|
United States47024 Posts
On May 09 2015 02:55 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 02:19 Parnage wrote: How uncivilized..
Speaking of Dota, I click lina to run the fuck away, lina goes forward then turns and explodes at critical times. I'm terrible but that annoys me, just something I need to deal with or can I do something to stop that? Yup happens to me quite often too. It's probably a combination of Dota 2 pathing and not being used to it. Unless you already played LoL with minimap switched to the left to be consistent with BW, I find it likely that you're just accidentally clicking on the minimap.
Changing your minimap misclick time in your .cfg fixes this.
|
On May 09 2015 02:58 wei2coolman wrote: Oh SG is only 15 bucks? I thought it'd be more expensive considering how apprehensive some people were about getting it. I'll probably pick it up in a couple weeks, super busy these next two, then I'll join in on Wave and Soniv smashing my ass to oblivion in it. Often way cheaper due to frequent sales. You're missing a few characters worth of DLC though,if you don't want to play endless beta mode (and which is ending as soon as robo fortune drops).
|
On May 09 2015 03:34 Frudgey wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 03:22 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:16 Slayer91 wrote:On May 09 2015 03:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:06 Slayer91 wrote:no he didn't believe in casual relationships On May 09 2015 03:05 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:01 Slayer91 wrote: well you'd be pretty stupid to believe david hume on that point then dont worry guys photon momentum isn't related to plancks constant because david hume said so I dont think your quite understanding Hume's point i didnt read it yet im not interested in semantics which is probably basically what it is since its philosophy and trying to deny the existence of a logical concept the problem though is if its not based on reason it can't be a logical concept because logic itself is reason. there's nothing wrong with simply saying its common sense and thats its reasonable to expect though. Hume's point is that we can't use reason to show causality. not that we should pretend it doesn't appear to happen is there any practical application of that point? if not then who cares we cant use reason to show we truly exist but who cares the practicality of it is questionable but Hume's ultimate point was to show that science is not based upon reason but on experience because it's impossible to show that the future will resemble the past without using circular reasoning and presupposing that the future resembles the past as a premise. (funnily enough Hum set out to show that science was based upon reason in his initial idea for the book). of course many people including Immanuel Kant have disagreed with Hume but depending on who you ask they have had varying degrees of success with it. (In his history of western Philosophy Bertrand Russel concluded that no one has ever properly dealt with the problem of induction.) on a technical point it's been pretty established that we can use logic to show we exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogito_ergo_sum "The simple meaning of the Latin phrase is that thinking about one’s existence proves—in and of itself—that an "I" exists to do the thinking; or, as Descartes explains, "[W]e cannot doubt of our existence while we doubt … ." aka the mere fact that we can think about us not existing proves that we are thinking which proves something that is us exists. whether we can refute skepticism of anything other than that is also debateable and Hume concluded that while we can't refute skepticism we can disregard it because it's ultimately useless. Thanks for posting the Philosophy. Always get a kick reading this kind of stuff. I think for the most part I agree with Hume's philosophy. I think he brings up a lot of good points. nah its all nonsense you should read naruto for relevant modern philosophy
|
On May 09 2015 03:30 Slayer91 wrote: yes based on that premise you cant and cogito ergo sum doesnt work on some other premises im sure somebody also made up
edit cruisnik stop spoiling please
yeah usually philosohpy is based around arguing about premises and of course nothing's been completely proved of course. people have and do reject pretty much everything. even the cogito has a ton of objections raised to it
a lot of it is about language and how things are interpreted which can vary from person to person. Miachael Dummet said in the 70s that " the proper object of philosophy" is "the analysis of the structure of thought, [for which] the only proper method [is] the analysis of langauge."
I like analyitical philosophy but even that can get kind of out there.
here's a logical proof that 1+1=2
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On May 09 2015 03:36 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 02:58 wei2coolman wrote: Oh SG is only 15 bucks? I thought it'd be more expensive considering how apprehensive some people were about getting it. I'll probably pick it up in a couple weeks, super busy these next two, then I'll join in on Wave and Soniv smashing my ass to oblivion in it. Often way cheaper due to frequent sales. You're missing a few characters worth of DLC though,if you don't want to play endless beta mode (and which is ending as soon as robo fortune drops).
But if you wait for the game to go on sale, the characters do as well. So it becomes significantly cheaper to get everything.
