1. the word human has been defined countless times. If you have trouble with that, open a dictionary.
2. That's called trolling.
3. Hmm, I'm not even going to address point 3, as point 2, and a review of the thread, tells me I've just been taken for a ride. Congratulations, I don't usually get taken in, I guess it's how damned sincere you sounded, like you really -meant- what you were saying.
Everyone being created equal is a philosophical ideal, not a practical or factual one. Demanding factual proof for that statement is sorta've like demanding factual proof for the existence of god...
It's a guiding ideal based on the essential quality of being Human, not intellectual or physical ability. To deny that everyone is created equal is to say that some people are intrinsically more "human" than others, better, more deserving of life, etc. That is an equally baseless philosophical ideal that encourages abhorrent laws like, say, "Black people are intrinsically lesser than White people, therefore they should all be slaves."
You have to be willing to accept philosophy as a valid subject of debate before you can start arguing about it. If you insist on ignoring the entire basis for one particular statement, you may as well just ignore the argument entirely, since all you're going to accomplish is, well, trolling the thread.
You misrepresented his position with an extreme example entirely unrelated to his original statement.
His statement, which does indeed apply to individuals with a higher than average social status does not at all apply to individuals at the rock-bottom of social status. Your attempt at hyperbole was a failure, and constitutes a logical fallacy in and of itself.
Plus, I've got mod points to burn, but felt like arguing the issue instead of just pinging you, since you're above-average for a Slashdot debator, even if you are still wrong.
Hyperbole isn't just a glorified Mad-lib, you've got to have a valid point.
A statement that applies for one group (Upper Middle-class tech workers) might not apply for another group (Impoverished disaster victims). That doesn't mean the original statement is in any way incorrect.
Evolution is a Theory in the Scientific Sense, "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
This is why it counts as "Science"
Intelligent Design is a theory in the colloquial sense, which is what most of the definitions that include "Idle speculation" are referring to. There is no Scientific Backing for Intelligent Design, which is why, if it's taught in a classroom, it should be a theology class, not a Science Class.
Slashdot Mirror
A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
I haven't been using any extrodinary definition of the word human, and it should have been fairly obvious from the context.
1. the word human has been defined countless times. If you have trouble with that, open a dictionary.
2. That's called trolling.
3. Hmm, I'm not even going to address point 3, as point 2, and a review of the thread, tells me I've just been taken for a ride. Congratulations, I don't usually get taken in, I guess it's how damned sincere you sounded, like you really -meant- what you were saying.
*Sigh*
Human
Quit attacking semantics, and start attacking the arguement.
Uh, that's it. Being Human.
Used in a Sentence, "I'm more human than you are"
or "I'm a better human being than you."
etc. etc.
Everyone being created equal is a philosophical ideal, not a practical or factual one. Demanding factual proof for that statement is sorta've like demanding factual proof for the existence of god...
It's a guiding ideal based on the essential quality of being Human, not intellectual or physical ability. To deny that everyone is created equal is to say that some people are intrinsically more "human" than others, better, more deserving of life, etc. That is an equally baseless philosophical ideal that encourages abhorrent laws like, say, "Black people are intrinsically lesser than White people, therefore they should all be slaves."
You have to be willing to accept philosophy as a valid subject of debate before you can start arguing about it. If you insist on ignoring the entire basis for one particular statement, you may as well just ignore the argument entirely, since all you're going to accomplish is, well, trolling the thread.
Baatezu, Tanar'Ri, Yugoloths..
Oh, wait, wrong rule of threes
You misrepresented his position with an extreme example entirely unrelated to his original statement.
His statement, which does indeed apply to individuals with a higher than average social status does not at all apply to individuals at the rock-bottom of social status. Your attempt at hyperbole was a failure, and constitutes a logical fallacy in and of itself.
Plus, I've got mod points to burn, but felt like arguing the issue instead of just pinging you, since you're above-average for a Slashdot debator, even if you are still wrong.
Hyperbole isn't just a glorified Mad-lib, you've got to have a valid point.
A statement that applies for one group (Upper Middle-class tech workers) might not apply for another group (Impoverished disaster victims). That doesn't mean the original statement is in any way incorrect.
Erm, you're good at logical fallacies, so good you -committed- one when trying to show the existence of an entirely different one.
A varient of the Straw Man Referred to as the Extreme Man on this site.
*Ahem*
Old News
I'm confused.
What exactly are you trying to say?
You seem to have confused the Word Theory.
Evolution is a Theory in the Scientific Sense, "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
This is why it counts as "Science"
Intelligent Design is a theory in the colloquial sense, which is what most of the definitions that include "Idle speculation" are referring to. There is no Scientific Backing for Intelligent Design, which is why, if it's taught in a classroom, it should be a theology class, not a Science Class.
Being -in- the Military right now, my point of view on this is somewhat different than yours.
You Sick Bastard.
Tobacco?
Whatever
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/A_w inner_is_you
While more militant atheists who actively try to convert others to nonbelief, might qualify...
A Lack of Belief is not a zealously held belief or cause.
What, exactly, is religious about Atheism?
I mean, is there something religious about not believing in Santa Claus anymore either?
As long as it wasn't classified, and he didn't come into possession of it by stealing from Embassy Mailboxes, there's nothing illegal about it.
dear casualsax,
you have a stick up your ass.
Kindly remove it
Which is why he included Interest Rates and home ownership...
The latter being one of the best economic indicators possible.
Underwater tests are already conducted, seeing as working underwater is the closest terrestrial condition to weightlessness possible...
It never would have had this problem in the first place if they saved it's state after it defeated it's father.
it's really not very hard to demonize the french, considering most of us Americans hated them -before- their UN antics
Definantely the work of Jaquio...