₦airaland Forum

Fenrir:
And for 5, you fucking weak sap men are biologically built to take care of women

We are built to protect and provide

Textbook naturalistic fallacy.

Some people use the phrase, naturalistic fallacy or appeal to nature, in a different sense, to characterize inferences of the form "Something is natural; therefore, it is morally acceptable" or "This property is unnatural; therefore, this property is undesirable." Such inferences are common in discussions of medicine, homosexuality, environmentalism, and veganism.

The naturalistic fallacy is the idea that what is found in nature is good. It was the basis for social Darwinism, the belief that helping the poor and sick would get in the way of evolution, which depends on the survival of the fittest. Today, biologists denounce the naturalistic fallacy because they want to describe the natural world honestly, without people deriving morals about how we ought to behave (as in: If birds and beasts engage in adultery, infanticide, cannibalism, it must be OK).

— Steven Pinker[6]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

Fenrir:
And so utterly foolish to not understand that marriage was designed for women but men get more out of it and there only 2 risks in marriage for a man

Then you don't know the basics. Marriage wasn't necessarily "designed" for any gender in particular. Although, if you really want to stretch it, there are more solid arguments to support the idea that marriage as an institution has been a patriarchal and inherently misogynistic institution for millenniums.

Fenrir:
1) raising a kid that not his, but mandatory dna tests at all births which will be law in America and Europe soon

Medicine after death.

Fenrir:
2) financial, a woman marrying man just divorce him later and take half his shit that is solved but a pre nuptial agreement

The emotional and psychological baggage nko?

Fenrir:
But women can be be sexually abused
Beaten, killed, marry a fucking deadbeat that'd fucking broke, marry a man that gets her pregnant a few times then abandons her to raise the kids alone and much more

Women have a right to know a man can take care of her before getting involved with him

Non-sequitur. These comments are giving serious "Captain Save A Hoe" energy. No offense.

These concerns are legitimate concerns, but where you flop logically is using them to justify material expectations. Orientation and better legal protections that don't perpetuate economic dependency can be arranged.

Fenrir:
And you have it backwards in this country

Women are born with value
No boy is born with any value he makes his value by getting of his ass and making himself a man

Good education
Good job
Masculine

BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE AND PROTECT

But Nigeria has no men except when another nationality visits

What type of philosophy is this? I'm not aware of this. Actual human value in the conventional sense, is tied to capitalist achievements. It is not exclusive to anyone on arbitrary distinctions, and it's also not a birthright. If you can kindly provide an academic source that supports this concept of value you've written here, I'd love to read it.

The irony of your response though is that you came out swinging at Nigerian men, supposedly in defense of the characterization of women in this thread, but you ended reinforcing the exact same structures that restrain feminism without knowing, and that is what has prompted my response.

I'll leave you to figure it out for yourself.

OnionBandit:
The boy fit be creemeenal, but trust Peter Hoebi supporters to get emotional because he was their star boy when their fraud Messiah visited Lagos.

Except you have proof that the boy is a criminal, then this comment of yours is just nothing but sour grapes.

GanagiBitrus:
Not excusing Nigerians' greed & quest for quick money, but Govt also has responsibility to protect her citizens.
SEC & other agencies shouldn't be licensing & allowing such dubious schemes to operate, & scam Nigerians.

Solid comment. Unfortunately you don't really expect frauds to checkmate other frauds.

Samantha125:
What kind of house?🤔🤔🤔

Bungalow

kingxsamz:
😂 It's only people that eat very lightly that think 5 wraps is too much.
Those are the people who eat two slices of bread and still feel overfed.

You just described my elder sister.

Sometimes I look at her eating and get so annoyed. Like in your mind you're satisfied. 🤦🏽🤣🤣

doggedfighter:
You ate 5 wraps of fufu and you are laughing ?😳

Minus joke I think 5 is the standard for able bodied men wey tear eye. 😁

Even me I eat 5-7 on average on a good day. I recently reduced it to 3 to save cost. I can take up to 10 depending on the level of hunger (if I haven't eaten all day for instance).

People who know me personally, from friends to family, know me as a chief consumer. 🤣

DeepSight:
It's not really about having a better theory because I accept the fundamentals of the ToE. I just acknowledge that it has unresolved issues.

Fair enough. I appreciate the honesty.

Personally, I'm not too deep in the field of natural sciences so I can't claim full understanding of the ToE. I was bred in the social sciences, so I'll probably have a better shot at debating international policies and legal rights. 🤷🏽

The only gripe I have with people arguing the ToE in this religion section is that most of the time, the theory is often used as a crutch by Christians to attack atheists, and I've never understood that logic because personally I don't give a shít about the theory. It didn't lead me to become an atheist and frankly, it bores me to death.

But somehow Christians think shooting it down automatically validates their Bible stories - a very primitive type of thinking rooted in false dichotomy (an actual logical fallacy). 🤦🏽

I give the atheists a pass on bringing it up because at least they're rightfully juxtaposing it against the Bible's tale of creation, which sounds even more ridiculous and convoluted.

DeepSight:
Being a person who believes in the spiritual though, I am inclined to believe in some sort of guided evolution as opposed to that which is strictly limited to natural selection. That is better able to help us with something as complicated as the evolution of the eye for example.

This is strictly within the realm of subjectivity, so I'm not going to argue this paragraph with you. As for me, I feel no need to accept the existence of a spiritual realm.

I will never drag an argument with someone over how he believes the universe came to be, provided he or she accepts that his belief is entirely his own belief. Where I start to heckle them is if they try to establish their beliefs as an objective truth, like the way some people do here.

Also, this is unrelated to our conversation but I just want to note how profoundly ignorant some people on this thread are that they casually take the word "power" from the axiom "knowledge is power", and equate it with physical capacity.

The same people write nonsensical faith fueled diatribes here to try and disparage the idea of having "knowledge", foolishly thinking that having knowledge doesn't have any practical real world benefits. I mean, the inherent stupidity in that statement should be self evident. Lol. 😂

You seem like a pretty flexible poster in terms of thought and logic, and I respect you for it. Unlike some here who are closed off from reality by their faith, and ironically think that it is a virtue worth extolling.

DeepSight:
Many times evolutionists hide behind the large expanses of time they say evolution occurs over in order to gloss over things that will actually be impossible even in an eternity of time without guidance.

Well, like I said, I don't know jack shít about the ToE. I'm an atheist, not a biologist or "evolutionist" (whatever that means). Also I feel people often conflate "theory of evolution" with "evolution". Those two terms have different connotations.

Furthermore, I don't particularly care about the modus operandi of ToE proponents. However, a scientific theory doesn't necessarily have to be flawless for it to be plausible. Even the theory of gravity has its own limitations when you go deep into quantum mechanics.

DeepSight:
Finally let me stress that not even the guided evolution I believe in is perfect. I do not believe that the creators or instigators of this world are perfect either.

Again, I will not personally accept the idea of there being a "creator or instigator" of this world without convincing evidence. But I will respect it as your belief.

DeepSight:
Many people who think they understand everything about evolution have the same unnecessary arrogance you have displayed here.

If you don't touch upon the point that all of the evolution complimentary sexual organs must have happened in a single generation then not only do you not understand the issue, but you haven't even started to address it.

You mentioned that the evolution of sex is gradual. This is wrong for one reason. Just tell me how there would have been successful reproduction during that gradual process with incomplete complementary reproduction systems?

That's all you need to address and not whether you started studying evolution when you were two years old.

This same arrogance of yours is what has caused many professors who have asked these questions to be fired by dogmatic academics in universities who cannot admit that the ToE has problems.

The theory of evolution has problems, I agree.

Do you have a stronger hypothesis or postulate that is backed up by the evidence?

I'm reading certain comments here and I'm just shaking my head laughing. This thread is becoming hilarious and sad in equal measure. 🤧

I can't imagine the height of delusions it must take to rest on false validations, instead of actual evidence of your claims, to boost your own confidence. Throughout my entire life, I've met many people who are intelligent, or who THINK they're intelligent but when push comes to shove, they woefully show their ignorance to the whole room.

You can string up arguments that sound reasonable and enjoyable to read. Okay? People like to see that. They will clap and sing for it. So what? Does it really prove anything? Does it really contribute to knowledge in a discussion? In many ways, I actually feel pity for this type of people because Dunning Kruger is a serious condition and it has the grip of a metal vice.

Knowledge is power after all, and so is TRUTH. Both infintely superior to opinions, or anything else. I know say I get prick. Even the most astute scientist cannot deny that fact. 💁🏽

So it's funny to watch people here reveling in the euphoria of mass delusion. People love to read sophistry, because sophistry looks pretty and fanciful, even though substantially, it is nonsense. And so it can never be a reliable lead to TRUTH. Evidence will always be the best route.

Okay that's my 2 cents. Carry on, y'all. 👍🏽

kingxsamz:
Fufu is not as soft as Semo and Okra is very slippery. The only way that can work is if you dip most of your fingers (if not your hand) into the soup. Or unless the soup is thick enough.

Hmmmm. 🤔

Makes sense sha.

I always preferred fufu with soups that don't draw or are too thick, like pepper soup or some versions of Banga.

Gabrielshow24:
It's intellectual dishonesty because he used it as a basis to deem others unintelligible — basically hypocrisy, trying to flex a muscle he can't use!

Fair enough.

Gabrielshow24:
To clarify, the post you deemed it fit, I 'pretended' upon to be mine was it in any way related to the dismissal of his argument! What shall we call that type of response 🤨?

Yes, it was a response to something he stated, as a matter of fact. Attacking someone for relying on AI when you're also relying on AI for whatever reason automatically renders your point moot, your true intentions notwithstanding. If you can find reasonable justification for using AI, I'm sure Omoawoke will do the same if we start to heckle him.

Gabrielshow24:
I don't like to go about in circular arguments. I have heard your own. It's alright 🙃. Hopefully I see you on the battlefield 😁 where we can settle the rest there—Although, I think🤔 we still have unfinished business 🙃.

You're the one who kept walking us round the circle only to keep reinforcing my point. I never intended to drag the issue any longer than necessary.

I'll see you when I see you like fantasia.

Good morning.

Gabrielshow24:
My context is totally different from that of op's. We are miles apart intellectually!

Duh. The context is different. I just said that.

As for the supposed gap in intelligence, I don't know enough to comment on that and it's irrelevant to this argument.

Gabrielshow24:
My entire theme has been against his total reliance on AI even in his own thread!
I'm sure you saw where I said "I was talking to an LLM"

So basically this is a quarrel about who uses AI more? 🤷🏽😂

Gabrielshow24:
Also, you failed to address op when he mocked others' intellect using AI! That's my bone of contention with you, your radar didn't pick up on that 🤕! You didn't deem that as intellectual dishonesty!

Did OP copy ChatGPT without reference? If no, then how is that intellectual dishonesty?

It's like when we go to websites like Britannica or Quora. Some people lift content from those sites and paste them here without attribution. Others do their due diligence and include the references.

But the bottom line is this: are the lifted articles relevant to the conversation? Do they address the topic? Are they coherent?

Some people copy paste, but sometimes even their copy paste ends up biting them in the ass because they didn't read through it properly to see subtle details or caveats that disarms them completely.

Like I said, heckle him all you want but he never hid his intentions. He has been consistent, and he didn't pretend as if those words were his.

People dissing each other about intelligence happens all the time around here, to the point where I don't even register it in my mind. If I was a petty shít-stirrer, I can literally sit here all day and point out why many people on this thread have no right to be calling others unintelligent. But then what would really be the point?

kingxsamz:
Use hand to eat Fufu and Okra? Nah.
Egusi, yeah but not Okra.

Lol. Why tho?

Gabrielshow24:
I probably missed that mention of yours.
Well, I didn't use AI to have a discourse with him 🤔.
The one you allude to was to call him out as regards his promise🤨.

Did you find any during our discourse? Nope, you can't! I don't need to stoop so low to his level!

No wam.

Gabrielshow24:
It's not an excuse to justify my own! Your yard stick is totally wrong. Your perceived act of hypocrisy is far-fetched!

Now kindly tell me, in the discourse I had with both you and him, of an instance of AI🤧.
At least, we have had conversations. Let's start from there🙃.

I want to engage you for a little while to dismiss your sentimental allusions🤨!

What part of "certain posts scattered across other sections here" are you finding difficult to assimilate?

No seriously I can pull up what I said and we'll go through it.

FiveFootNinja:
I wasn't exactly referring to this thread when I said you had posts entirely copied from AI. When I said your posts, I was speaking of certain posts scattered across other sections here.

What part don't you understand?

Gabrielshow24:
I am not relying on it to generate my comment!

VS

Gabrielshow24:
When I do use it in write-ups...

🤦🏽🤦🏽🤦🏽🤦🏽🤦🏽

Gabrielshow24:
....it is only when I am tired, busy or too engaged to type my own response!

There's a difference....

So long story short, you rely on AI. It's just a matter of context. I get your point perfectly.

As for being tired, busy or too engaged, personally I don't see why you shouldn't just take a rest and come back to respond when you want to. Personally, I've done it before. I can respond to a conversation I was having with someone last month. But anyway, that's me.

All I'm saying is you can't mock someone for relying on AI, when you do the exact same. The same way you've justified yourself here (and your reason is okay), another person can have his own justification for using AI. That's why I said you have to look at the optics i.e read the room.

Gabrielshow24:
Are you this daft?
First of all, you missed the goal post entirely by positing that I used GPT when I didn't.

Secondly, yeah, I used an LLM extension which can be construed as AI but not in the discussion, I had with op! —you are free to disprove this if you like, if it will help you sleep more🤔

Thirdly, You totally missed the plethora of different instances where your homeboy downplayed others' intellect while totally relying on GPT for answers! A serious case of mistaken identity! Your hypocrisy radar didn't go on🤔.

Lastly, You don't have anything useful to say!

Class dismissed!

You've terminated the conversation for the second time only to come back and keep repeating yourself. 🤦🏽

I don't see how anything you've said here changes that fact that you rely on AI for certain posts.

Here's a useful hint: pointing out other people's wrongdoing is not an excuse to justify yours.

Gabrielshow24:
Nope it's not🙃.
Are you so disinclined that you are not aware of various writing tools and agents equipped with generative writing capabilities? Must everything be ChatGpt to you🤦🏾‍♂️? If I want, i can allow the extension to take over from this moment on and the tone of my message will change🤨, hence I have no need to copy and paste like omoawoke🤧.

You're artificially generating content here that's being presented as if they were from your own thoughts. And you're well aware that this is happening. It's not happening without your knowledge.

So it's irrelevant whether you're using ChatGPT, LLM extension or whatever tool. You're still relying on it to generate your comments. And that's the bottom line.

Sleep never catch you yet? Abi e don comot for your eye?

Gabrielshow24:
Check your write-up and stop playing ignorant!

No problem. We'll revisit the topic when you stop trolling and do the needful.

Gabrielshow24:
I'm afraid, I will have to cut this conversation short as it is going nowhere!

Yeah, sure. 🙄

Gabrielshow24:
You didn't accuse him of hypocrisy when he 'looked down' on others while using GPT.
He made all sorts of claims to aggrandize intellectual wisdom to himself—your voice wasn't heard!

I already told you I don't have a problem with people using GPT. I have a problem with people using GPT and OUTRIGHTLY LYING that they're not using GPT. 🤧

Gabrielshow24:
I used an LLM extension to complete my write up—in calling him out🤔—not as an evidence or a source of truth. There came your hoary head shouting hypocrisy!!!

How is this not relying on AI? 🤦🏽

I'll wait for the next round of gymnastics.

Gabrielshow24:
Goodnight, when you have a better thing to discuss, kindly hit me up! You know where to find me🙃

It's fine. I wasn't expecting any tangible reply anyway. Goodnight. 👍🏽

Gabrielshow24:
Can you not read? 🤔
What didn't you generalize?

If you know what I generalized, then it shouldn't be so difficult to point it out. 🤷🏽

Gabrielshow24:
I don't use GPT hence I have no need to cite it!

Okay, so this isn't ChatGPT then?

Gabrielshow24:
Ah, the self-proclaimed arbiter of intellect graces us with his presence! 🌟 It’s amusing how you claim to engage with 'high intellect' while simultaneously resorting to insults rather than substantive debate. But let’s not forget your earlier promise to provide evidence to dismantle the plausibility of the Tower of Babel.

You were tasked with properly dating the Tower and presenting evidence of languages that predate that period. Yet here you are, more focused on belittling others than actually delivering on that challenge. It seems your lofty claims of intelligence are as empty as your arguments!

You may think you’re above the fray, but true intellect isn’t just about throwing around insults; it’s about engaging with ideas and backing them up with solid evidence. So, while you eliminate those you deem 'dull,' perhaps take a moment to reflect on your own contributions—or lack thereof. After all, it’s easy to feel superior when you’re standing on a pedestal of your own making, but real wisdom lies in humility and the willingness to learn from others.

So, let’s see that evidence you promised! Or will you continue to hide behind your self-inflated ego? 🤔

Gabrielshow24:
Next time, you don't hastily generalize!
If indeed, you had followed the conversation you would have known who the real hypocrite was!

What did I generalize? Can you answer?

Gabrielshow24:
Also, you can go to the thread he opened and see whether I used AI in any of my interactions!

If he lacks the proper education that he can't do without AI that's his problem not mine!
Even when we had discourse the other day,🤔 did I use AI? Where is this stemming from?

I called him out to provide evidence 🤨 using suggestions to make my task faster yet here we are, you didn't accuse him of being intellectually dishonest and an hypocrite for looking down on others while using AI but you can accuse me🤨!

Indeed, you have something useful to say! Arbiter of hypocrisy! 🤣🤣🤣

But he was open from the beginning that he was using AI.

Did you cite ChatGPT in any of the posts you copied? 🙂

By the way, spamming laughing emojis just makes you look desperate. Let's keep the conversation mature. I don't know why you're getting so defensive.

Gabrielshow24:
That's a lie. My posts are not written by AI from start to finish. