Rezultati pretraživanja
  1. 27. sij
    Odgovor korisniku/ci

    I think usages like "eliminate metaphysics" expose "the idea of smarter than" as authoritarianism; the agreeable argument would be to differentiate between fiction ("smarter than physics") and non-fiction ()

  2. 31. sij

    the history of predictions and observations isn't confined to the timeline of an alpha-spokesman; when we don't want to be wrong, bet on the first law of thermodynamics when using square root symbols, disproving generic nihilisms

  3. Odgovor korisniku/ci

    in Russia = perfect example ... blown away by what he wrote ... = = The Feeling of Life Itself (by Christof Koch)

  4. 13. ožu 2019.

    Rainbow fun in PK4! 🌈 It’s fun to learn!

  5. 5. pro 2019.

    Sitting in a university (of Colorado) ethics class ... I think the difference “between” ethics and meta-ethics is ... ethics! =

  6. Odgovor korisniku/ci

    THE problem there is to solve: we're taught empathy-for-default-men in both good and evil but = = disproving generic nihilism which is predicting zero using minus one (destruction myths) see observe

  7. 27. sij

    solipsism is the idea that everything was created when one person was born, just as it will be destroyed when that person does; futurism is the opposite idea: what we observe (including one another) will be neither created nor destroyed

    Prikaži ovu nit
  8. 24. sij
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:
  9. 21. sij
    Odgovor korisnicima

    It's , so "pray" about whether or not the first law of thermodynamics identifies what remains even at : thanks for the degree in speaking English while I worked for the Biology Department

  10. 30. sij
    Odgovor korisniku/ci

    predicting nothing hasn't annihilated everything we observe between exclusive predictions === excluding zero probability in favor of additional evidence

  11. 6. pro 2019.
  12. 4. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima

    the future in general is already here; the highest human power is manage (typically avoid) collisions with other human beings =

  13. 3. velj
  14. 3. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima
  15. 3. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima

    I just suggest the first law of thermodynamics as I think remains relevant to Panpsychism as

  16. 1. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima

    don't prioritize zero points if we are truly about

  17. 30. sij
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:
  18. 30. sij
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    I think so unless by "crushing" we mean "annihilating" I also believe in concerning all "integer" thermodynamics: "additional, inverse squaring": (A point --> will avoid <-- point B) ... (AB-->will avoid<--CD) ... (->ABCD EFGH<-) excluding "zeroPoints"

  19. 30. sij

    predicting nothing doesn't annihilate everything we observe (between exclusive predictions, excluding zero points) =

  20. 30. sij
    Odgovor korisnicima

    the nonfictional argument for generic or math debates, like prioritizing 1+(-1)=0 vs Schrödinger's : "the particularly exigent demand is the square root"; so we can prioritze zero if we will but that fancy talk remains disprovable as

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.