Jenelope Johnson

@TytheGreat4 @avidseries Lol

@JenelopeJohnson @avidseries Degenerate

Which one do you like the least?

@HairyPolitical @TheRealFarley You're retarded, my friend

@JenelopeJohnson @TheRealFarley Yeah you're a clown

I’m tired of having to look at Junkies all around me, doing drugs, breaking into cars, and nobody wants to run them out of our city. Portland is ugly and disgusting. I hate it here. And I won’t apologize for calling it out.

@HairyPolitical @SeanOTracey2 @TheRealFarley It kept a lot of these people safely off the streets, so pretty well generally

@JenelopeJohnson @SeanOTracey2 @TheRealFarley How well has criminalization helped so far? And thats very nazi of you🤦‍♂️🤣

@TytheGreat4 @avidseries How people manage to dislike Putin more than Netanyahu is beyond me

@avidseries The only respectable answer is Putin, but part of me certainly wanted to juice the numbers for Starmer or Erdogan screw them

@christopherrufo I want to read it, but the prose is so abominable I fear I'll never be able to

I read the first hundred pages of The Road last year, and read the first hundred pages of Blood Meridian this year, and in both instances, gave up, because the books never clicked. Lyrical writing, but the characters are reduced to way down Maslow's hierarchy, and the tone is so relentlessly bleak, with almost no humanity breaking through, it was difficult to feel anything besides the flint clicking against the cold steel in the overwhelming darkness. I know many of you love it, but to me, it's overwrought, overstylized, and overhyped.

@HairyPolitical @SeanOTracey2 @TheRealFarley Realistic plan to fix things: criminalize drugs, force druggies into rehab, or institutionalize them if they refuse

@SeanOTracey2 @TheRealFarley And look, no actual plan on how to fix things. Just run away and ignore it because it hurts your feelings. But you're right in one aspect. All drugs should be legalized, regulated, and taxed

@HairyPolitical @TheRealFarley

@TheRealFarley Oh so you lack funds and resources just like them but you're better simply because you don't do drugs?

@cfryant @elonmusk @elonmusk why is this guy even at X at all? He seems completely toxic

Guess I shouldn't be surprised at this point. I owe all the people who told me early an apology, everything you said about Nikita being completely unprofessional, for seemingly no reason has been proven 100% correct. @elonmusk If you follow this thread you will see what I and many others have experienced first hand. He seems purposely unhelpful and more interested in excuses than actually coming up with solutions. Please don't take my word for it, see for yourself. X deserves a better head of product.

@TheNewPolicy @Grummz No more scammers and bots *without VPNs*, you mean.

@Grummz Yes. No more African, Israeli, and Indian scammers and bots. Not racist, simply a fact.

Are you gonna use this?

@Angel_Abdiel01 @wil_da_beast630 I also never claimed to be an expert. That's another lie that you're using as a cop-out. But I'm glad you acknowledged your "epistemology" is both based on faith and utility - the true tools of a perverse worldview.

@Angel_Abdiel01 @wil_da_beast630 You can prove the outcome of a war because you can demonstrate it. Can you demonstrate a deity and extraordinary supernatural claims manifesting physically? No, you cannot. Thus, there is no reason to accept them. Doing so would be a perversion. The burden of proof is on you.

There are a lot of very PRACTICAL problems with religion. For my Buddhists and very trad Christians: the global population has increased from 50M to 8B over just a few years. Where are all these new "souls"......coming from?

@reddit_lies @nikitabier This is not reassuring.

@nikitabier This is very reassuring then, glad you're addressing the reply spam.

This is a bad idea. One of the reasons Reddit is so bad was because of the upvote/downvote system. If dislikes suppress posts in the timeline, X will rapidly descend into an echochamber.

@TomMore9 @wil_da_beast630 I appreciate that. Though my point still stands.

@JenelopeJohnson @wil_da_beast630 I've posted some links (Kreeft) with short audios addressing many of your notions and misunderstandings.

