Posts by Amanda Flores88

wanderingbadger44 said:They can certainly ask, but they aren't going to get anywhere.
It would be like asking the administration to hand out individual written confirmations to every single person every day—like getting a signed note saying you won't be allowed into class unless you're wearing specific shoes.

Just read the student handbook and call it a day.

And since you want to play hero, why don't you try walking into a venue where they require a COVID-19 vaccination card and demand they give you a formal, written document personally stating you aren't being admitted without it? Let us know if you actually receive that paper and if you manage to get inside. Then, feel free to sue the government.

The whole point of my argument here is that we are looking at parents whose own instability is making life unnecessarily difficult for their child, which is something that can have lasting effects on a kid's development.

I mean, you've got a point there, but maybe "unstable" is more about how society itself is broken—teaching kids that appearances are everything and that hypocrisy is just how the world works.

Samuel Turner2 said:Basically, the vaccine isn't doing much. Even the CDC and Fauci admitted it:

If we actually lived in a sane world led by sane people, this "revelation"—even if we already suspected it—should be the end of COVID-19 vaccine passports. It should also kill any debate about mandatory shots in certain areas, and wrap up all those "do it for others, get vaccinated!" campaigns once and for all.

Like the comment says—this news should put an end to the whole push for mandates. For some folks, a vaccine might be a game changer, but hey, everyone's got to decide that for themselves, right?

Pushing harder after stuff like this comes out? Yeah, it’s no wonder people are getting skeptical and pushing back.

Amanda Jackson5 said:It basically translates to "scout" in Hawaiian.

Thanks

James Lee77 said:We can get even more creative here: if everything materialists say is true—that our thoughts and experiences are "really" just electromagnetic patterns in our neurons—then why couldn't electromagnetic patterns somewhere else be thoughts and experiences too? Like, why couldn't the electromagnetic patterns of the Sun actually be the Sun's own thoughts and feelings? And if that's the case, maybe the Sun is basically some kind of solar god influencing people on Earth through the Earth photon path?

Alright, come on, give me something way more imaginative than that.

Cute 😍, assuming every single process counts as an experience.

Amanda Jackson5 said:But why assume we're just livestock if someone like Jesus is actually involved in our story? Besides, if you encounter a civilization advanced enough, the line between high technology and divinity becomes almost impossible to draw. It’s possible that existence itself eventually converges toward a single point where those two things become one and the same.
Another thing worth considering is that if Jesus were to walk among us today, nobody would even realize who he was, let alone believe him. The same logic applies to alien civilizations—it might have even happened quite recently:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...gets-trickier/

So, what's the deal with Oumuamua? Why'd they pick that name anyway?

Sandra Murphy33 said:That just proves he wasn't a (Christian) believer—he was an researcher.
He sought out theosophists, mystics, and even traveled to the East...

A true believer doesn't research; they believe.
To them, investigation is synonymous with doubt.

Given the Hegelian view of God as a process (rather than a person or a being), and the fact that he was investigating being itself rather than "God," we would probably label him an agnostic by modern standards.
In that era, such a category didn't exist, so people today love to simply slap the "believer" label on him. They transplant facts from one century to another without accounting for the massive shifts in context or the zeitgeist.

If willfully ignoring those distinctions isn't bias, I don't know what is.

But couldn't someone explore just to deepen their faith or confirm what they already believe?

Is there actually an issue if he were a believer?

James Phillips92 said:If we're talking logic, we first have to establish whether the COVID vaccine provides lasting immunity—which, so far, it pretty much doesn't—before we can even attempt to compare COVID shots to something like the measles and mumps vaccines.

This isn't even a traditional vaccine in any real sense. People just keep ignoring that fact.

But you've gotta try thinking about other philosophers instead of just yourself 🙂

Joseph Bailey41


Flying Ant


Enchi Uglavnom

Basically just a bunch of vibes tied to their avatars—Volver is Penelope, Sigmund is like a mashup of Leo Nikolayevich and Karl Marx, Neo is this total hippie traveler, Jednostavko is just a grumpy Mlinarec, while addx and Apemant are basically Hrvoje Prpić (long hair style), and then you've got Bear and Walnut who are just... well, chunky...

