Posts by Nathan Hayes31

11 posts shown.

We are all one! in Philosophy · Mar 30, 2004

Eric Wells3 said:That’s basically what I was getting at.

I just don't see how you managed to drag science into this whole thing...😕

Are you seriously still unaware of what you actually wrote?
You were talking about interpreting from a "third-person" perspective, which is a scientific approach.
You don't even realize that, yet you used the terminology yourself!
Eric Wells3, go to bed!
S.

→ go to post

We are all one! in Philosophy · Mar 30, 2004

Mickey Mouse said:Based on your theory, there’s basically nothing left to discuss regarding consciousness... since we can't access anyone else's... [/B]

Consciousness isn't even a defined scientific term, which makes it impossible to make any credible scientific claims about it from a third-person perspective.

If you're observing someone who's unconscious, you still have zero insight into their actual consciousness, and that's the deciding factor.

Whatever you personally imagine their consciousness feels like is completely irrelevant.
From a third-person standpoint, all we can do is observe the manifestations—the qualities of consciousness. Every individual experiences consciousness and self-awareness for themselves. There's no other way it works.

Do you actually understand anything about philosophy?
Nathan Hayes31.😕

→ go to post

We are all one! in Philosophy · Mar 29, 2004

Eric Wells3 said:Great.
So now we've decided you aren't conscious.
If you're an object (to my Self), and A can't be both A and non-A, and I am a conscious subject, then you simply can't be conscious.

Think about it for a second... I'm talking about using third-person speech...

Writing about consciousness from a third-person perspective is impossible. It's not just because we don't actually know what consciousness is, but because it's inherently subjective.

At any given moment, anyone can only ever experience themselves, never anyone else. I don't have access to your Self, and you don't have access to mine; we each own our own consciousness.
As usual, you're leaning on just one thing: logic.
S. 😁

→ go to post

We are all one! in Philosophy · Mar 28, 2004

Eric Wells3 said:I've always found it pretty strange... how can two separate consciousnesses actually exist at the exact same time?
I am the subject, and to my Self, you are the object. But it works both ways. To your own Self, you are the subject, and I’m just the object...
So, who actually comes out on top between us two...🤔
And in the end, doesn't that just prove how limited the concept of "I" actually is... especially when we're both claiming the exact same "I"?

Self becoming an object of awareness... that's self-awareness.
That’s why every single person carries their own Self and self-awareness...
The naturalist’s circular reasoning stems from a fundamental failure to interpret reality correctly. They don't actually perceive anything through the Self; instead, they just conflate consciousness and self-awareness with the objects they perceive. Since they claim both the mind and the external world are just "nature," this circularity becomes an inevitable—yet completely broken—logical loop. On top of that, the naturalist ignores the law of non-contradiction. You can't say A is the same as non-A. But by merging the identity of the Self with the identity of nature into one single entity, they create nothing but a total aporia...

The core issue is that we’re stuck in a loop... these two concepts just end up defining themselves through each other. It's circular logic at its worst...
Look at neurophysiology research. Since explaining brain activity is just an expression of thought—which is inherently part of the Self—these scientists are basically trying to explain consciousness using consciousness. And because these brain processes are just natural phenomena, they’re trapped in circular reasoning... they're trying to explain nature through nature. Both issues are fundamentally unexplainable. At least for now...
S.

→ go to post

Why are religious people filling up prisons? in Philosophy · Mar 26, 2004

Rebecca Cox2 says:
Hahaha! Unfortunately for you, that’s just wrong.

Back in 1990, Atheists and Agnostics made up 8.0%, jumping to 14.2% by 2001. If anyone actually cares about the rest of the stats, they can check here.

Out of that 8%, 99.9% are nothing but criminals. Nobody gives a damn about the other 0.1%!
Where on earth are you getting this documentation? Unbelievable.
S. hahaha🙂

→ go to post

Why are religious people filling up prisons? in Philosophy · Mar 26, 2004

adriatic said:The USA is basically a nation of inmates and convicts. We have more prisoners than farmers, and when it comes to total population percentage, we lead the world.
But who actually ends up behind bars? Check out these numbers:

STUDIES: ATHEISTS SUPPLY LESS THAN 1% OF PRISON POPULATIONS
by Wayne Aiken, North Carolina Director
AMERICAN ATHEISTS

People always tell me, "You're an Atheist? I bet you have zero conscience when it comes to breaking the law." They couldn't be more wrong. If you actually look at prison demographics, the reality is totally different.

In "The New Criminology," Max d. Schlapp and Edward E. Smith note that after two generations of statistical study, the ratio of convicts lacking religious upbringing is roughly 1/10th of 1%. W. T. Root, a Psychology Professor at the University of Pittsburgh, studied 1,916 inmates and noted, "Indifference to religion, due to thought, strengthens character," pointing out that Unitarians, Agnostics, Atheists and Free-Thinkers were almost entirely missing from penitentiaries.
During 10 years in Sing Sing, among those executed for murder, 65% were Catholics, 26% were Protestants, 6% were Hebrew, 2% were Pagan, and less than 1/3 of 1% were non-religious.

I don't think a full translation is necessary. Basically, it shows a distinct religious makeup among inmates. Don't take these specific numbers as absolute gospel—they aren't meant to represent the entire country—but the ratios hold true across other parts of the USA too.

So, looking at the bottom line, within Sing Sing, murderers were 56% Catholic (even though every fourth American is Catholic), 26% Protestant (every second American), 6% Jew, and everyone else was negligible.
Non-believers are represented a hundred times less than their actual share of the general population.

