Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)

[milk]

Going beyond the boundaries of the mere observable in science, sounds more and more "irrational" but only if one is stuck in a rational numbers stage.

You need a way to distinguish between what's a fantasy or dream or idea in your head and what's happening in reality, i.e. in the wold of tables and chairs that you can trip on and break your neck. If one is "Going beyond the bounds of the observable," how can one tell what's imagination? Put it another way, whatever you say that can't be tested empirically, I can reject as possible imagination.

[Marc]

That is the problem with the knowledge of good and evil. Once you know, you can't un-know.

Yep, I understand. But I did/do not agree with the Christian 'knowledge' of good and evil. That was my personal problem. And therefore I left the church. So, to at least some of the churchgoers, I'm most certainly on the Highway To Hell. But, as Donald Trump probably would say: "we'll see."

[Wendell_E]

Sheesh! Off-topic posts are one thing, but off-topic pages? And pages, and pages?  At least I haven't missed any important Trumptalk.

[71 dB]

And you call this "rational" and "scientific"?

I'd call it rational, but not scientific, because it lacks the scientific method of verification. Mankind can't verify these things yet if ever. All of this is theoretical.

Then you are hopelessly ignorant of the logic of the English language.

Not other languages? How about Estonian language? What I'm talking about has nothing to do with languages.

So is religion.

Your religion I suppose? Mankind has developped countless religions and belief systems. Did your religion exist even 3000 years ago? Does it exist 3000 years from now?
.

SYes it is, but it's only you who think that there was ever such a time.

That's because I think about these things! There is a reason why I consider belief in deities silly, or religions in general oblosete cultural remnants for mankind in the 21st century. It's because I think. How about you? Judging from how you respond to my thoughts you are pretty clueless. I recommend thought experiments. I suppose that's a weird concept for religious people. Why think when religion gives all the answers? Well if you thought you'd notice your religion gives some answers (moral rules etc. shared by most belief systems ever) while beeing complete bs on many issues. So the real answers are elsewhere. Science is able to give a lot of answers, but unfortunately not all of them, at least not yet. So there is room for thinking yourself.

Had you been properly educated in logic, philosophy and history you'd have realized yourself the staggering amount of ignorance you displayed of all these fields  by writing all of the above.

Yeah, yeah, I uneducated moron. I only have an university degree in electric engineering so of course I am dumber than you.

Haven't you noticed that I am almost the only one here with substance while others try to smear me? Why is that? Why don't you demonsrate our excellence in logic, philosophy and history pointing out my fallacies one by one? I didn't even claim my thoughts to be correct for 100 % certainty. They are just my thoughts! Who am I? Albert Einsten? That's why it's so surprising to see people get into defend mode. Is a thinking person with relatively normal level of intelligence this dangerous for people who do not think? Wow.

[71 dB]

Do you think there is anything "Christian" about your contemptuous treatment of 71 dB?

According to my experiences that's pretty typical "Christian" behaviour. They know how to love other people by hating them for disagreeing about their beliefs. I respect all people no matter what religion, but I don't respect silly beliefs and I don't hide it. People themselves are not always responsible for their silly thoughs. People are victims of surrounding influences and all people are not lucky to have good influences.

[Christo]

I respect all people no matter what religion

.. except for those who have one and also for who they happen to be. But otherwise: my sincerest respect. 
...

but I don't respect silly beliefs and I don't hide it.

In fact, it is the only kind of beliefs that I spread myself too. My solidarity knows no bonds. 

[71 dB]

I get some of what you are saying but let me expand on it a bit. In the ancient world, no one would have believed that parallel lines would never meet. Consider this:

One story claims that a young student by the name of Hippasus was idly toying with the number √2, attempting to find the equivalent fraction. Eventually he came to realize that no such fraction existed, i.e. that √2 is an irrational number. Hippasus must have been overjoyed by his discovery, but his master was not. Pythagoras had defined the universe in terms of rational numbers, and the existence of irrational numbers brought his ideal into question. The consequence of Hippasus' insight should have been a period of discussion and contemplation during which Pythagoras ought to have come to terms with this new source of numbers. However, Pythagoras was unwilling to accept that he was wrong, but at the same time he was unable to destroy Hippasus' argument by the power of logic. To his eternal shame he sentenced Hippasus to death by drowning.

Logic in terms of rational numbers cannot account for many mathematical anomalies, yet they are useful. Without them, we would not be sitting here communicating via computers. I mean, how can anyone accept that two negative numbers multiplied by one another can render a positive number? It is not a quantity, but only symbolic.