Jason Kern63 said:If everyone shared your mindset, we wouldn't have airplanes, advanced technology, or even bicycles. Someone had to step up, invent things, and get moving; otherwise, our streets would still be covered in dust instead of paved with asphalt. Vaccine efficacy was tested for a period of time, and it proved they work at preventing the most severe outcomes. As for the fact that they haven't been studied on millions of people yet—well, there simply wasn't enough time, so they left it to voluntary participation. You either take the shot or you don't. Who is going to wait five years to test a vaccine when the need is IMMEDIATE??? Did you write a letter to the troops during a war saying, "Please, don't attack us right away; wait five years until we can arm ourselves properly so we can fight better"? Look, brother, the war has already started. You go out to fight with a hundred-year-old relic, knowing full well your chances of hitting anything are slim. If we all thought like you, we’d currently be living in a version of the Republic of Mexico that stretched all the way to the Adriatic Sea.
History will eventually reveal whether it was smart to vaccinate or not. Personally, I know at least ten people who would have jumped at the chance to take the vaccine if they had known the reality of COVID—people who ended up on oxygen for ten days, barely able to breathe, and heaven knows what the long-term effects on their bodies might be. Of course, someone who merely sneezed twice during an infection is going to downplay the severity; after all, they were lucky enough to avoid the worst of it.

And those aren't even really comparable. It's not like people were being forced to ride bikes or fly planes the second they stepped out of the workshop.

Plus, military service isn't mandatory anymore—much to the joy of many.

David Robinson26 said:Honestly, one should just bypass you "old-timers" entirely when it comes to discussing gaming. 😒

It seems as though the sense of wonder associated with childhood died out in both of you a long time ago.

To begin with, what criteria are we even using to categorize games as either "normal" or "not normal"?

Where did you even come from today? You're acting wild. 😁

First, my buddy here claims these games are especially bad (for kids), then he goes on to say that's somehow the least philosophical way to put it—whatever that means. 😁

ruggedraven36 said:After all, video games are a form of media—specifically electronic media—which are fields that philosophy engages with quite deeply.

After all, video games are a form of media—specifically electronic media—which are fields that philosophy engages with quite deeply.
Talking about "pros and cons" is about as shallow as it gets. It isn't philosophy—any kid can list what's good and what's bad about something. That's just common sense, not deep thought.
Talking about "pros and cons" is about as shallow as it gets. It isn't philosophy—any kid can list what's good and what's bad about something. That's just common sense, not deep thought.
Glad you skipped over that part.

ruggedraven36 said:It’s just a game run through software built into a computer.

What are we actually doing while playing?

We feed input data to the program via physical movement—think controller buttons or mouse clicks—and our senses pick up the output, which lets us manage all those interactive elements that depend on us.

Is there any actual value in playing games?

Video games are worthless. Honestly, they’re pretty bad for kids—they pull them away from real-world play and everything else matters too.

Where does philosophy fit into video games?

Nowhere.

Joseph Murphy10 said:It’s really not that simple. Just as a thought experiment—let's say we all ditch the digital world for five days, kill our phones, cut the Wi-Fi, and just go work outdoors or read some books.

We're talking about the same stuff here.

Giving up isn't just part of being human.

I’m not sure if we’re totally on the same page—the core elements of gaming are freedom and fun. That ability to just hop in and out whenever you want? That’s exactly what separates a game from a chore or actual life.

The "fun" part is a bit more nuanced, but even when things get pretty brutal, the assumption is that you're having a blast—otherwise, why would you even be playing?

Then there's everything else—psychology, how it's applied, the consequences... but most of the time, we're pretty good at keeping reality and fantasy separate.
And yeah, anything can be misused, I guess.

Gerald Jackson48 said:Video games offer so much more than just a way to kill time or unwind after a long day. They can actually be pretty useful tools for learning. Honestly, we’ve been seeing some incredibly deep, complex storytelling in gaming for a while now. And then you have those logic-heavy titles that really make you think. Sokoban. It really helps sharpen those mental muscles. It builds up your cognitive skills and all that good stuff. The Philosophy of Planescape: Torment

Joseph Murphy10 said:Not quite...

There are some seriously intense, even dangerous, and downright brutal games out there in this world.

I mean, look at reality TV—that’s just a specific type of "game," right? And they can be brutal and zero fun. They directly attack basic human dignity because people, lured by some prize, will jump through whatever hoops they have to. Those rules are often rigged to go against human nature—tapping into those low-level, primal instincts we all hide deep down, basically triggering the "beast" within us toward ourselves and everyone else..

The truth is, the American workforce has changed massively. That shift changed our habits and how we manage our time. Now, people have more free time than ever, which creates this huge problem: what do you actually *do* with it? How do you fill the void? Enter "games." We went from old-school pixelated stuff on the Atari 8 (man, those were the days) to incredibly sophisticated setups...

And most of them are built on blood, sweat, tears, killing, beating people up, and whatnot...

Now, let's take a massive leap forward here...

Picture a relatively young guy—someone who’s been deprived of real reading or actual human connection, raised in a radicalized, violent environment, someone who spent the vast majority of his life playing "games" where he "killed" countless "enemies." Now, try applying that logic to the real world.

Look, not everyone is as smart as those of us sitting here reading and typing. There are plenty of people out there who aren't particularly bright—people who experience some kind of injustice, or maybe just *perceive* it as an injustice, and suddenly decide to "take matters into their own hands." You can probably guess how that ends...

I’m going extreme here—I’m not blaming "games" entirely—but I am factoring them into how a personality is formed, alongside everything else sociology and psychology would look at.

Bottom line: games and video games aren't nearly as harmless as people usually think.

What makes these kinds of games non-serious is that you can always just walk away. No matter how realistic the simulation gets, you aren't stuck—you can bail whenever you've had enough.

lonegardener said:🤣 Honestly, you sound just like my dad, lol.

Look, there are all kinds of games out there. Aside from the mindless ones (though, let's face it, many aren't much different from an old-school arcade cabinet—does anyone else remember those?)—there are games that function literally like interactive novels. Just as books can explore complex ethical dilemmas, games take it a step further because you actually have to "make a choice" and then live with the consequences.

Plus, you have online games that rely heavily on player interaction, making them comparable to Twitter or even a discussion forum. You only need to check out a site like Twitch to see just how vibrant these communities can be.

He was probably just giving you some friendly advice—basically saying it’s high time you find a real job once you actually land one. 😁

Nicholas Gonzalez87 said:Look, it’s not about replacing reality. Honestly, plenty of gamers are way more active in the real world than anyone else. Think of VR as an extra layer of richness, kind of like reading a great book. These digital spaces let you experience things you simply can't do offline—like intense teamwork in games like Call of Duty, or diving into the whole competitive esports scene.

Yeah, I get that—gaming is basically like reading a book or catching a movie. It's a productive way to kill time, for better or worse.

But what actually *is* a game, besides just being an easy way to have fun?

Quote:

Volver says: When you dig into this kind of stuff, language philosophers basically spend all their time trying to figure out if the way we frame and pass on thoughts through text actually works—relying on that old idea that language, especially writing, has this special, maybe even exclusive, link to how we think.

Sam Martinez9 said:Posted from Slack
- Volver

Good morning, everyone.

What’s on your reading list this morning? I’ve been spending some time with Capra lately. As is the case with most readers, I find myself starting from the end. Here is a brief excerpt from the final pages:

* ........ moving from linear systems of resource depletion and the accumulation of products and waste toward cyclical flows of matter and energy; shifting from an obsession with objects and natural wealth toward a focus on services and human resources; transitioning from seeking happiness in material possessions to finding it in human connections. To borrow the words of David Suzuki:

Family, friends, community—these are the primary sources of profound satisfaction and love. We visit family members, maintain ties with our mentors, and share meaningful moments with friends. We undertake difficult challenges to help others, to save the frogs, and to protect the wilderness, and we find purpose in those efforts. Nature and service provide us with spiritual fulfillment. None of these joys deplete the Earth's resources, yet they leave us deeply replenished. They are complex and far closer to true happiness than simple pleasures like a Coca-Cola or a new minivan.*

The other day, a volunteer from Catholic Charities reached out and mentioned how the disaster really forced people to realize what actually matters—focusing on people and solidarity.

And honestly? She's right. But when you look at what happened back in the Midwest, the reality is that those folks lost their homes and buildings—tangible, physical stuff that their entire lives depend on. People expect friends, both old and new, to step up and help them get back on their feet—meaning keeping their jobs and having a roof over their heads. A few kind words and some sympathy go a long way, sure, but sometimes love and caring for one another has to be very, very practical.

Donna White50 said:In a total Utopia, every single need gets met—I mean, let's be real, nobody actually wants to deal with someone else's mess... so if you think about it, a true Utopia just can't exist as long as there's still garbage to clean up...
Look, let's be real for a second—life basically boils down to eating and... well, doing our business just to stay alive. If we're talking about doing that stuff out in the woods instead of using a bathroom, then I guess a true Utopia wouldn't even have toilets in it... maybe...

I honestly feel like cleaning the toilet is just a fundamental part of the whole bathroom process—like, you can't separate them. It’s only fair that we clean up our own messes, or at least pay someone else to handle it for us, so we can get back to being paid to deal with everyone else's bullshit and nonsense...

... and pretty much everything else that follows 🤣 👍

gentlerider7 said:Change our attitude toward what, specifically?

Talking about those types of jobs. It’s way easier to dream up some utopia where those roles don't even exist than to actually give the people doing them better status. I mean, isn't the whole point of a utopia to get rid of those kinds of gaps? But can we honestly build a society where people aren't constantly trying to outdo one another? Even if you wiped those specific jobs off the map, that drive to stand out wouldn't just vanish—you'd just end up with a different hierarchy based on time, talent, or whatever else.