/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11151474]

I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!!

[Anonymous No.11151494]

>>11151474
>if you only knew how bad things really are

[Anonymous No.11151523]

>>11151494
Don't worry. He's a homosexual

[Anonymous No.11151524]

>>11151474
Some thing are the result of a broken system, sometimes people’s culture is broken.

[Anonymous No.11151529]

>>11151474
>I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!!

the fuck does this have to do with science

it's by definition a religion
these people made up their mind about certain things based on ideological premises and will ignore any data that contradicts their assumptions

pic very related btw

[Anonymous No.11151553]

>>11151474
Is that sentence grammatically correct? I don't exactly get what it means.
Then again, it doesn't really matter. I'm not into esoterics.

[Anonymous No.11151572]

>>11151529
>pic very related btw
That picture is the definition of reddit, the scientific method in the left was made by extreme religious people, and seldom great scientists belive in religion and are quite superstitious

[Anonymous No.11151579]

>>11151572
It was probably bait. The image is still cringe tho.
Seldom means rarely btw.

[Anonymous No.11151586]

>>11151572
>seldom great scientists belive in religio
The majority of great scientists have been religious

[Anonymous No.11151587]

>>11151572
>That picture is the definition of reddit, the scientific method in the left was made by extreme religious people, and seldom great scientists belive in religion and are quite superstitious

there are so many retarded things in this one line of text, it's remarkable!

[Anonymous No.11151595]

>>11151586
>The majority of great scientists have been religious

So?

Did they apply the rigorous methods they used in science to they religious conviction? Probably not.

People get indoctrinated into a religion as children, before you even develop anything like critical thinking. There is also the fact that many great scientists of the past would have been killed (if not literally then at least when it comes to their reputation) if they openly stated that religion is a bunch of bullshit.

[Anonymous No.11151960]

>>11151595
>>11151529
>>11151523
>>11151474
>>11151524
If you're suffering from depression, the book 'Feeling Good' by MD David Burns can help.
It's about cognitive-behavioral therapy, a successful treatment for depression, dealing with negative thinking patterns.
Link to PDF:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/sdydy3n2mdpueck/%2528harper._health%2529_burns_david_d_-feeling_good__the_new_mood_therapy_revised_and_updated-avon_books_harper_%25282009%2529.pdf/file
(if you don't want to use Mediafire, look for it on libgen.is - it's a good site for PDFs in general - browse/download at your own discretion).

Also listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmDwl2-IZEk
It's an audiobook of 'Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway' by Susan Jeffers, a self-help book on overcoming anxiety.

You can also try some St. John's Wort (it's a plant) tea for immediate relief (I mix mine with Melissa for the calming effect).

It might also be nice to learn to meditate, as it can relieve your mind of negative thoughts. nperov.com for learning materials.

Or maybe you just have a vitamin D defficiency, see >>/sci/thread/S10221251 Go get some sun.

[Anonymous No.11151962]

>>11151595
>>11151529
>>11151523
>>11151474
>>11151524
>>11151494
If you're suffering from depression, the book 'Feeling Good' by MD David Burns can help.
It's about cognitive-behavioral therapy, a successful treatment for depression, dealing with negative thinking patterns.
Link to PDF:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/sdydy3n2mdpueck/%2528harper._health%2529_burns_david_d_-feeling_good__the_new_mood_therapy_revised_and_updated-avon_books_harper_%25282009%2529.pdf/file
(if you don't want to use Mediafire, look for it on libgen.is - it's a good site for PDFs in general - browse/download at your own discretion).

Also listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmDwl2-IZEk
It's an audiobook of 'Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway' by Susan Jeffers, a self-help book on overcoming anxiety.

You can also try some St. John's Wort (it's a plant) tea for immediate relief (I mix mine with Melissa for the calming effect).

It might also be nice to learn to meditate, as it can relieve your mind of negative thoughts. nperov.com for learning materials.

Or maybe you just have a vitamin D defficiency, see >>/sci/thread/S10221251 Go get some sun.

[Anonymous No.11152150]

>>11151529
XD religion is soooo stupid, gosh when I went to church camp I hated the prayer and giant sky fairy hahaha why can't we just believe in science LOL

[Anonymous No.11152170]

>>11152150
nu atheist one dimensional critique of religion as being "le flying spaghetti monster" is dumb but religion is still massive cope

[Anonymous No.11152184]

>>11151962
this is a pretty weird meme

Im a very hateful person but I'm still not depressed

[Anonymous No.11152192]

>>11151474
Yes. Good old times when girls haven't had penises.

[Anonymous No.11152198]

>>11151529
A brainlet's criticism of religion.

[Anonymous No.11152202]

>>11151962
>unironically pushing a book that shows the way to happiness is being willingly ignorant
Can't tell if bait or new/sci/.

[Anonymous No.11152220]

>>11151962
It's actually a good book.
Basically stoicism, however.

[Anonymous No.11152234]

>>11151474

[Anonymous No.11152282]

>>11152220
>>11152202

[Anonymous No.11152291]

>>11152282
?

[Anonymous No.11152293]

>>11151529
WOW I WONDER IF THAT IMAGE IS BIASED OR ANYTHING!!!

[Anonymous No.11152298]

>>11151474
>reproducibility crisis driven by mismanagement and overgrowth of aimless stem programs and the slow down of quick progress in demanding fields that selected against midwits and parasites
>immediately exploit for political goals while doing nothing to raise quantitative reasoning standards in the subjects most afflicted by this kind of dishonesty and incompetence
Libtards really are the ubermensch

[Anonymous No.11152305]

>>11151474
But isn't ignoring what the data suggests based on some contrived agenda technically the opposite of science?

[Anonymous No.11152306]

>>11151474 (OP)
But isn't ignoring what the data suggests based on some contrived agenda technically the opposite of science?
Also my French Celestial girlfriend is fucking real FUCK!!!

[Anonymous No.11152547]

>>11151529
Terrible criticism of religion. Read Taleb.

[Anonymous No.11152920]

[Anonymous No.11152922]

>>11152920

[Anonymous No.11152924]

>>11152922

[Anonymous No.11152925]

>>11151474
what about this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_paradox , theyre probably ok with it

[Anonymous No.11152927]

>>11152924

[Anonymous No.11152933]

>>11152927

[Anonymous No.11152935]

>>11152933

[Anonymous No.11152937]

pls go back to plebbit

[Anonymous No.11152941]

>>11152935

[Anonymous No.11152945]

>>11152941

[Anonymous No.11152951]

>>11152945

[Anonymous No.11152952]

>>11152937
>I have zero arguments or intelligent comments to make.

[Anonymous No.11152955]

>>11152951

[Anonymous No.11152958]

>>11151474
>SCIENCE
More like a type IV sociology malignancy.
It's as related to science as astrology or homeopathy are.

[Anonymous No.11152961]

>>11152150
This is all you christcucks can do. You have been btfo'd so many times to the point you're unable to recover.

[Anonymous No.11152970]

>>11152955

[Anonymous No.11152977]

Cringy thread overall. Perfect replication of my middle school mindset

[Anonymous No.11152993]

>>11152977

please elaborate

>I know you won't because while writing you will realise that everything you want to say sounds laughable.