Buddhism doesn't admit of a all-encompassing deity but in practice, transcendence. Otherwise, why should Prince Sakyamuni give up his position and wealth to become a begging monk? Going beyond the boundaries of the mere observable in science, sounds more and more "irrational" but only if o±ne is stuck in a rational numbers stage.

As for "space" between the molecules, Eckart Tolle speaks of that in his lectures, that it is good, even freeing, to be aware of emptiness.

Number √2 is the second most irrational number after golden ratio (√5±1)/2, so it's indeed very difficult to approximate using rational numbers. Surprisingly, Pi is not that hard to approximate using rational numbers. 22/7 already is a very close approximation off only by about 0.0013 or 0.04 %!

Vector product gives justification for two negative number (vectors) giving an positive product value. In complex arithmetic it's very clear why -1 times -1 = 1 or how i² = -1.

[71 dB]

.. except for those who have one and also for who they happen to be. But otherwise: my sincerest respect. 

Again, silly beliefs are not to be respected just to respect a person having those beliefs. I consider belief in deities as silly as beliefs in unicorns. I would not respect belief in unicorns expressed by a grown up person. Same with deities. The only difference between deities and unicorns is that people are indoctrinated/raised to believe in deities + all the cultural burden, but no such things happen with unicorns. That's why grown up people VERY rarely believe in unicorns.

I'm sorry if you feel disrespected, but your silly beliefs are not my fault. I'm only pointing them out. Your silly belief is not the same thing as you. Had you born in another country or family you would most probably believe in a different deity or lack belief in deities altogether. Your silly belief is shared by other people. I'm attacking the club you are a member of. Don't defend the club, defend yourself. There are other clubs. Which one should you join?

[drogulus]

Because:

"The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms." - (atributted to) Socrates

It's you who brought up Socrates in the first place, so please be at least consistent with your own terms.

I certainly am baffled by atheists stopping short of getting to the ultimate and only too logical conclusion of their position, namely that there is no difference whatsoever between Hitler and Mother Theresa.

There were a lot of historically wrong maps to get in a more real place than your grandmas  --- all of them being thought scientifically, evidence-based at the time, only to be proven wrong after.


You might fancy yourself as a scientifically enllightened person, but the truth is that you have absolutely no clue whatsoever what you're talking about.

Are you nuts? Evidence is the same in 2019 BC as in 2019 AD.

Once again,  you are clueles.

You are the living embodiment of those sophists Socrates (via Plato) fought.

     The point of not taking the bait about definitions is that they don't have the a priori quality Socraplato and you find essential. It's not a good idea to need something you can't have.

     The process of information used to generate and test propositions started among creatures that didn't define anything. Practice long preceded concepts. When concept creatures came along they defined what they did.

     We don't accept absolutist definitions for Hitler and Momma T. We judge according to the words and deeds. Their metaphysical status is imaginary. Their words and deeds are real.

     You make a good point about maps. It's central to my view, that the truth is contingent upon the facts that constitutes the evidence that supports it, and therefore not an a priori like the Forms. We don't need the concept of an absolute, it would do no harm to greet the notion with derisive laughter. It has no use value.

     

[drogulus]

Sheesh! Off-topic posts are one thing, but off-topic pages? And pages, and pages?  At least I haven't missed any important Trumptalk.

     The world historical vacuosity of TrumpTalk has inspired us to seek examples of other (heh!) Forms it has taken in the past. Trump, to his credit, is unwilling to build his wall by absolute definition. In the end it could be made of Bounty paper towels if only Congress will give him the Mexican money for it.

      Has it occurred to anyone besides me that the state of emergency is not for the wall but that the wall is for the state of emergency? Trump has been using each crisis in turn to escape the consequences of the previous ones. This could be "crisis inflation" as I retrospectively define it.

[Christo]

I'm sorry if you feel disrespected, but your silly beliefs are not my fault.

Oh, but they ARE! You totally convinced me! 

[drogulus]

No, I don't, but I just can't help it. I should really stop reading this bloody thread.

     There is no reason why you should stop. There is a lesson to be learned, several actually but one is that believer "insultees" find they need to insult people while accusing insulters of ideas of giving personal offense. I don't see an assault on my ideas as personal even when a believer resorts to it. There are ideas that are frustrating to advocate, especially ideas about knowledge no one could be in a position to have but are super super a priori true nonetheless. Some ideas exist only for the purpose of supporting an abstract entity as real because the world itself stubbornly refuses to do it.

[Florestan]

     There is no reason why you should stop.

