/sci/ - Science & Math

I thought you guys were going to argue that merit and logic should determine which scientists to invest resources in, but everyone here seem to be arguing women are inferior and should be discriminated against, which makes you no better than the misandrists abusing the feminist movement who accuse everything and everyone of being sexist and think men should be discriminated again to even things out.

Can you imagine being the manager of a R&D project, committed to the task at hand, then for one of these people to turn up and stirring up distrust and hate? In my view they would be just as bad as a bigot carrying out workplace bullying and harassment, disrupting human resources, costing money. I would suddenly become very determined to get rid of them by any means necessary.

For the record, this /sci/entist disapproves of both sides of the argument.

>>5288252

There is a difference between the definitions for "consciousness" and "soul", but both terms are ambiguous and can refer to the same thing.

If someone says "oh I have a soul, I feel, I think, this is valid proof under scientific method since you need an observer" and you say "HURR WHY DO YOU BELIEVE IN SKY FAIRIES" you're an idiot.

If someone says "I don't have a soul, I am not a glowing orb like thing that can float it's way to heaven, also I love richard dawkins" and you say "what the fuck are you talking about, of course you have a soul, you're not a philosophical zombie, you are just trying to be edgy" then you also are an idiot.

This thread is full of trolls and idiots confused by semantics.

/thread?

>>5160711
The important thing is you've found a label to pin on people who prove you wrong in rational debate.