[Anonymous No.11153011]

>>11151529
>>11152920
>>11152922
>>11152924
>>11152927
>>11152933
>>11152935
>>11152941
>>11152951
>>11152955
>>11152970
It is constantly astounding how you people fail to see yourselves the way others see you. That is the root of cringiness afterall, a lack of self awareness, like a bad TikTok video.

These images offer better insight into the minds of bitter atheists than they counter established theology. Literally all of this is a strawman, one way or another.

Redditor, constantly refreshing this thread on a saturday, will respond to this with another meme.

[Anonymous No.11153040]

>>11152993
When you "disprove" religion using scientific principles and logic you are committing a fallacy. Of course religion doesn't make scientific sense, just as science can not be proven in a theological sense. They are two mutually exclusive modes of thought, when you mix them contradictions will occur. Both have positives and negatives, to be condescending means you are too stupid to consider another mode of thought. Scientific thought is much more efficient, but where has this relentless efficiency gotten the average person? The average American today has an arguably shittier life than a hunter gatherer. Don't discount a mode of thought entirely based on memes made by middle schoolers in 2012

[Anonymous No.11153049]

>>11151474
>We conclude that ethnic groups with a higher concentration of melanin in their skin have a darker skin tone

DAS RAYCISS!!!

[Anonymous No.11153089]

>>11152952
>Are you challenging my biased opinions? Here, look at this funny meme i took from reddit

[Anonymous No.11153130]

>>11152293
Uh, no, I got it from /r/atheism and it's based in science, and science is always right.

[Anonymous No.11153144]

>>11153130
>it's based in science
> it's based in science
sauce?

[Anonymous No.11153145]

>>11151572
>>11151579
That image is older than both of you

[Anonymous No.11153162]

Well it's true but not in the way they want us to believe. Poisonous popular culture, the degeneration of moral values, unchecked greed and corruption, cause unforgivable disadvantages to minorities, vulnerable people, and everyone else.

[Anonymous No.11153169]

>>11153145
I'm 19 though

[Anonymous No.11153198]

>>11153169
>possibly born in 2000
holy shit

[Anonymous No.11153336]

I'm totally against religion but wtf is this thread becoming

[Anonymous No.11153356]

>>11152927
>>11152933
>>11152935
>>11152941
>>11152945
>>11152951
>>11152955

All i ask Is internet atheists come up with arguments that haven't been refuted thousands of times before, yet they never do. They exists too. If you want to fight theism you need to focus on criticizing revelation and resurrection, not the nature of god, which is on rock solid grounding

>>11152941
this is pretty funny though

[Anonymous No.11153386]

>>11151529
Modern science deals with contradictory evidence by inventing bullshit or coming up with arbitrary constants to modify the equations.

[Anonymous No.11153393]

>>11153356
>internet atheists come up with arguments that haven't been refuted thousands of times before
I haven't seen these refuted:
>>11152933
>>11152927
>>11152922
>>11152920

[Anonymous No.11153402]

>>11153011
>counter established theology
I've rarely seen any sort of actual theology discussed on this site. Most of the so called "Christians" on 4chan just use it to justify their prejudices and hatreds.

[Anonymous No.11153406]

>>11153393
jesusfags BTFO

[Anonymous No.11153409]

>>11153393
you havent been looking, The fact that you think evil existing somehow proves god DOSENT exists is backwards. the whole point of the moral argument is Good and evil DO exist, therefore there is an order on good things, and an all good thing exists.

You are picking and choosing concepts from theology without following to their logical conclusion. Then you pretend like there is some vast contradiction

[Anonymous No.11153420]

>>11153409
>The fact that you think evil existing somehow proves god DOSENT exists is backwards
great, i will trust you the ESL with a grade of D-

[Anonymous No.11153424]

>>11153393
>epicurean paradox
this has been refuted since 300 bc, the rest of that stuff is just biblical myths that the vast majority of religious people dont beleive literally

[Anonymous No.11153434]

>>11153420
Prove evil exists without bringing emotion into the argument and without appealing to a transcendent being

[Anonymous No.11153754]

>>11153424
>>epicurean paradox
>this has been refuted since 300 bc

how exactly?

[Anonymous No.11153769]

>>11153040
>They are two mutually exclusive modes of thought

do you consider voodoo and the worship of Kali equally valid or is this just a case of
>pic related

[Anonymous No.11153867]

>>11151962
Listen to his podcast. Dr Burns helped me through rough times.

Also have a vit D deficiency

[Anonymous No.11153928]

>>11153386
>Modern science deals with contradictory evidence by inventing bullshit or coming up with arbitrary constants to modify the equations.
And yet it's still not based in faith

[Anonymous No.11153934]

>>11152198
You haven't offered a defense of religion

>>11152547
Taleb doesn't support religion and its affects on society. Taleb only criticizes approaches of dismantling organized religion that will cause collateral damage.

[Anonymous No.11153936]

>>11153934
***Effects

[Anonymous No.11153938]

>>11153934
Religion serves to help its followers- that is why it persists.

[Anonymous No.11153952]

""""evil"""" doesn't exist. Only the interpretation as evil of characteristics detrimental to the inclusive fitness of a population exists. Evolved humans are intrinsically averse to what is not evolutionarily beneficial, and justify this aversion by perceiving it as evil.

[Anonymous No.11153961]

>>11153938
The belief that religion serves to helps its followers is why it persists today. It's a self-sustaining system founded on faith and devoid of reason. I'm referring to Abrahamic religion.

[Anonymous No.11153967]

>>11153961
>devoid of reason
Religions have persisted. That is proof.

[Anonymous No.11153968]

>>11153402
On this site, they're mostly just contrarians with a superiority complex over redditors and nu atheists.

[Anonymous No.11153978]

>>11153967
Destructive behavior exists until it exerts enough of a dysgenic influence that the population engaging in it becomes extinct. That is not proof of religion not being devoid of reason.

[Anonymous No.11153989]

>>11153978
Yes, religion is devoid of reason.
That said, survival doesn't necessarily require reason.

[Anonymous No.11153996]

>>11151474
This is Science TM not science.

[Anonymous No.11154032]

>>11153989
Survival in the time span between creation and extinction does not require reason. But, continued survival necessarily requires reason. Because a process of viewing the world such as Abrahamic religion is devoid of reason, it cannot be conducive toward continued survival. The dead bodies piled up over the faith-based and reason-devoid philosophies called religion are proof. Proof are also all the other such philosophies devoid of reason relegated to irrelevance and then nothingness. Abrahamic religion has been so successful at persisting only at the expense of other religious individuals, but it will do so until its own demise, as the tide of the most destructive variants such as Islam grows by the day.

Faith-based thinking is what will lead to humanity's extinction. We might leave this Earth in a more sophisticated manner than the neanderthals likely did, but we will nonetheless under such conditions.

[Anonymous No.11154041]

>>11154032
>Faith-based thinking is what will lead to humanity's extinction.
Depends on the religion- climate change is the new one- I'd say it's more dangerous than most other religions.

[Anonymous No.11154071]

>>11154041
Defined as faith-based and reason-devoid, more or less dangerous does not matter in the grand scheme, so neither does which religion. I suppose by this definition you could call much of today's """rationalists""" like some climate change activists "religious." But one thing's for sure: Such individuals are not following a reason-based process of inquiry such as the scientific method (the best we've got so far for understanding reality). Contrary to what many religious people in this cesspool think, engaging in confirmation bias is not rational, and neither is it "following the scientific method."

