For the sake of the rest of the world as much as America, if you have even the slightest preference for Obama over McCain, please don't let your cynicism towards the whole political process deter you. Vote for Obama. The Republicans rely on voter apathy far more than than the Democrats do.

Cars_willkillyou Believing you think, are conscious, or perceive, however you want to see it, implies doubt in that. How can you doubt that you think? The simple act of doubting is thinking. You know you exist. You don't believe you exist.

Don't flatter yourself, you didn't exist to me until you posted in this thread. Although that's not entirely true. You existed to me as one of the posters whose name I did not know and whose posts I may or may not have read. And before you joined the forum, you existed to me as part of the unknown populace of the world that I believe exist for reasons I'm not going to explain.

Perception only confirms your existence, it is not the reason for it. You can believe that, but I doubt you do as much as you seem to communicate. Or do you not exist when you're in deep sleep? Or do you exist in a different capacity when you dream? I think it is a mistake to equate consciousness to existence. Consciousness merely confirms ones own existence, I believe it's a mistake to equate consciousness/thought/doubt/perception with existence. You don't know that you do in fact exist when you are incapable of thought/perception/consciousness, but but you don't know that you don't either. You could be right, but that's jumping to a conclusion. You can believe that you fade in and out of existence, that you don't exist when you are unconscious, but I personally believe that I have a physical body that is still here when I'm unconscious. I believe I have a collection of memories that I can process and sort through when I become conscious once again. I believe that is all part of my existence. I must iterate though that that is my believed existence. I believe my existence entails more than just my thought, but I am only aware of the existence of my thought, and only when I am conscious.

You don't know that when you die your consciousness dies with your body. There is no way of knowing, and if you're right, there is no way of proving that. You believe your consciousness dies with your body. Because you believe your consciousness is connected to your body VIA your brain, but you can't confirm that, because you don't know your body exists at all, or even that it is your brain that is really doing the thinking. You think that your brain is doing the thinking because that is what you believe you've learned in classes that you believe you attended. Or you think that because that is what you believe you have deduced because that is where you see from, hear from, and talk from. That's where your conscious voice seems to eminate from to your senses, but I can manipulate myself to perceive my inner voice as residing in my stomach . I believe you have the ability too.

I agree with you partially on synonyms, although I believe a secondary reason for that is because languages merge over the years to form new languages. But for my purposes in the point I'm trying to get across, I believe the differences between faith and belief are inconsequential.

philosyphowned?

No, it kinda sucks. But I don't know the conversation nor care enough to find out. But the whole "you can't prove it so you believe it" trip is lame. If you want to discuss epistemology, discuss epistemology. His ontology is tripping over his epistemology. It's like going up to a neurosurgeon and telling him "a CT scan of my brain doesn't prove anything, dood."

that asstard believes in abstinence-only shows and opposes sex education and now the royal-c is going to push the dotter into marrying babydaddy after grandson #2 pops out becuz we all know TRIG is really not hers, oh yeah. he was con-seeved during trig class hence his name. pluckerzzz.

It's not an important distinction to make in everyday life, but when talking about religion, the past, the meaning of life, morals et cetera. you've got to be careful, or you're going to trigger me to go into Descartes mode. Or if I'm feeling a bit saucy I'll go into Socrates mode and keep asking you "Why?"

me? what? meaning of life? what meaning? who's life?

speak.

I kind of suspect that, but I'm not sure how that girl could survive a trig class, let alone a pre-algebra class. She doesn't look the math type.

math is a tool of the devil.

thats why she was fucking under the stairs instead of going to klass.

and math is beautiful, like the devil & his spawn.

Haha, you make me smile

You don't get kicked out of heaven for not being narcissistic that's for sure.

double negatives, ye trickster!

Never did I not want to make people abstain from not counting the negatives in my sentences to figure out the true meaning.

i dont deny that i didn't say not the opposite of not that-- evARRRRRRRRRR

Personally:
I'm very concerned about the morality of our country now. TV, movies, the music that our children are, you know, barraged with every day. And I want to know if there's anything that can be worked out with the—Hollywood, or whoever, to help get rid of some of this bad language and whatever, you know...

People that spout off on Descartes trips have ruined many of my philosophy courses. You can undercut really everything for whatever personal agenda you have with a simple Cartesian rant. Often I would be in a class discussing Spinoza or Kant but then we all have to go through remedial Descartes because some twat can't suspend the question of the validity of perception. And Cartesian philosophy isn't that great, as it ignores the Heideggerian point that the existence of the world is not resting upon perceptive corporeal but the relations in which the corporeal represent in which we (our will) relates to. Pushing a Cartesian in front of a speeding bus should illustrate the point adequately. Perception is all one has and, while doubtable, they are certainly not ignorable. One needs to grow up and realize the utility of truth, just because a thing is doubtable does not mean that it isn't useful. The ramifications of aphilosophy are important to consider, unless you enjoy the idea of solipsistic catatonia.

yeah, so for the next couple months we'll be able to frame the whole election discourse around the 17 year old teenager's sexuality. We won't have to discuss torture camps or american death ships or us concentration camps or spying on citizens or even nuts and bolts issues like funding education or infrastructure.

there is also some subtle mass social programming informing teen girls if they get pregnant they will be rewarded.

and we will be forced to endure the opinion of an ill-informed, ill-experienced, housewife about hiow we should drill ANWAR, our national "last minute", desperate measure reserves, just so halliburton can makle more money and we can "save" $0.15 a gallon on gas, defacing and polluting the most pristine wilderness in our country with derricks, oil wells, pipelines, and heavy machinery. NICE

that fucking cunt started talking a bout ANWAR the moment she got interviewed. fucking rosanne barr looking bitch.