number of reasons, which I can discuss at length if you, or anyone else, is interested.

However, this is beginning to stray a little too far from the Banter Thread's roots (or lack thereof). If anyone wishes to continue this particular discussion, perhaps it would be best to move it to a thread of its own? :)
 
Top