[Anonymous No.11154078]

>>11154071
Yes, some people are more rational than others- but what matters is how their actions are impacted by their religion- going to war is one- and modern racial and climate science is leading us to war- civil.

[Anonymous No.11154102]

>>11154078
Indeed. It would therefore be best to leave those "religious" ways of thinking behind when it comes to making rational decisions about war or science, especially science. There would be no ideology surrounding racial (genetics and evolution more broadly) or climate science if the scientific method were actually being rigorously applied. People would formulate new theories, modify them as new evidence supports or discredits them, and arrive at a malleable consensus likely subject to change in the future.

[Anonymous No.11154107]

>>11154102
They're choosing to hate those who disagree on topics that have little/no consensus- such as racial aptitudes, climate science, and political workings.

[Anonymous No.11154125]

>>11154107
And if we're representatives of science and more broadly rationality, we should discourage them from thinking in those ways by pointing out flaws in their reasoning. People will always be inclined to reason to a certain degree of effectiveness, but faith-based garbage like religion is not the solution. We should engage in discussion for the well-being of both parties, without malice, something a lot of the nu athiests fail at by insulting religious people at every turn. Trying to prove something unprovable like the existence of God is futile.

[Anonymous No.11154136]

>>11154125
>faith based bad
Sure, but I don't believe worse than faulty rational.
>show flaws in reasoning
They only say that they're scientifically grounded- if pushed, they'll revert to tradition or moral reasons. Science is just a front for most.

[Anonymous No.11154139]

>>11153040
>The average American today has an arguably shittier life than a hunter gatherer.

I'd like to see you argue that.
Even if you succeeded, you can't attribute the plight of the average person to the "efficiency of scientific thought." And you sure as fuck can't propose religion as a better alternative. The scientific method is a process of proposing new theories and adjusting them based on found evidence (not subject to biases like confirmation bias). Why can't this goal of ridding the world of suffering be subject to the same process?

[Anonymous No.11154158]

>>11154136
>Sure, but I don't believe worse than faulty rational.

"Faulty rational" and faith-based reasoning are the same thing. There is no process of refining a central theory via the scientific method in either of them.

>They only say that they're scientifically grounded- if pushed, they'll revert to tradition or moral reasons. Science is just a front for most.

Then they weren't grounded in the scientific method in the first place, and we should help them with that.

[Anonymous No.11154169]

>>11152547
Taleb thinks rationality can't "replace religion" because Soviet Russia and atheist suicide bombers have existed. The soviet union causing all the suffering it did for all that time through the methods it implemented was not rational. They stuck to an unrefined theory way past its expiry date and paid the consequences. Atheist suicide bombers, no matter what they tell you about what they think they believe, are not being rational when killing civilians. They clearly didn't test out the hypothesis of whether exploding other people reduces suffering in the world or not.

[Anonymous No.11154172]

>>11154158
>Then they weren't grounded in the scientific method in the first place, and we should help them with that.
You're so optimistic.

[Anonymous No.11154176]

>>11154172
It's better than prosletyzing religion, don't you think?

[Anonymous No.11154178]

>>11153402
I'm from /lit/ and am a 2•4chan /christian/ refugee.
Legitimate christian philosophy used to be discussed in these places, more so the latter than the former. Now /lit/ is filled with newfags and /christian/ is no more.
Nowadays I get most my Christian discussion through alternative channels (no pun intended, not a chan site).

What a garbage thread for /sci/ this has become.

>>11153198
I am the king of the zoomers.

[Anonymous No.11154188]

>>11154176
For the short run, yes. But I'm not sure about the long run.
For many, their view is polarized- those who don't agree on their scientific view are enemies- not much different than typical religions.

[Anonymous No.11154209]

>>11151595
religion shouldn't have anything to do with critical thinking.
Also you should try studying philosophy and develop the methods of forming thoughts and opinions. People are also trained to hate nazis, commies, believe women deserve rights, and think there is such thing as innovation.
Abstract truths don't require any sort of application in any particular way. You're just a retard that has been breed- centuries of proletariat slaves beaten to submission of the philosophy of capital.
Nothing wrong with believing how things exist, but arguing the personal nuance is just retarded. Especially when it's about the benefit of another inane ideology.
Retards arguing who is more retarded. BORING.
>>11152234
>killing nazi white male scum is good
>what how dare you even mention incarcerating criminals you're a racist for imprisoning people that objectively deserved it by the law.
Subjective morality shouldn't be a virtue just because you agree with it. your post is based and underrated

[Anonymous No.11154223]

>>11154209
>religion shouldn't have anything to do with critical thinking.
Awful idea. Critical thinking should exist in all walks of life. A world without Aquinas for example would have been much worse off.

[Anonymous No.11154231]

>>11154188
Characterizing those who don't agree with your theory as your enemies is not rational. It doesn't follow the scientific method, which makes it a point to formulate new theories and modify existing ones all to arrive at a scientific consensus. If a consensus can't presently be attained, then the solution is to find better evidence in favour of your own theory, not to sabotage other theories and create enemies. Attachment to ideas for the sake of status is not rational in this context, where arrive at a mutual understanding for the good of all humanity is the goal. In fact, given that the goal of achieving this kind of vast knowledge is non-material in nature, direct behavior towards material gain is irrational.

So I don't see any necessity in defining "short or long runs." Faith-based philosophy is not conducive to moving humanity forward with respect to reducing the suffering in the world and gathering knowledge about the material nature of it all. The scientific method is the best approach we have got for attacking those fundamental questions of our existence. Questions such as "what is the meaning of life" need not be approach in the way of the Abrahamic religions.

[Anonymous No.11154246]

>>11154223
>Critical thinking should exist in all walks of life
shitty personal belief.
>worse
shitty subjective belief accepted by conformity.

[Anonymous No.11154248]

>>11154231
>The scientific method is the best approach we have got for attacking those fundamental questions of our existence.
I agree that science is best for those who are willing to follow it- but we're not the first era to have scientific breakthroughs- and scientific kingdoms/countries have transitioned- by a combination of replacement of ideology, and a replacement of people.

[Anonymous No.11154264]

>this thread
did i enter r/atheism and r/ilovescience by mistake?

[Anonymous No.11154273]

>>11154246
Lol what a garbage human being you are. I seriously wish I could enjoy being as contrarian as you. It would make life a lot more interesting.

[Anonymous No.11154301]

>>11154248
>I agree that science is best for those who are willing to follow it
It is the best process for reducing suffering and learning the truth of the material world, so it is best for everyone.
>but we're not the first era to have scientific breakthroughs- and scientific kingdoms/countries have transitioned- by a combination of replacement of ideology, and a replacement of people.
Civilizations cause the breakthroughs, not eras.
Survival of a population due to its evolution is based on the inclusive fitness of the individuals that compose it. Our civilization survived the past to arrive at its present, intact state, unlike those that perished. The scientific method in its current form is among humanity's greatest
achievements, but wasn't present in the distant past. Similarly to religion which is firmly faith-based, the faith-based components of ideology are irrational, and both need not play a role in shaping a society firmly grounded in the scientific method.