Yes, there is; every now and then I lose my temper and become aggressive and unpolite, which I am not in real life. And the whole thing of arguing over such topics on an internet board is actually quite useless.

[BasilValentine]

     The world historical vacuosity of TrumpTalk has inspired us to seek examples of other (heh!) Forms it has taken in the past. Trump, to his credit, is unwilling to build his wall by absolute definition. In the end it could be made of Bounty paper towels if only Congress will give him the Mexican money for it.

      Has it occurred to anyone besides me that the state of emergency is not for the wall but that the wall is for the state of emergency? Trump has been using each crisis in turn to escape the consequences of the previous ones. This could be "crisis inflation" as I retrospectively define it.

Or maybe he just wants the Justice Department's funding to run out! And re his Soviet talking points on Afghanistan: Which is more believable, that Trump actually memorized a set of talking points, or that he was just making a ludicrous comparison between Soviets fighting (fictional) terrorists crossing their southern border and his efforts to fight fictional terrorists crossing ours? As hard as it is to believe, he might be stupider than anyone is giving him credit for.

[Karl Henning]

Russian lawyer at Trump Tower meeting charged in separate case
https://wapo.st/2Ff2VSr

[bwv 1080]

These are the people we are supposed to trust to dispassionately guide our foreign policy?

In 2012, while he was head of Central Command, the Marine General pressed the Army to procure and deploy blood testing equipment from a Silicon Valley company called Theranos. He communicated that he was having success with this effort directly to Theranos's chief executive officer. Even though an Army health unit tried to terminate the contract due to its not meeting requirements, according to POGO, Mattis kept the pressure up. Luckily, it was never used on the battlefield.

Maybe it shouldn't be a surprise but upon retirement in 2013, Mattis asked a DoD counsel about the ethics guiding future employment with Theranos. They advised against it. So Mattis went to serve on its board instead for a $100,000 salary. Two years after Mattis quit to serve as Trump's Pentagon chief in 2016, the two Theranos executives he worked with were indicted for "massive" fraud, perpetuating a "multi-million dollar scheme to defraud investors, doctors and patients," and misrepresenting their product entirely. It was a fake.

But assuming this was Mattis's only foray into the private sector would be naive. When he was tapped for defense secretary—just three years after he left the military—he was worth upwards of $10 million. In addition to his retirement pay, which was close to $15,000 a month at the time, he received $242,000 as a board member, plus as much as $1.2 million in stock options in General Dynamics, the Pentagon's fourth largest contractor. He also disclosed payments from other corporate boards, speech honorariums—including $20,000 from defense heavyweight Northrop Grumman—and a whopping $410,000 from Stanford University's public policy think tank the Hoover Institution for serving as a "distinguished visiting fellow."

Never for a moment think that Mattis won't land softly after he leaves Washington

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/mattis-one-more-general-for-the-self-licking-ice-cream-cone/?fbclid=IwAR3G3ldJLz1TGxD8xe3HEdlxafTzlThyvCuwPR3FmcN4W8hUJkJA1Rory8U

[drogulus]

These are the people we are supposed to trust to dispassionately guide our foreign policy?

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/mattis-one-more-general-for-the-self-licking-ice-cream-cone/?fbclid=IwAR3G3ldJLz1TGxD8xe3HEdlxafTzlThyvCuwPR3FmcN4W8hUJkJA1Rory8U

      I think the answer is no. No to ad hominem arguments, too, when it comes to that. And if conservatives are going to act like New Leftists about how corrupt generals are the cause of bad foreign policy, they should be listened to with an equal level of seriousness. I'd rather take the foreign policy views of a variety of experts together. Mattis is respected among them, less so among dogmatists who only want agreement with their presupposed wisdom. That is not dispassion, it's what dispassion gets us away from.

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

Russian lawyer at Trump Tower meeting charged in separate case
https://wapo.st/2Ff2VSr

Trump was breathing easy for a while, but Karl is back on the case! 

[Florestan]

Trump was breathing easy for a while, but Karl is back on the case! 

*chortle*

[Zeus]

These are the people we are supposed to trust to dispassionately guide our foreign policy?

Makes him harder to bribe.  For that matter, makes it harder for Trump to screw him over by firing him just before he qualifies for his pension.

I like Mattis, I thought he did a fine job under incredibly difficult circumstances, and I think it's pretty predictable and typical for Trump supporters to turn on Mattis now – because their man is so, so much more upstanding, right?.  I'm not gonna defend or object to any specific claims from this article though.  TLDR ;-)