Let me ask you this: did we really need a pod race? What does it establish? What does it add? Is it exciting? And yet we spend a good half hour on that bullshit on Tatooine, half an hour that could have been spent observing the ways of the Force. I wonder if there's even a hundred people who liked the original trilogy who had a positive opinion on Watto. Was that something we needed, George Fucking Lucas?
No, the focus of the prequel trilogy was human drama, which is never enticing. If it had actually been about the force it would have been amazing, but instead it was about fucking Jar-Jar, Anakin's anxiety, and stillborn babies.
I like the name; I think it's good. The most interesting part of star wars is the force (and the jedi, as the primary force users). Suggesting that the force is central to the story by naming it in the title gives me hope.
Presumably the chess player; the checkers player would not recognize the importance of what the chess player perceives to be the checkers player's king piece. The checkers player would only win once all of the opposing pieces were removed, but the chess player would only have to remove the checkers player's king.
It also says right inside that God turned someone into a pillar of salt for disobeying him. Doesn't that sound like something an evil creature would do?
Goddammit, you're making me want to go out and try to convert jehova's witnesses again
It is very much reason -- if there is a being of such power that he can both hide himself as well as his influence from us while at the same time influencing everything we do, we would never be able to know if that was the case. It's just unlikely to be true. Read this for more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
The problem with this is the "discussion" part. There will be no discussion, because to have a discussion the participants need to agree to the same rules, which they don't do. Scientists will not accept appeals to the bible as valid justification, and creationists will not accept observable phenomena as evidence.
You can turn that kind of reasoning back on itself. "How do you know that Satan didn't plant the bible to tempt you away from the path of science?" All the justifications for the veracity of the statements in the bible are statements made in the bible itself. That kind of circularity is exactly what a deceiver would set up to tempt those who are easily led astray.
None, if you're a modal hyperrealist about possible worlds. However, since the death of David Lewis there aren't very many of those left.
"None" is a bit too strong actually, since the number of fantasy convention goers who claim that the reality of, say, Hogwarts is actual rather than merely possible is negligible compared to the number of religious people who claim the existence of some deity or other is actual.
You can't play chess if your opponent insists on playing checkers with the same pieces. There are rules that govern rational debate; through the correct application of these rules we can come closer to the truth. If one side doesn't follow the rules (for instance, they consider "but it says in the bible that x" a valid argument), a debate is impossible. That's why you can't debate creationists: they're not playing by the same rules.
Have you ever noticed how all weapons are physical objects? Clearly the only logical implication to draw from this is that all physical objects are evil.
not a belief system. Some followed "the way of the samurai" (really neo-confuscianism), and others were (zen) buddhist or shinto adherents, often at the same time.
Sometimes I wish the US had a government appointed Mother to deal with morons like these, incapable of not acting like little children. Yes, very clever, you gave Sally a cookie to say Jimmy has cooties so Jenny won't like him anymore. Well done.
Both because there is no direct relation between being able to operate a machine designed to be as intuitively to operate as possible and actually having tech skills and because if they were they would be playing the PS4, which is technologically superior.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it was their lack of political acumen rather than the massive disparity in technological development that caused their enslavement, well spotted.
Let me ask you this: did we really need a pod race? What does it establish? What does it add? Is it exciting? And yet we spend a good half hour on that bullshit on Tatooine, half an hour that could have been spent observing the ways of the Force. I wonder if there's even a hundred people who liked the original trilogy who had a positive opinion on Watto. Was that something we needed, George Fucking Lucas?
That means you're part of the problem. Politics are just the fucking worst.
No, the focus of the prequel trilogy was human drama, which is never enticing. If it had actually been about the force it would have been amazing, but instead it was about fucking Jar-Jar, Anakin's anxiety, and stillborn babies.
I like the name; I think it's good. The most interesting part of star wars is the force (and the jedi, as the primary force users). Suggesting that the force is central to the story by naming it in the title gives me hope.
Presumably the chess player; the checkers player would not recognize the importance of what the chess player perceives to be the checkers player's king piece. The checkers player would only win once all of the opposing pieces were removed, but the chess player would only have to remove the checkers player's king.
It also says right inside that God turned someone into a pillar of salt for disobeying him. Doesn't that sound like something an evil creature would do?
Goddammit, you're making me want to go out and try to convert jehova's witnesses again
It is very much reason -- if there is a being of such power that he can both hide himself as well as his influence from us while at the same time influencing everything we do, we would never be able to know if that was the case. It's just unlikely to be true. Read this for more http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
You can posit the existence of Satan without positing the existence of God. Wikipedia gnosticism/demiurge
Judging from your inability to grasp analogies, if you want to play chess then I guess you're forcing me to play checkers, yes.
Mod parent up. Not all points of view are created equal.
The problem with this is the "discussion" part. There will be no discussion, because to have a discussion the participants need to agree to the same rules, which they don't do. Scientists will not accept appeals to the bible as valid justification, and creationists will not accept observable phenomena as evidence.
You can turn that kind of reasoning back on itself. "How do you know that Satan didn't plant the bible to tempt you away from the path of science?" All the justifications for the veracity of the statements in the bible are statements made in the bible itself. That kind of circularity is exactly what a deceiver would set up to tempt those who are easily led astray.
None, if you're a modal hyperrealist about possible worlds. However, since the death of David Lewis there aren't very many of those left.
"None" is a bit too strong actually, since the number of fantasy convention goers who claim that the reality of, say, Hogwarts is actual rather than merely possible is negligible compared to the number of religious people who claim the existence of some deity or other is actual.
You can't play chess if your opponent insists on playing checkers with the same pieces. There are rules that govern rational debate; through the correct application of these rules we can come closer to the truth. If one side doesn't follow the rules (for instance, they consider "but it says in the bible that x" a valid argument), a debate is impossible. That's why you can't debate creationists: they're not playing by the same rules.
Thinking of actual gold-colored blood, I was expecting a human/arachnid hybrid. A spider-man, if you will.
I may have bad news for you regarding your ontological status, provided you are not a ghost, spirit, or otherwise disembodied soul.
Have you ever noticed how all weapons are physical objects? Clearly the only logical implication to draw from this is that all physical objects are evil.
not a belief system. Some followed "the way of the samurai" (really neo-confuscianism), and others were (zen) buddhist or shinto adherents, often at the same time.
You can only copy it. It's not theft when the original owner is not deprived of the goods.
Sometimes I wish the US had a government appointed Mother to deal with morons like these, incapable of not acting like little children. Yes, very clever, you gave Sally a cookie to say Jimmy has cooties so Jenny won't like him anymore. Well done.
If I had no logic, then this sentence could not contain a conditional.
Wait, do you mean to say someone DIED from GETTING SHOT IN THE EYE? What the fuck? That doesn't make any sense at all.
No, because the price differential between ferraris and other cars is vastly greater than that between xbones and PS4s.
Both because there is no direct relation between being able to operate a machine designed to be as intuitively to operate as possible and actually having tech skills and because if they were they would be playing the PS4, which is technologically superior.