In present, "modern" societies, where there aren't any overwhelming number of religious individuals there are mostly pseudo-rationalists like nu athiests who are engaging in their own religions of materialism plagued by confirmation bias, masquerading as followers of the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.11154307]

>>11154273
You're the contrarian one. And you still haven't stated how the world would be worse off.

[Anonymous No.11154383]

>>11154273
I'm not contrarian, but if I were wouldn't you like that? it does fit your belief on how the world should be.
Contrarian is a very precise term, I just generally am not interested in personally generated subjectivity and the ideology of a trained dogs.
>HURR DURR LIFE PUROSE
>HURR DURR THE STARS
>HURR DURR SOCIALISM
>HURR DUUR EXALTED ATHEIST
not amused. BORING.
I would call myself an abstract purist. put simply: I like abstract truth. I dislike the arbitrary application of said truth via personal dogmatic beliefs.
I guess men require beliefs in order to remain sane.
>>11154301
>It is the best process for reducing suffering and learning the truth of the material world, so it is best for everyone.
proof?
and what do those things even mean?
By your applications, you're wrong. An animals main goal is to reproduce, so making reproduction farms would be in the best interest.
everything else would just be religious dogmatism.
period occurs between 10-15, thus a women is fertile at those ages. By your objective science world YOU endorse pedophilia, where young girls are strapped and bred to produce as many children possible.
according to the religious dogmatism of morality and ethics you're a sick fuck.
You're not being retarded on purpose right?
>scientific method
more subjective dogmatism of the decision of which to follow.
>In present, "modern" societies, where there aren't any overwhelming number of religious individuals there are mostly pseudo-rationalists like nu athiests who are engaging in their own religions of materialism plagued by confirmation bias, masquerading as followers of the scientific method.
based

[Anonymous No.11154391]

>>11151529
You must be at least 18 to post here.

[Anonymous No.11154457]

>>11151474
Was this written by an ESL?

[Anonymous No.11154464]

>>11154264
More like a thread from 2008 fell out of /b/ into some kind of time capsule and blew up right here.

[Anonymous No.11154470]

>>11154301
Wow, look at this. It' like they knew you in person.
>>11152935

[Anonymous No.11154482]

>>11154464
What happened since 2008?

Judging by this thread, not much. There are still plenty of seemingly somewhat educated people who will jump at every opportunity to defend their belief in sky daddy.

[Anonymous No.11154508]

Imagine unironically becoming a faux-christian just because /pol/ or pewdiepie told you to so you can own the libs

[Anonymous No.11154577]

Yes, freedom is broken!

[Anonymous No.11154585]

>>11151553
i think it is correct but sounds unnatural. they emphasized "outcomeS" when "outcome" works, and by "demographic subgroup" they mean niggers, faggots, and womyn. they went from plural to singular on a whim.

[Anonymous No.11154586]

>>11154508
>because /pol/ or pewdiepie told you to
Growing up in an environment where children and youngsters completely lack any actual role model makes them easily susceptible to anything that promises them a feeling of belonging, sense and orientation. Pewdiepie just like most of his colleagues have understood it and now exploit it for financial gains.

[Anonymous No.11154936]

imagine caring

[Anonymous No.11155105]

>>11154383
>An animals main goal is to reproduce
An animal's goal (at the level of the individual) is to ensure the survival of its alleles in the next generation. This does not necessarily entail the survival of the population (i.e. humanity as a whole). Based on the theory of Kin Selection: An individual's goal should be to maximize its inclusive fitness in order to increase the survival of the population to which it belongs. Humans are the most complex living organism in this regard. Maximizing reproduction by forcing it for the sake of sheer numbers will result in the swift death of most popularions on on this planet, including us. So a far better theory of increasing the survival of our population is to increase our knowledge of the material world and minimize global suffering. And what is the best framework to achieve these two goals? The scientific method applied in its most rigorous form.

Engaging in optimization efforts like breeding at pedophilic ages isn't rational because it causes suffering to those women, which you have implied. The religious dogma you mention exists supposedly to guide humanity through a path of least suffering. And if it achieves that, such as in the problem of breeding, then it should be viewed as a theory worthy of further testing and then application in the real world. Since I'm not a pedophile, I would posit that breeding women to produce as many children as possible does not adequately contribute to the reduction of suffering in the world due to a fuck ton of experimented and statistically significant factors. "Objective science" cannot possibly be, as you describe it, ignoring evidence of suffering to satisfy a personal theory of maximizing reproduction = minimize suffering because it would be violating the scientific method's process of refining theories based on all available evidence. There is nothing objective or scientific about ignoring evidence that pedophilia harms children and world's wellbeing as a whole.

[Anonymous No.11155133]

>>11154383
(2/2)
The scientific method is by definition a system of not following dogma. This is a science board, and yet most in this thread don't know that. Attachment to a scientific theory in the presence of contradicting evidence (most commonly due to confirmation bias) is pseudo-rationalism. It's the reason why faith-based systems like religion strive. It's also why pseudo-rationalists like nu atheists exist, who try to prove something unprovable like the existence of God, and who engage in their own religions of materialism, as as viable methods of discouraging non-scientific thinking.
>according to the religious dogmatism of morality and ethics you're a sick fuck.
Have you forgotten about the religious dogmatism that would support pedophilia? Islam comes to mind.

[Anonymous No.11155184]

>>11154470
>>11152935
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.11155186]

>>11152547
>Taleb
he got destroyed by steve sailer lmao, he has nothing of interest to say

[Anonymous No.11155194]

>>11152935
More xkcd cringe. Go back to r*ddit

[Anonymous No.11155427]

>>11151474
>Begging the question fallacy.
Dropped.
Sad, many such cases!

[Anonymous No.11155592]

>>11151474
A slide explaining that non-bigots are delusional. Interesting.

[Anonymous No.11155894]

>>11152945
can just imagine isaac asimov with the "pathetic"subtitle beneath him

[Anonymous No.11155962]

>>11151529
your response is accurate but the implication that religion is always bad is wrong.

[Anonymous No.11155973]

>>11151553
yeah i agree, it should be "I AM FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE"

[Anonymous No.11155976]

>>11152924
what's your proof that all this "evidence" wasn't created by God?
The biggest sign of a pseudo-intellectual is one who goes on and on and on about the inaccuracies of religion, thinking he is genius for that, refusing to see the benefits that religion may have, even if not accurate. I hope DESTROYING your grandad about religion with FACTS AND LOGIC during thanksgiving was worth it.

[Anonymous No.11155979]

>>11151474
>yeah lets go kill some space nazis and republicans same difference really,science fuck yeah!

I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE!!! TOO BRO!!!

[Anonymous No.11156014]

>>11151523
Doesn't look like a homosexual to me. If he had a beard, yes. Bald and beard is a homosexual. Clean shaven bald is usually right-wing married male.

[Anonymous No.11156034]

>wherein any attempts to challenge establishment thoughts on the relationship between race and success is immediately derailed as a religion thread instead
I'm telling ya, this place hasn't been the same since that one guy solved the haruhi ordering problem. My little /sci/ can't be this luminescent at night.

[Anonymous No.11156037]

>>11155976
>refusing to see the benefits that religion may have
Potential benefits of religion and the truth of religion are two separate issues. for example, it's perfectly possible that no god exists, yet believing in that god provides benefits for individuals or groups. It's a "useful fiction". So there are definitely utilitarian arguments in favor or religious belief.
In response to this anon, though: >>11152924 , Most intelligent believers acknowledge that the Bible is not a science book. A person who argues otherwise is way out of their lane.

[Anonymous No.11156049]

>>11152202
It's correct also, knowledge / truth has absolutely no intrinsic value, and any value it has to you is purely based on the utility it has in your daily life.

i.e. beliefs that actively hinder your ability to make social connections with other people (for example most but not all channer racists) are a sure sign of a midwit.

[Anonymous No.11156676]

>>11151524
Sometimes the people themselves are boken.

[Anonymous No.11156690]

>>11151474
>the waSTEMsummit hashtag
so is that washington state or western australia?

[Anonymous No.11156746]

>>11156049
>for example most but not all channer racists
>most
Oh- which racists, specifically, are you defending?

[Anonymous No.11156749]

so is "science" flawed or can we trust alarmtard climatologists???

[Anonymous No.11157094]

>>11155105
>So a far better theory of increasing the survival of our population is to increase our knowledge of the material world and minimize global suffering
radical and uncritical assumption. what a joke. you're letting your religious dogmatism show.
>suffering
poor assumption again also what does that even mean? more shitty dogmatism.
I didn't imply anything. I don't think anything particular about it, just that according to modern western views it would be seen as wrong.
>application
more baseless dogmatism.
>reduction of suffering
can you guess what I'll say? and that dogmatic statement does NOT actually have anything to do with your scientific method. Because that isn't the most optimized method for creating a society that is effective at collecting truth (not saying I agree with such dogmatism, but just stating that you're not thinking effectively due to shitty priori, instilled throughout your life.)
also the question of action is a serious one. I find the entire concept to be incredibly contradictory.
>caring about children or the world
[insert predictive phrase]
>The scientific method is by definition a system of not following dogma.
the follow that sentiment.
Abstract truths obviously have no meaning, stop acting purposefully retarded.
>optimizing the scientific method in a scientific method society
I wonder what I have to say about that.
I agree personally and dogmatically with what you say in the end. I think it's very based. but as a an abstract purist I know ethics is nothing more than dogmatic bullshit, and thus I have no philosophy for how society should act, it is meaningless to think it should or shouldn't in any way x or not x.
Why should I care that pedophiles or islamist exist? I am not in the business of destroying dogmatism, that's just plain dogmatic.

[Anonymous No.11157133]

>>11157094
>bUt aS An aBsTrAct pUrIsT...
You are by far the most insufferable person in this thread.

[Anonymous No.11157245]

>>11157133
Sorry anon. didn't mean to be like this. It's pretty obvious that I developed improperly due to being raise by a working single mother, and therefore suffering from neglect my entire life, and lacking social skills to make friends brought me to a level of loneliness that has probably caused irreversible brain damage.
My mother is older now, but she will always become emotional when she hears about violent murders in the news. I will usually reply to her, "I cannot understand what you are saying when you are crying. talk to me about it later when you are willing to speak normally."
I don't see what I did wrong. I cannot understand her when she is crying, why would I entertain a conversation I cannot even hear? and why would someone get upset over me telling them that I cannot understand what they are saying?
so I have been called similar things.
why do you call me this?

[Anonymous No.11157275]

>>11151595
>Did they apply the rigorous methods they used in science to they religious conviction?

Yes, they absolutely did. Newton was hugely advocative of rigorous study of the Bible and held back many of his theological views (like his rejection of God as a trinity) until his death for fear of the consequences.

[Anonymous No.11157290]

/r/atheism has arrived with their crusty 10 year old jpegs

[Anonymous No.11157368]

>>11157290
>>r/christianity has arrived with their creepy 3000+ year old fanfiction

[Anonymous No.11157657]

>>11157094
See this is the problem with Western philosophy and its pointless, self-masturbatory nature. All it has ever been good for is the bringing about the scientific method.

>Because that isn't the most optimized method for creating a society that is effective at collecting truth
Then offer a better idea? Insight into the universe's physical properties is only possible through the scientific method. Questions like "is there a reason for all this" are unnecessary. Trying to prove the unprovable, such as the existence of God, is also pointless (referring to nu atheists).

>Abstract truths obviously have no meaning, stop acting purposefully retarded.
There doesn't need to be a meaning to life and all of its material contents. Everything can simply exist and it's our duty to learn about its material nature, using scientific methods of inquiry such as physics. Outside of inquiry into the material world, there is only the question of consciousness and how to approach it. Given that it is the only vector through which pain is experienced, minimizing the suffering in the world is a noble goal. There is nothing dogmatic about it as it is simply a theory, a scientific one when put under the lens of the scientific method, that proposes the best way to move humanity forward. How can it be dogma when I am urging you put a better theory on the table? All the religions of the world and the bullshit philosophizing you're wasting your energy on are, only on a superficial level, efforts to "finding the truth." At the core of it, you are simply finding a way to alleviate yourself of suffering. Remember, there is no such thing as masochism on the neurological level.

[Anonymous No.11157921]

>>11151572
>That picture is the definition of reddit
>>11152937
>pls go back to plebbit
>>11152977
>Cringy thread overall. Perfect replication of my middle school mindset
>>11153011
>Redditor
>>11153130
>Uh, no, I got it from /r/atheism and it's based in science, and science is always right.
>>11157290
>/r/atheism has arrived with their crusty 10 year old jpegs

Guyz, reddit, amiright?
We not like them. We internet elite.

Fucking brainlets. But honestly, I shouldn't expect more from people who jump up to defend religion.

[Anonymous No.11157938]

>>11157275
>Yes, they absolutely did. Newton was hugely advocative of rigorous study of the Bible and held back many of his theological views (like his rejection of God as a trinity) until his death for fear of the consequences.

I know you won't read it, because it's above the legth of a twitter post, but some other poor soul might benefit from this.

https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/04/08/398227737/what-the-god-of-the-gaps-teaches-us-about-science?t=1574101524908

[Anonymous No.11157960]

>>11151529
>>11157921
Euphoric posts

[Anonymous No.11157964]

>>11157938
>npr

[Anonymous No.11157967]

As a man, I can never bear children, and that is racist

[Anonymous No.11157972]

>>11157960

>Some atheists are fat and cringy. Therefore I chose to believe in God.

[Anonymous No.11157982]

>>11152933
Where does skeptical theism or anti-theodicy fit in here?

[Anonymous No.11157986]

>>11153754

>>11153434

[Anonymous No.11157992]

>>11153952
God can exist regardless of the existence of evil.

The epicurean paradox dosent work only if evil dosent exist. And in fact Good and Evil existing imply the existence of some all good-being. The paradox is just a misunderstanding of what god is in the traditional theological sense

[Anonymous No.11158008]

>>11157972
>some

[Anonymous No.11158013]

>>11157986
>>11153434
>Prove evil exists without bringing emotion into the argument and without appealing to a transcendent being

Oh wow, deep!

I'd like to see you arguing the existence of evil while being tortured.

If you seek pleasure and try to avoid pain, you will know what evil is, when somebody tries to make your world as painful as possible.

