𝚂𝚝𝚊𝚗 𝙿𝚊𝚝𝚝𝚘𝚗

@SeedOilDsrspctr @amazingatheist @OtitoNosike Seriousness & broad consideration, even if it makes you slightly less competitive than someone who doesn't uphold these.

@amazingatheist @OtitoNosike What do you imagine replacing the Competence Hierarchy with?

I have never understood, and still do not understand, why people loathe Jordan Peterson. For me, he is the most compelling philosopher of the 21st century. His ideas have reshaped how the modern man, particularly in the West, sees himself. And this is not even limited to the West. Any sensible young man can recognize the value in his thinking; lessons that, if practiced as he presents them, have the power to turn one’s life around.

@AleMartnezR1 There is no such thing as necessity in an absolute sense. Necessitation is always per modal constraints.

Explanation of the Anselmian OA. Premise 1: H(x) → C(x) If something is hypothetical/conditional, it is by definition contingent. If its "necessity" depends on a "hipótesis" or condition, it isn't truly necessary in an absolute sense. Premise 2: ¬C(God) This is the "Definition Rule." In classical theism and modal logic (like that of Alvin Plantinga or Anselm), God is defined as a Necessary Being. Therefore, God is not contingent. Conclusion: ∴ ¬H(God) Since God is not contingent, and all hypothetical things are contingent, God cannot be hypothetical.

@leftistssuck1 @beyoncegarden If this is a false flag account you're doing a good job at it

@beyoncegarden Are all these leftists on meth? They all talk fast, use a lot of words and never reslly say much

he CLEARED him so bad i’m crying he just wouldn’t answer😭

@AStrasser116 I don't justify intuition unless I have no better option (like when I'm under pressure to act quickly).

Or maybe there is no such thing as an intuition at all, there is simply a seeming or maybe just a disposition to believe without a seeming. Whatever it is, I'd say it is prima facie justified if no defeater. I just don't really care if intuitions are sui generis or not

Some people doubt the evidential value of intuitions because they don't think intuitions are some unique thing over and above something like inclinations to believe. I think whether intuitions are sui generis is irrelevant to whether intuitions are justified

@AleMartnezR1 There are different modalities. E.g., God can be merely possible in one modality while necessary in another. It's important to specify the modal provisions of your operators so that you don't inadvertently "define things into existence."

The concept of God is the concept of a necessarily existing being. A necessarily existing being cannot exist contingently. Therefore, either: God’s existence is impossible, or God’s existence is necessary. The concept of God is not self-contradictory (i.e., not impossible). Therefore, God’s existence is necessary. If God exists necessarily, then God exists in all possible worlds. Therefore, God exists (in the actual world).

@SpeedWatkins @darwintojesus Amen.

@darwintojesus We both have meaningful relationships with our wives and children. Now suppose God does not exist. Does that supposition change anything about the relationships we have with them? It is strange to suggest that a “No” answer is a “cope.” That’s not even prima facie plausible.

Is this the greatest atheist cope?

@TrumpforBrenda Spamming the cross as freakin' bullet points They really don't think much of us Christians, do they

Why is Greg Goode inserting himself into a grieving family’s situation for political gain? Invoking the name of someone who can’t speak for himself isn’t leadership—it’s opportunism. Real Christian values don’t exploit a widow’s grief. District 38 deserves better.

The crusades were justified. It's okay to believe in something.

@PageauJonathan x.com/StanRockPatton…

@nicksortor @EAMckinstry Probably because if a legal immigrant gets attacked by such a dog, they'd just say the person hit the dog and get them deported. You need to have a more pro-freedom, healthy skepticism about disingenuous legislation like this.

@EAMckinstry I mean, that’s what they voted for!

🚨 JUST IN: The US House has PASSED the BOWOW Act, which makes any non-citizen who assaults or harms a federal working dog AUTOMATICALLY deportable, 228-190 This comes after an Egyptian man KICKED CBP Detection Dog Freddie, who caught him SMUGGLING illegal goods into the US Good boy, Freddie! Of course, most Democrats voted against this.

@michaeljknowles Time to start behaving like you really believe it, Michael.

Because he's God. (Saved you a lengthy read...)