How do you explain that? Why are Catholics so prone to crime while non-believers are the exact opposite? 😕

Because there are hardly any non-believers in the USA anyway...

→ go to post

Pregnancy and iron levels in Health · Jan 23, 2004

placidjackal97 said:Just adding that I take iron, and nobody ever told me I had to do it on an empty stomach.

I wouldn't have mentioned it either, honestly, mostly because I wasn't sure you'd actually get it.
Whether you take it before meals if you can handle it, or after if the supplement makes you sick, doesn't change the fact that absorption is what matters here. Taking it before a meal is better for absorption. But hey, it's not life-threatening to take it after eating if taking it on an empty stomach gives you stomach cramps...
It comes down to the actual principle of how it works, which apparently both you and that clueless David can't seem to wrap your heads around.
Hell, you could probably just apply it rectally for all I care, if that's what works for you! 😕 😎
swiftbison7.

→ go to post

Pregnancy and iron levels in Health · Jan 22, 2004

David said:Casey Palmer5, I actually got that exact same advice from a doctor just last week—take iron after meals so it doesn't wreck your stomach, and ideally pair it with some Vitamin C. There you go.

It’s like you’re refusing to see the point. For maximum absorption, you take supplements on an empty stomach. Period. But if you can't handle them because they're destroying your stomach, then yeah, take them after food, knowing full well you'll get less out of them. This isn't about your specialist spreading misinformation; it's about weighing the side effects against the results.
S.

→ go to post

Pregnancy and iron levels in Health · Jan 21, 2004

Joseph Jones85 said:Casey Palmer5, I actually got that exact same advice from a doctor just last week—take your Iron after eating so it doesn't wreck your stomach, and try to take it with a Vitamin C pill if you can. That's it.

Casey Palmer5 is right!
During Previa, Iron supplements are taken orally and on an empty stomach.
Treatment usually starts in the second half of the pregnancy, with the goal of ensuring every Previa reaches delivery with a hemoglobin level of at least 13g% (130g/l).
The dosage depends on how severe the anemia is. It's standard for a Gravida to take about 100 mg/day of the supplement.
Everyone reacts differently to these things, which is why there are so many different types and combinations available.
Best,👋
Nathan Hayes31.

→ go to post

Why is the alternative being targeted in Cleveland? in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 13, 2003

melloworca3 said:Why is everyone constantly persecuting anyone who tries to be different..?

Wasn't Cleveland once actually a real city, full of culture, diversity, and something different? Don't we all have the right to decide for ourselves what we like and what we don't? At the end of the day, don't we all have the right to just be different....?

Well... screw you, Mr. Mayor, and screw all you politicians, screw the Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Libertarians, screw all you brainless idiots, screw the daddy's boys driving expensive cars, screw the preppies, screw the pseudo-intellectuals burying their heads in the sand, screw the pop stars stripping for a quick buck, screw the ministers, deputy ministers, directors, and board members, screw the fake artists living off old people and begging for a beer every single day, screw the absolute morons, screw Trump, and screw the 10,000 idiots who went to his concert, screw everyone at NBC and local news, screw the hacks who can't see past a cheap beer, screw blacks and whites, screw yellows and reds, screw Catholics, Orthodox, Muslims, Jews, and Buddhists, screw Americans and Russians, screw criminals and screw the cops, those frustrated idiots with badges on their chests, screw athletes because they're as dumb as hell, screw professors, masters, and PhDs, screw the academics too because you talk your whole lives and nobody understands a word, screw journalists, screw the globalists and the anti-globalists because you've ruined the planet, screw homosexuals and heterosexuals, screw the homophobes, screw the Nazis and the Communists, screw the soldiers—what even are you guys anyway?, screw the cardinals and church officials with your fairy tales and smoke and mirrors, screw the populists, screw them all, screw the bus drivers because you're angry all day long, screw everyone who works and hasn't seen a paycheck in months because you're stupid as hell, screw everyone who spends their whole life keeping their head down while getting screwed....

Merry Christmas to everyone and screw this damn New Year.......

🙂

What kind of "alternative" are you rambling about? What are you looking for or offering, and more importantly, compared to what?😕 👋 👎 🙂

Is it all just reduced to "living under the bridge"? If that's your idea of an alternative.............. then goodbye.........?
S.🙂

→ go to post

Grammy Awards 2003 on Philosophy... in Philosophy · Dec 13, 2003

Here’s my take on the threads, individual posts, and users. Completely "unbiased," highly "expert," and totally devoid of any personal feelings.

MY NOMINATIONS FOR TOPIC OF THE YEAR IN PHILOSOPHY:

1) "Philosophical debate between an atheist and a believer," by user PBE. Link here:

2) "The dogma of atheism" by user Obelix. Link here:

3) "Animal ethics: the case against killing," by user Obelix. Link here:

MY NOMINATIONS FOR POST OF THE YEAR IN PHILOSOPHY:

1) Post by user PANDORA10-676, from the Topic "dogma of atheism" by Obelix, at:

2) Post by user OBELIX-1143, from the Topic "dogma of atheism" by Obelix, at:

3) Post by user SHAMAN-69, from the Topic "philosophy in the theme of Wu Wei by Shaman" by illegalea, at:

MY NOMINATIONS FOR USER OF THE YEAR IN PHILOSOPHY:

1) Obelix
2) PANDORA10
3) PBE

→ go to post