Ecomp :)

@SavvyGCali @dpf11100 @TheNicheWhisper @angryaboutbikes Where do you think private industry gets its money from

@dpf11100 @TheNicheWhisper @angryaboutbikes The only money government gets is by taxing the private industry. They cannot recycle their own cash without printing, and thus causing inflation.

Can someone please study the workings of this socialist magic trick known as 'paying some workers to do a thing that the government wants to be done'

@TheNicheWhisper @angryaboutbikes Public deficit is private surplus.

@angryaboutbikes You're being dishonest. It's easy to pay workers to fix a problem. The hard part is affording it. You can do anything that requires money, when you go into debt to pay for it... the problem is that those debts have to be repaid. Socialism forgets about the paying it back part

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn There's no principle that says a non-willed system has to produce all possible outcomes. A die roll doesn't roll every number simultaneously. Why should we expect a non-willed necessary being to produce all possible universes simultaneously?

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn So how do you know that, what's the epistemic Justification for that then

Theists: "Something can't come from nothing!" Also theists: "Nothing created God!"

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn And if all it can do is create only one universe(ours)? Why is that impossible?

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn So you have not been listening to the point, because if it didn't then every universe could be created, which is absurd and impossible to account for

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Exactly. So the necessary being doesn't necessarily have a will.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn That's an arbitrary standard you have yet to justify, if I can doesn't mean i ONLY can, that's a separate limitation that must be Justified

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn And if all it can do is create the universe as we know it?

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn That's because that's the only scenario where a single universe is Coherent, if I can will a universe and have the power to do so, I have the power to will more but I choose not to, but if this force is impersonal and without a will it must do what it can.

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn You're still working on the presumption that the creative force has a will and makes choices, when that's exactly what's being brought into question here.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn So if it's capable how do you know it doesn't create every single thing that it can, if it can create the universe So if I manufacture a certain product A am I limited to only manufacturing product A for the rest of my life? Or can I do product B as a variation of product A?

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn I didn't say it was only capable of creating what was created, I said that was the extent of what it necessarily needs to be able to create. It doesn't need to be all powerful, just powerful enough to bring about our own universe.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn That doesn't make any sense, if it can create all of this, what's to stop it with creating another version of all of this, or another another version of all of this? And so on? How do you know that it's only capable of creating what it has created?

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn It only needs to be capable of creating what was created.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn If something is the ground of being itself and is the origin of all being, then it should be capable of creating anything, that's just the inference

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Who says the something needs to be capable of doing anything possible? Why is that a requirement of the necessary being?

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Then explain how exactly determinism is limiting something's acts in a way where its capability is there to do anything but it doesn't do anything more than whatever we're seeing

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn It's an available option. I'm not ruling out a will as an available constraining mechanism, but you are ruling out every other constraining mechanism aside from will without justification.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn You just said it would, but you didn't actually give a reason as to why there is a limitation

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn I did both tell you how(it would be constrained either deterministicly or stochasticly) and also told you what will does(constrains the outcome)

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn That's a different question, why did you dodge from the original prompt

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Not a someone, a something. Why can't the something be constrained by what it makes, either deterministically or stochastically? You're already assuming constraints by introducing a will.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Tell me how you have a particular world that can be created by someone without a will that doesn't involve blindly creating everything it can, what does a will do in the first place?

@03stranger_ @LinkofSunshine Undiagnosed asthma, unknown environmental allergies, anxiety disorders, stress, undiagnosed heart problems, wildfire smoke particles, city smog particles, the common cold, post-covid lung damage, proximity to tobacco or weed smokers, prior damage from the aforementioned, etc, etc

@EcompVideo @LinkofSunshine unless you think i have spontaneous unexplained bouts of breathing issues like a sickly victorian child i don’t know how this is supposed to be the case

There is basically 0 hard evidence that airborne allergies exist outside of extremely rare circumstances In one experiment, they just straight up held 29 people 3-inches away from a thing of peanut butter and found not a single one had anything close to a reaction

@03stranger_ @LinkofSunshine Confirmation bias, you don't notice the times when you sneeze and have trouble breathing but nobody around is eating peanuts.

@EcompVideo @LinkofSunshine x.com/03stranger_/st…

@03stranger_ @LinkofSunshine That's anxiety

@LinkofSunshine a perfectly undisturbed thing of peanut butter might not cause reactions yeah but i personally have started having allergy symptoms when someone was eating peanuts near me and particles started drifting my way

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Asserting it over and over again doesn't justify the assertion.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Because it can't decide, it's not able to choose or will, if it can it does and must do. Again if it can create without a will, it does do that and must do it Math doesn't create, it's a particular system that's infallible and is already there, it isn't invented

@LinkofSunshine It's basically a thing they tell kids and parents so they can keep themselves and others safe because reactions do happen when Grubby Gary doesn't wash his peanut butter hands and then tags Allergy Alice during recess.

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Why does it have to make everything if it doesn't decide what to make? It can't be randomly selected? It's produce can't follow naturally? Any mathematic function is entirely impersonal but they only ever produce a single constrained result. A die roll only lands on one number.

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Because it can't decide, it isn't personal and if it can make, without a will it must make everything. Because without a mind there is no will, without a will you can't actually decide or choose or have any type of autonomy Personality is defined by having these things.

@OrthoIconodule @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Why would it have to make every universe? Why can't something mindless do only one thing? Also how can you tell that it is having personal interactions?

@EcompVideo @Viki_Therian @HingleMcCr64580 @McClureShawn Because it has personal interactions, it's not an impersonal monad or One that just emanates. If it wasn't personal and didn't have a mind, it would have to make every universe, it would have to make everything, but it didn't.