But advanced thinkers like yourself probably transcended pain and pleasure - from the comfort of their gaming chairs.

[Anonymous No.11158025]

>>11158013
>I'd like to see you arguing the existence of evil while being tortured.
I believe evil exists though, and I therefore believe there is a transcendent limit concept that mankind is moving towards when we make moral developments.
>If you seek pleasure and try to avoid pain, you will know what evil is, when somebody tries to make your world as painful as possible.
Not true, There are plenty of situations where pain is vastly more good then pleasure. Excersizing, Being a police officer, Fighting wars, even the evolution of mankind was mostly a drive to resolve pain

[Anonymous No.11158037]

>>11158013
what is this onions tier post. Ever thought that maybe torture has no basis on whether it's good or bad, because I'm sure as aware that the people during witch trials were perfectly fine with it happening just like people these days are perfectly fine with torturing pedos and other types of criminals. If we were to think that torture were to be bad, then by that logic torturing criminals who deserved it should be placed as being bad. You pretty much used emotion to state what you said, proving anon's point that ideas of good and evil are nothing but emotional concepts that trigger a response

[Anonymous No.11158060]

>>11158025
Pain is never better than pleasure. Exercise feels good because it releases endorphins and other chemicals in your brain. At the level of the brain, there is no such thing as masochism.

[Anonymous No.11158069]

>>11158008
Lmao get outside of your bubble you contrarian loser. Most of the "religious" people on this site are degenerates trying to justify their hedonism and superiority complex over nu atheist plebbitors.

[Anonymous No.11158072]

>>11158060
>Exercise feels good
it dosent to me until an hour after I finish. Yet I still do it because I consider it good.

[Anonymous No.11158084]

>>11158072
You're under the spell of an illusion. You consider exercise good because it feels good. The exact time that it feels good does not matter. This is an insult to the people that get zero kicks off of exercise like normies do, and yet are still insulted for their condition. You probably believe in free will too.

[Anonymous No.11158120]

>>11158084
>You're under the spell of an illusion.
By that definition, so are you. Whats the point of not elevating rationality and logic to the forefront of thought? If I am living under an illusion, i dont see the problem of constructing concepts such that they account for everything conceivable and have no contradiction.

I have a theory of Ethics that is consistent, affirms objective moral development, can actually make true statements about morality, can identify things that are good and evil, and is completely rationalistic in that it contains no contradictions.

Yet you think none of this exists, An so any development i try to make will just be met with "illusion" or "dopamine". The interesting thing about this position is If you are conscious of the illusion, then to cut down completely on your pain/pleasure ratio you would immediately kill yourself. It is quite literally the best thing to do. Of course you could just say that you evolutionary wiring is tricking you into not killing yourself, but in admitting that you have risen above the mind that is given to you and are conscious of it again. You have to explain why you continue to move on when you can minimize pain maximally.

[Anonymous No.11158128]

>>11158120
Evil doesn't exist. Killing yourself is not minimizing pain. Actually, being conscious of the illusion, in the right way, does away with it entirely. There's actually a Buddhist practice based entirely off of that concept!

[Anonymous No.11158133]

>>11158128
>There's actually a Buddhist practice based entirely off of that concept!
your pretending like the Buddhist conception of evil is the same as the western concept of evil. The western concept is completely transcendent and is usually tautologically complete.In other words the western concept of good is simply the transcendence of the eastern concept of "good and evil". Buddhist Good and Evil did not develop as highly as it did in the west and it is usually concieved of as in terms of pain and pleasure as you are assuming .

[Anonymous No.11158135]

>>11158120
I can guarantee you that your "theory of ethics" is not consistent.

[Anonymous No.11158137]

>>11158128
bhuddhism is anti materialist in general

[Anonymous No.11158143]

>>11158135
No you can't because I know that Ontological moral objects exist.

[Anonymous No.11158148]

>>11158133
Western philosophy really is peak mental masturbation. At least it gave birth to the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.11158190]

>>11158148
Yes, it was an extreme emphasis on reason, while eastern was more "common sense and feeling" which is probably exactly why the west generated the scientific method

[Anonymous No.11158208]

>>11158128
>Evil doesn't exist
so explain how the epicurean argument holds?

[Anonymous No.11158339]

>>11158208
It doesn't. Trying to prove unprovable things like the existence of God is a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.11158401]

>>11157368
Gracioso

[Anonymous No.11158461]

>>11158008
the average christian is a wall mart sharter

[Anonymous No.11158683]

>>11157245
I'd kick you in the balls tbqh. You just seem very ball-kickable. Like a punchable face, but for getting kicked in the balls because of how you type.

[Anonymous No.11158710]

>>11151474

[Anonymous No.11158712]

>>11158461
There are religious schitzos, and most wallmart sharters are those types, but they aren't Christian.
They believe in crystals, essential oils and would probably enter a scientology building given the chance.

Church goers are often more well-adjusted than your average pedestrian, despite what hollywood would like you to believe.

[Anonymous No.11158738]

>>11156746
not defending anyone, just aware that sufficient charisma can make up for any old belief. Most people here don't have sufficient charisma to do that. It's a rhetorical strategy, not a statement of belief. I think race-based hatreds are abhorrent.

[Anonymous No.11159018]

>>11158710
Um actually there’s no such thing as races
Checkmate bigot

[Anonymous No.11159075]

>>11154482
Just triggering people with your mindset would be enough reward. But then the bad philosophy actually causes some to chime in. Also, you can be curious and methodical about natural phenomena AND about stuff that is not measurable with something a physicist might invent. Questions like "What is right and what is wrong?", "what is a good poem" etc. Please don't turn out to be an NPC that suggests some syntactical device that can be measured with natural language processing to measure how good a poem is.

[Anonymous No.11159092]

>>11159018

[Anonymous No.11159103]

>>11151474

If student's can't read, it must be the teacher's union's fault.

[Anonymous No.11159123]

>>11151474

The Math and Science test results are due to Bigotry!

[Anonymous No.11159127]

>>11159123
The White man is keeping them down
100% percent black country you say? It's Colonialism and racism hidden in Western Science and Mathematics.

[Anonymous No.11159131]

>>11159123
ya'll every just wanna move to nigerland and be a literal genius-god among men? You can do magic tricks and convince them you're a shaman and shit. assuming they don't douse you in gasoline and tie a tire around your neck first.

[Anonymous No.11159133]

>>11159123
fwiw an Eritrian at my college told me about the insane difficulty of maths at his high school.
he said he was surprised at how easy the classes were in america given how much more we've achieved here. gave him more reason to believe that "harder tests" doesn't equal "better students"

[Anonymous No.11159141]

>>11159133
Only people of the elite go to high school, of course it's going to have standards.

[Anonymous No.11159171]

>>11151474

The USA Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor (Feminst Liberal Progressive) believes that if a test is given for a job and no black person passes the test then that test is racist.

Proof of this insane ideology:

Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009), is a US labor law case of the United States Supreme Court on unlawful discrimination through disparate impact under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Twenty city firefighters at the New Haven Fire Department,[1] nineteen white and one Hispanic, claimed discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 after they had passed the test for promotions to management positions and the city declined to promote them. New Haven officials invalidated the test results because none of the black firefighters who took it scored high enough to be considered for the positions.

She agreed with invalidating the test results, it took the USA supreme court to over turn the ruling and let the test results stand.

[Anonymous No.11159246]

>>11151474
So when white (or gook) males require higher standards to be accepted for the same position, it's because the system is broken? That's what they're saying right?

[Anonymous No.11159260]

Cringy fedora posting aside, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWZifSXlzlI
Favorite atheist youtube video of all time.

[Anonymous No.11159263]

>>11154178
>Legitimate christian philosophy used to be discussed in these places, more so the latter than the former. Now /lit/ is filled with newfags and /christian/ is no more.

You've got it backwards. /lit/ was a full on poststructuralist haven until about 2014, when there was an influx of Christposters as the site more generally shifted conservative following gamergate. /lit/ was obsessed with Derrida and Foucault before the theology newfags took over.

[Anonymous No.11159404]

>>11151474
I did not know that was the definition of bigotry. Huh. Today I learned bigotry is scientifically backed.

[Anonymous No.11159454]

>>11159171
I mean, STDs are now sexist. I think these words have transcended morality and action and now they just apply to subjects no less indifferently than terms like hot or cold. Anymore it seems saying something is sexist against women just means women suck at it or it wasn't designed for them. You'd think intent would play a big part in whether someone or something should be deemed bigoted, but apparently not. Morality is no longer the concern. It's just a cold mathematical < or >. No more or less meaningful than being hot or cold. For fucks sake, air conditioning is sexist.

[Anonymous No.11159462]

>>11159141
>of course it's going to have standards.
the thing is its standards were apparently far above white standards at a top tier american uni.
i was surprised to hear it

[Anonymous No.11159751]

>>11158712
the average church goer world wide would either be a septuagenarian (a woman more likely than not) or Mugumbu Afrikanu

[Anonymous No.11159765]

>>11159171
The mutts winning ww2 and poisoning the world was the worst thing that could happen. I mean fuck nazi Germany they were awful but it would have eventually collapsed on its own like all autocratic dictatorships

[Anonymous No.11159771]

>>11158143
>I know that Ontological moral objects exist.
>Not "I believe"
How do you come to that conclusion? Genuinely curious.

[Anonymous No.11159937]

>>11158143
Ethics is just spook bro

[Anonymous No.11159942]

>>11159454
STDs are "sexist" in tge sense that they negatively impact one gender more than the other due, among other things, biological factors.
This, I think, is still a use of the term that is consistent with the use in social contexts. So I don't really have a problem with it.

[Anonymous No.11159957]

That's unironically correct, though. If you believe that differences between (let's say) races are not a result of systemic indifferences but instead of a quantity inherent to a specific race alone, you are saying that the races are quantifiably better than each other and are thus a racist

[Anonymous No.11159959]

>>11159957
Who cares? What does your existential state of being matter for whether you're right?

[Anonymous No.11159961]

>>11159959
>Who cares
87 posters including you, apparently

[Anonymous No.11160047]

>>11159957
Not better just distinct. If that is the definition of racism then leftists are racist cause they acknowledge that sub-Saharan Africans are dark skinned due to their biology. This is conceding a quantitative difference.

[Anonymous No.11160050]

>>11159961
No, you tard. I care about the effects of being labelled racist and the deployment of this term to terminate logic and inquiry.
Fuck it, you're not a tard. You're an insincere piece of shit who should shove yourself down an incinerator.

[Anonymous No.11160157]

>>11159765
>fuck nazi Germany they were awful

[Anonymous No.11160158]

>>11159957
>Red is fundamentally different than blue due to the wavelength of light.
>Therefore red is better and you're a colourist.

[Anonymous No.11160159]

There is nothing wrong in believing in higher powers.

But if you follow any of the Earth religions and believe they are 100% true you are a fucking retard. A complete tool.

[Anonymous No.11160162]

>>11160157
They are responsible for the collapse of West's grip on the world you dumb shit. Without them it's possible we would still have colonial empires to this day.

[Anonymous No.11160165]

>>11160162
>it's Germany's fault that nips bombed america for no reason and then the Americans went spastic and fucked everything up and create a new world paradigm where they go around destabilizing countries to steal all their resources
ok retard

[Anonymous No.11160172]

>>11160165
Americans were already supplying UK you complete idiot. Germans wouldn't win the war, offensive in Russia already slowed down before they got any help from USA. They were always fucked in the long term.

[Anonymous No.11160182]

>>11151474
>classism
>if you accuse me of being wealthier and having more life opportunities than you just because my ancestors stole land from from your ancestors and me and my family are still holding it today, you're a bigot
is classism even a thing?

[Anonymous No.11160186]

>>11155894

[Anonymous No.11160219]

>>11151474
>all languages are equally complex

[Anonymous No.11160343]

>>11160182
if you assume my ancestors had anything to do with enslaving your ancestors simply based on the colour of my skin and in spite of the fact that only a minority of people had the wealth to obtain slaves and those people were disproportionally Jewish, not European, you're a racist.

[Anonymous No.11160379]

>>11160159
That's most of people believing in higher powers though.

[Anonymous No.11160390]

>>11158190
And yet now it's getting undermined by the desert religions. Faulty concepts such as the "soul" and "self" are what is bringing about all this useless mental masturbation in Western philosophy. Good thing the scientific method is slowly disintegrating that delusion and part of "eastern philosophy" (hate using that term) was right from the very beginning on this particular point.

[Anonymous No.11160460]

>>11158683
AHHHHHHHH IM COOOOOOOMIIIINNNNGG
YYYEYHAAHAHAHAHH THE IDEA ODF YOU TORTURING MY BALLS IS SO HOT

[Anonymous No.11160579]

>>11160157
>extrajudicial killings of political opponents and allies alike rule guys am i /pol/retarded enough now?

[Anonymous No.11160586]

>>11160165
it absolutely is, hitler had no good reason to start a war with half the world

[Anonymous No.11160599]

>>11160343
what's with these /pol/ memes? there were barely any jews in america at that time

[Anonymous No.11160623]

>>11160599
All you have to do is google you brainlet.
For:
https://rense.com/general69/invo.htm
Against:
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jews-and-the-african-slave-trade/

Even the pro-jewish site acknowledges that "over 75 percent of Jewish families in Charleston, South Carolina; Richmond, Virginia; and Savannah, Georgia, owned slaves, and nearly 40 percent of Jewish households across the country did."
Far exceeding the average for Europeans. Their defense is that because they were such a small population that their total contribution was small, but it's still disproportionate.

[Anonymous No.11160634]

>>11160623
Slavery historian Jason H. Silverman describes the part of Jews in slave trading in the southern United states as "minuscule", and wrote that the historical rise and fall of slavery in the United States would not have been affected at all had there been no Jews living in the south.[14] Jews accounted for only 1.25% of all Southern slave owners.[14]

[Anonymous No.11160638]

>>11160623
Wealthy Jewish families in the American South generally preferred employing white servants rather than owning slaves.[162] Jewish slave owners included Aaron Lopez, Francis Salvador, Judah Touro, and Haym Salomon.[164]

Jewish slave owners were found mostly in business or domestic settings, rather than on plantations, so most of the slave ownership was in an urban context — running a business or as domestic servants.[161][162] Jewish slave owners freed their black slaves at about the same rate as non-Jewish slave owners.[14] Jewish slave owners sometimes bequeathed slaves to their children in their wills.[14]

[Anonymous No.11160655]

>>11160634
>Jews accounted for only 1.25% of slave owners
Nice, now tell us what the total population of Jewish people were at the time.

Also, I like how you go straight to the Against instead of the For. Why don't you have a look at that. While Jews might not have played market moving role in the purchase of slaves they certainly did in obtaining and selling them.

[Anonymous No.11160671]

>>11160623
you know a political ideology is bs when it's got no intricacy no nuance and there's one single cause to every problem so that untermensch like you can easily remember and explain away every phenomena with a simple utterance.
so you have libertarians and their gubbement, you have commies and the ebil liberal capitalists and the /pol/tard and the abominable monolithic juice

[Anonymous No.11160764]

>>11160634
Thats a kinda disingenuous take on it frankly.

According to https://ourworldindata.org/homicides and then https://www.census.gov/popclock/ we get a total homicide of about 17300.
Now you are a family of 4 who has all committed 5 homicides each but because thats just a 0.11% of the total homicides you declare that your family is definitely not part of the problem.

[Anonymous No.11161845]

>>11151474
>If the data shows my preconcieved notions are incorrect, then the data is wrong.

[Anonymous No.11161853]

>>11151474
Doesn't the statement of this imply the authors themselves are bigots?

Bigot - a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

[Anonymous No.11161920]

>>11160671
Actually Marx offers a very nuanced analysis of the power structures present in a capitalist system, while firmly placing the blame for the issues not on any group of people, but rather the system itself.

[Anonymous No.11162053]

>>11161853
no you don't understand. bigot no longer means bigot. Bigot is a new word which can only mean racism, classism, sexism, etc.

[Anonymous No.11162117]

>>11151529
>only way to acquire knowledge is through the scientific method
based mongoloid

[Anonymous No.11162216]

>another iq thread

[Anonymous No.11162283]

>>11160671
What if I told you that all three of those things are the same.

[Anonymous No.11162288]

>>11162117
And how else do you think it is possible to obtain knowledge, anon?

[Anonymous No.11162329]

>>11162288
the entire mathematical framework is "a priori" and inherently idealistic
have you even read kant?

[Anonymous No.11162541]

>>11162288
Philosophy is considered to be a way to obtain knowledge but is by no means empirical.

[Anonymous No.11162615]

>>11162288
Buy one of those DMT-filled vapes and ask aliens.

[Anonymous No.11162639]

>>11158208
It's based on the claims that Satan and god exists. It uses the religious assumption against its own.

[Anonymous No.11162640]

>>11159018
Cause white people are the only humans.

[Anonymous No.11162642]

>>11160634
>Jason (((Silverman))) denying his fellow tribesmen involvement
Color me surprised

[Anonymous No.11162646]

>>11160586
>Hitler started the war.
No
>Inb4
Muh Poland
Russia also invaded Poland.

[Anonymous No.11162651]

>>11161920
A system is never at fault, people that make it are. So no, there will always group of people at fault. Broken systems can be fixed, if it isn't fixed it isn't because it's impossible to fix, but because it works as intended.

[Anonymous No.11162655]

>>11160634
Thank you Silverman you are my greatest historian

[Anonymous No.11162656]

>>11162646
that's right he invaded half the countries in europe like a moron and inevitably lost

[Anonymous No.11162669]

>>11162656
He took a shot at greatness to defend his country. Germany was a sitting duck without more farmland. Half a million Germans were starved to death by Britain using the British navy two decades before. Was he supposed to let Germany be Britain, France and Russia’s bitch? Was he supposed to let Britain pull that switch in the next war and turn Germany into the USSR 2.0 with anti-gentile Jews in charge in a German Marxist revolution? (What almost happened the first time.) He did absolutely nothing wrong other than perhaps not having every single Junker and their families shot by based homos under Rohm.
Those men did their best and they didn’t make it, but they put the heebs, Marxists and capitalists on notice, and even forced the commies to take better care of their own people. And gave us the space program.
They didn’t get there, but they got a long way.

https://youtu.be/G8xtj9gFE90

[Anonymous No.11162675]

>>11158120
Btoh good and evil understand morals, the difference is how they understand them.
First, good tries to be moral; evil tries to look moral.
In other words, for good, morals is a tool of improvement of both self and others.
For evil it's just another tool or weapon - make yourself look as moral as possible, show off your good morality. And find excuses why others are irredeemable siners, why they need to be blamed and punished or ostracized. Use people's lack of knowledge of morals rules (that you made up yourself) and tell them doing something is fine so that you can publicly blame them for doing so and make yourself look moral and them immoral. Blame people in front of others, but make sure they do not know, so that they won't stop doing what you blame them for and you always have something to use against them. Show off by doing ridiculously generous thing for them. But don't tell them you're doing them, so that they get no benefit from them, or do things that look generous, but are useless to them (throwing pearls to the swine)
etc.

[Anonymous No.11162676]

>>11156014
He literally sucked my dick during the coffee break, you retard.

[Anonymous No.11162678]

>>11162675
Wrong and over-complicated.
Whatever is amoral, or moral in a way that is sufficiently unfamiliar, is evil.

[Anonymous No.11162707]

>>11162678
No idea what that could possibly mean.

[Anonymous No.11162710]

>>11153011
>established theology
no such thing dummy

[Anonymous No.11162833]

>>11162651
Yea you're right.
Basically Marx says "capitalism working as intended is a bad thing".

[Anonymous No.11162850]

>>11162833
Marx was a larping NEET whose predictive analysis of the world order has been thoroughly BTFOd, but people still shill his idiocy in the name of handouts and patching over their own insecurities
capitalism working as intended is not ideal but it's rich to hear that specific criticism from communists

[Anonymous No.11162862]

>>11162850
well communism never did work as intended :^)

[Anonymous No.11162870]

>>11162850
Marx is to capitalism what Manetho is to jews.

People will still advocate for marxism 3000 years from now.

[Anonymous No.11162872]

>all these butthurt christfags
top kek

[Anonymous No.11163350]

>>11151474
*Makes a study on sunburns*
*Another study on crime distribution*

[Anonymous No.11163361]

>>11159957

[Anonymous No.11163495]

>>11152150
sad truth is that most religious people just accept something and just stick to it no matter what. Ive been to many conversations that the answer to everything related to “but how do you explain that *thing* happens” is “if you have faith, you just believe it was god will. The hardest thing is to have faith.”

[Anonymous No.11163540]

>>11159957
Conclusions based on experimental evidence is by definition not bigotry.
Bigotry and racism are not synonyms no matter how much you want them to be.

[Anonymous No.11163852]

>>11163495
Most people stick to what they were told. They think that remembering what they were told means they're smart.

[Anonymous No.11163919]

>>11162870
Communism is the archetype of the lazy parasite. The person who wants without working or desires without sacrificing. They expect others to appreciate them for existing and to support them in their "work" of not working and larping as some enlightened scholar. The advocates of communism always think they'll be one of the commissars in the new order.

[Anonymous No.11164014]

>>11151524
some people have lower iqs.
if is genetic partly
do the math