@Angel_Abdiel01 @wil_da_beast630 That's a utilitarian reason to defend it. That's fine, I'm just saying that's an entirely different reason than defending an ideology because it is factually true. They're different. Utilitarianism is not an epistemology, by the way.

The reason I defend it when you’re going to reject it is because Christianity is the best basis for civilizational success and moral conduct ever preached. I don’t think you know very much about it and in your ignorance are entirely dismissive of it. You can’t even fathom what a world without the Christian God would look like, and you’ve almost certainly never tried. You’re really not all that big on addressing other people’s claims, ironically, as you completely ignored any that I’ve made to you, and you falsely accused me of doing the same. I’ll break it down for you. Your claim: “Christianity is obviously false” Then I respond with a bunch of my own claims and ideas, which you ignored. So yeah, epistemologically illiterate. Felt good in the moment. Stand by it.

@Angel_Abdiel01 @wil_da_beast630 Yes, the fundamental assertions of Christianity that are held as literally true (such as virgin births, resurrecting from the dead, material transmutstion, etc) are, definitively, obvious falsehoods. They are stated as faith conjectures, not as facts.

@JenelopeJohnson @wil_da_beast630 Your literal first claim was “Christianity is obviously false” and that was the basis for your implicit claim about truth and utility.

@TomMore9 @wil_da_beast630 This one. You can call it the belief of the culture, but if you hold it to be true, it is your belief as well. x.com/i/status/20343…

@JenelopeJohnson @wil_da_beast630 I'm sorry, but which premises did I state as predicated upon faith? And I see you use "faith" in the remote Kantian sense which I find absurd. Catholicism is the only radically coherent worldview. You are projecting your notions upon me as if they were mine. Its the culture.

@Angel_Abdiel01 @wil_da_beast630 If you admit you can't prove it, why defend it when others reject it? My claim is that: truth exists independent of, and is not subordinate to, utility. You can call that "epistemologically illiterate", "stupid" etc, but, again, those are not arguments. Have a nice day.

You’re confused about who the swine is. No, I’m not angry. I merely pointed out your own “argument”, since you’re so sensitive about that word, fallaciously states that Christianity is “obviously false” and then makes no evidentiary effort to support itself. You can’t prove it empirically anymore than I could prove the opposite. But you just make the claim and then somehow think you’re right because you said so. You’re epistemologically illiterate. You did the meme, so you got Reddit man. It was just a stupid thing to write, on its face. Then you turn around and list a whole bunch of “fallacies” while again making no effort to connect them to any claims I made, all of which were true and defensible. You don’t even know what “argument” means or how it works. You’re just stating random, baseless things and then assuming a really childish and pedantic tone of superiority. You write like you’re 12 years old.

@TomMore9 @wil_da_beast630 @tmunkky That's fine, it's an enormous subject. But I will remind you that it cannot be "radically coherent" if it asserts premises that are founded on faith (such as listed above), and that can't be defended by claiming others are ignorant if you can't defend it yourself.

@JenelopeJohnson @wil_da_beast630 @tmunkky I don't think I can explain western philosophy from the presocratics through to today on the nature of causality in a few posts here, so I'll give you a link to Peter Kreefts (Boston College) beautifully lucid site. Ed Feser is worldclass. peterkreeft.com/audio.htm

@TomMore9 @wil_da_beast630 @tmunkky What do you mean by "get going"? If you're presupposing a "first" cause, that's a circular argument. It follows that causes are caused by previous causes. It does not follow that a cause can initiate itself.

@JenelopeJohnson @wil_da_beast630 @tmunkky Because the whole series cannot get going if the only type of causes require actualization by something already actualized. Its our common experience of causation. Noteworthy that the Big Bang is a "singularity".

@Angel_Abdiel01 @tmunkky @wil_da_beast630 Your response never addressed my claim. You created assumptions, appealed to prominence, and attacked character. I suppose you're angry, and that's fine. But it doesn't advance the conversation. As you say, pearls before swine.

@JenelopeJohnson @tmunkky @wil_da_beast630 I like how you think you made an argument somehow but I don’t. Like do you just not know what the word means?