@Ponch1620 @AleMartnezR1 @AristotleRevolt @CatholicCo200 @MartinTweats @HDYGTYQL @NathanRoszman @Remithephilguy @RodRuiz14 @Christobvious @Ben_Jobe85 Correct. Something's existence can be necessitated per some concept but that doesn't mean it's real (since the concept may not reflect reality). We avoid this bug by relativizing necessity to constraints at play: open.substack.com/pub/stanpatton…

@AleMartnezR1 @AristotleRevolt @CatholicCo200 @MartinTweats @HDYGTYQL @NathanRoszman @Remithephilguy @RodRuiz14 @Christobvious @Ben_Jobe85 You can't define God into existence...

Another Ontological Formulation 1. Only beings whose non-existence is conceivable without contradiction are gods (lower-case g). 2. God is not a god (lower-case g). Conclusion Therefore, God’s non-existence is not conceivable without contradiction. Premise 1: The Definition of "gods" ​This premise suggests that if a being is a "lower-case god" (like Zeus or Thor), it is a contingent being. You can imagine a world where they don't exist without breaking the laws of logic. Their existence is "possible" but not "required." ​Premise 2: The Distinction of "God" ​This premise defines the "Upper-case God" as a Necessary Being. In philosophy (specifically in the tradition of St. Anselm or Alvin Plantinga), God is defined as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived." If God’s non-existence involves a logical contradiction, then God exists by necessity. ​The Conclusion ​The conclusion forces a categorical split. It asserts that "God" belongs to a different ontological category than "gods." While gods are part of the furniture of the universe (like planets or people), God is the foundation of existence itself.

Like Gandalf the White, I return (albeit briefly), bringing tidings of my final philosophy effort, a new way of expressing & framing modal logic that clobbers a number of paradoxes. If you liked my posts here, you will surely enjoy their culmination (type URL shown). I miss you!

@RealKeatonHobby @ZelenskyyUa The borders of freedom run along Ukraine's war front.

@ZelenskyyUa Zelenskyy talks tough, but endless aid isn't America's job. Negotiate peace with Putin now—focus on our borders first.

I don't need historical shit to end this war and move to diplomacy. Because it's just a delay tactic. I read no less history books than Putin. And I learned a lot. I know more about his country than he knows about Ukraine. Simply because I have been to Russia – to many cities. And I knew a lot of people there. He has never been to Ukraine this many times. He was only in big cities. I went to small cities. From the northern part to the southern part. Everywhere. I know their mentality. That's why I don't want to lose time on all these things. It's about them. They decided to have such a system. The Russians decided to change themselves. The Russians decided that they needed a new Tsar. It's up to them. But there is security. There is a big war waged against us. This is our lives. The only thing that I want to speak about with him is that I think that we need to resolve it in the most successful way. I mean to end this war quickly. That is why I want to speak only about such things.

@AleMartnezR1 @AristotleRevolt @ItalianPolish @gmanm1 @ArgumentsGod I don't even accept premise 2 as a Christian

Atheism's logical problem ​A → ¬G (Atheism entails the negation of God) ​G ↔ □E (Definition: God is equivalent to Necessary Existence) ​∴ A → ¬□E (Therefore, Atheism entails the negation of Necessary Existence) @AristotleRevolt @ItalianPolish @gmanm1 @ArgumentsGod @HDYGTYQL @IamJonte_ @CatholicCo200 @camwg86 @CertainSpeaks @darwintojesus @sakalbu @java_warrior @lamelaza7_ @jdogmac117830 @LuxVigilans @NathanRoszman @DerekMcAllister @XAverroes @Redsabr @Thelpsuxicus @logistrix @Remithephilguy

@yechiipeng @Phayvhor_ Science says our familiar thermodynamic setting began at some point, but it cannot say whether that setting is the whole of natural reality.

@Phayvhor_ Because science says the universe began at some point. Are you going to shun both believers and science?

If you say nobody created God, and that he is self existing Why can't you say the universe is self existing too?

@pops095 @OfftheDimmadome @LatFilosof 🫡 I think I did a vid like that with Lance... it's all so hazy now

@OfftheDimmadome @LatFilosof @StanRockPatton is the bomb.

A funny insight lately: the way atheism gets strawmanned online as — “you deny God, so you must deny objective meaning, universals, purpose, value, beauty, love, etc”, doesn’t apply to most atheists. But… I'm guilty as charged. (I would deny those as a theist too btw)

@greg_price11 politico.com/video/2018/02/…

To my leftist friends: I do not care that a leftist agitator got himself killed because he decided to arm himself with a gun and venture out to resist ICE, nor the other one who sped her car at an ICE agent while fleeing arrest, nor do I care about the little kid who was detained with his illegal alien father. And neither do you, because all you care about are turning people-- whose deaths never would have happened if you people didn't have a psychopathic opposition to lawful immigration enforcement-- into martyrs who can be used to justify ending deportations, which you want because it's the biggest threat to Democratic political power. What I do care about is the fact that there are millions of illegal aliens that have invaded my country. Your party are the ones who spent the previous 4 years importing as many of them into America as possible-- allowing millions of foreign military-aged men to cross the southern border and resettling them all around the country with our tax dollars. You didn't give a crap about the thousands of unaccompanied children that smugglers dropped off at the border-- nor the thousands that went missing-- in one of the biggest child trafficking operations in the world that happened because of your party. You didn't care about real victims like Laken Riley, Jocelyn Nungaray, and Rachel Morin-- not agitators trying to obstruct law enforcement-- but innocent people who were minding their own business when they were brutally murdered by criminal illegal aliens that Biden released into the country. But you people have decided that it's imperative that these illegals be able to stay. That somebody fresh over the border from Honduras is just as American as the rest of us. That somebody with such disrespect for our country that their first contribution to it was breaking our immigration laws should be given the same rights as every American. That they should be allowed to continue stealing jobs, driving up housing costs, and mooching off American taxpayers. And you want this for one reason and one reason only: Because it's the only way you can continue winning elections. You don't actually care about any of these people. You just want to give them citizenship so they can vote for Democrats and count them in the census so that blue states have more electoral votes than they deserve. All you want is to import as many foreigners as possible and give them a stake in the political future of our country so that Democrats can rule forever without the consent from actual Americans who you couldn't give two craps about. And you of course don't actually want to deal with the consequences of mass immigration. The places you live are not the ones where massive demographic changes have happened almost overnight. You'll continue living in your majority-white affluent communities while working class Americans deal with the influx of your new class of voters. And now, you are have decided that burning down the entire country is worth it if it means your precious illegal aliens get to stay. Your politicians are the ones have actively encouraged the riots in places like Minneapolis and radicalized people into thinking they have a right to obstruct lawful immigration enforcement. Renee good and Alex Pretti are dead because of you. I, along with 77 million other Americans, voted for a government that promised mass deportations. And that doesn't mean just gang members and criminals. It means every single person who crossed the border illegally or has overstayed their visa. It doesn't matter if they're a murderer or uber eats driver. We voted to get rid of them all because America is a sovereign nation that has the right to deport people with no right to be here in the first place. So no, I simply do not care about any of the sob stories that you manufacture on a daily basis to emotionally manipulate people against lawful enforcement of our immigration laws. I don't care if federal agents wearing masks triggers you, I don't care about your tug-at-the-heartstrings propaganda, and I especially don't care that your illegal alien "neighbors" feel scared. We're sick of being told we're bad people for objecting to the hordes of third-world illegals that you brought here without our consent. The moment you decide that Americans matter more to you than protecting illegals is the moment the chaos and death comes to an end. But you won't because all you are useful idiots for a machine that seeks to make Americans poor and miserable in the country their ancestors built.

@zypldot @ddale8 "Love does not delight in deception, but rejoices in the truth." - 1 Corinthians 13

@ddale8 So, it wasn't a "fake" image. It was an "altered" image of a real person who broke the law and was arrested. But keep on playing the fool.

The White House has confirmed its official X account posted a fake image of a woman arrested in Minnesota after interrupting a service at a church where an ICE official appears to be a pastor. The White House image altered the actual photo to wrongly make it seem like the defendant was sobbing. Asked for comment, the White House sent a link to a spokesperson’s X post that said, “Enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue.”

@CaseyReadReeder @Electriz27 @luscofusch It's just none of that requires dualism about *substances*. It's certainly a bridge too far to suggest that naturalists are rationally forced into that position.

@Electriz27 @luscofusch The obvious argument is that naturalists place all sorts of qualitative features of the world in the mind. This requires implicit dualism, because otherwise you haven't explained how these can be part of just atoms, quarks, or whatever most basic matter you assume.

At some point this year, I want to read this book: "In this provocative book, Michael Rea argues that naturalists are committed to substance dualism, antirealism about material objects, skepticism about other minds, and the suspension of judgment about idealism."