|
On May 09 2015 03:37 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 03:30 Slayer91 wrote: yes based on that premise you cant and cogito ergo sum doesnt work on some other premises im sure somebody also made up
edit cruisnik stop spoiling please yeah usually philosohpy is based around arguing about premises and of course nothing's been completely proved of course. people have and do reject pretty much everything. even the cogito has a ton of objections raised to it a lot of it is about language and how things are interpreted which can vary from person to person. Miachael Dummet said in the 70s that " the proper object of philosophy" is "the analysis of the structure of thought, [for which] the only proper method [is] the analysis of langauge." of course who is he to say whats the proper object of philosophy after all, that's one for the philosophers
i always thought the proper object of philosophy is to try to show how smart and pretentious you are to other smart and pretentious people
|
On May 09 2015 03:36 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 03:34 Frudgey wrote:On May 09 2015 03:22 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:16 Slayer91 wrote:On May 09 2015 03:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:06 Slayer91 wrote:no he didn't believe in casual relationships On May 09 2015 03:05 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:01 Slayer91 wrote: well you'd be pretty stupid to believe david hume on that point then dont worry guys photon momentum isn't related to plancks constant because david hume said so I dont think your quite understanding Hume's point i didnt read it yet im not interested in semantics which is probably basically what it is since its philosophy and trying to deny the existence of a logical concept the problem though is if its not based on reason it can't be a logical concept because logic itself is reason. there's nothing wrong with simply saying its common sense and thats its reasonable to expect though. Hume's point is that we can't use reason to show causality. not that we should pretend it doesn't appear to happen is there any practical application of that point? if not then who cares we cant use reason to show we truly exist but who cares the practicality of it is questionable but Hume's ultimate point was to show that science is not based upon reason but on experience because it's impossible to show that the future will resemble the past without using circular reasoning and presupposing that the future resembles the past as a premise. (funnily enough Hum set out to show that science was based upon reason in his initial idea for the book). of course many people including Immanuel Kant have disagreed with Hume but depending on who you ask they have had varying degrees of success with it. (In his history of western Philosophy Bertrand Russel concluded that no one has ever properly dealt with the problem of induction.) on a technical point it's been pretty established that we can use logic to show we exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogito_ergo_sum "The simple meaning of the Latin phrase is that thinking about one’s existence proves—in and of itself—that an "I" exists to do the thinking; or, as Descartes explains, "[W]e cannot doubt of our existence while we doubt … ." aka the mere fact that we can think about us not existing proves that we are thinking which proves something that is us exists. whether we can refute skepticism of anything other than that is also debateable and Hume concluded that while we can't refute skepticism we can disregard it because it's ultimately useless. Thanks for posting the Philosophy. Always get a kick reading this kind of stuff. I think for the most part I agree with Hume's philosophy. I think he brings up a lot of good points. nah its all nonsense you should read naruto for relevant modern philosophy Please, everyone knows that you read BoBoBo-Bo Bo-BoBo for relevant modern philosophy. Or in my case simply watch The Dark Knight. Pure Philosophy right there.
+ Show Spoiler +That being said, there was certainly more Philosophy in Naurto than I originally thought!
|
Lawns suck and dandelions should be decapitated.
|
On May 09 2015 03:43 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 03:37 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 09 2015 03:30 Slayer91 wrote: yes based on that premise you cant and cogito ergo sum doesnt work on some other premises im sure somebody also made up
edit cruisnik stop spoiling please yeah usually philosohpy is based around arguing about premises and of course nothing's been completely proved of course. people have and do reject pretty much everything. even the cogito has a ton of objections raised to it a lot of it is about language and how things are interpreted which can vary from person to person. Miachael Dummet said in the 70s that " the proper object of philosophy" is "the analysis of the structure of thought, [for which] the only proper method [is] the analysis of langauge." of course who is he to say whats the proper object of philosophy after all, that's one for the philosophers i always thought the proper object of philosophy is to try to show how smart and pretentious you are to other smart and pretentious people
I wasn't trying to show that I agree completely with Dummet on that but more so the importance of language in philosophy.
|
only because you can prove or disprove anything based on your definition of the words you use which speaks more about the farce of the whole field more than anything
|
On May 09 2015 03:37 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 03:36 WaveofShadow wrote:On May 09 2015 02:58 wei2coolman wrote: Oh SG is only 15 bucks? I thought it'd be more expensive considering how apprehensive some people were about getting it. I'll probably pick it up in a couple weeks, super busy these next two, then I'll join in on Wave and Soniv smashing my ass to oblivion in it. Often way cheaper due to frequent sales. You're missing a few characters worth of DLC though,if you don't want to play endless beta mode (and which is ending as soon as robo fortune drops). But if you wait for the game to go on sale, the characters do as well. So it becomes significantly cheaper to get everything. Hmm, cool. I'll have to keep my eye out for SG sales then.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
david hume just wanted to show everyone how smart he is and how retarded everyone else is his conlcusion is that science is retarded but iirc he himself liked science so really the only point he was making is that if reproductive success was based on brains, he woulda fucked your mum.
he's doing the equivalent of a kid saying that a game is stupid right after enjoying it for 2 hours
|
Actually Hume's point is more akin to "I have no idea how this game works and why anyone can possibly enjoy this. But fuck it, it's the best game we have."
|
I don't know who Hume is but from all I've read here he's the kind of person I would want to punch in the face if I was so inclined to punch people in the face for having stupid thoughts.
|
actually if we follow the paper written in nineteen ninty who gives a fuck by professor dickbutt we see depending on your definition of the concept of point it could be quite the opposite
|
On May 09 2015 03:48 Gahlo wrote: dandelions should be decapitated.
amen
|
I just want to point out that Hume wasn't saying that we should worry about a lot of this stuff in our daily lives mores that if we're going to try to use reason on things we should be very careful about how we do it. (at least that's how my philosophy teacher explained it.)
and yeah hume's point as it were is debatable to a certain extent
also a lot of philosophers have made important contributions to math and computing so it isn't just all not relevent.
(see Descartes and cartesian coordinates, goodel's incompleteness theorem, leibniz coming up with calculus independent of newton and developing the notation we use today).
and philosophy's the foundation for most forms of government.
also bertrand russel won a nobel prize in literature.
he was alos the subject of one of Eintien's famous quotes "great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
|
yeah if every foundation of the known universe breaks down in 2016 we're in trouble boys
|
No need to defend philosophy here. It's just business as usual with Teutonica.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|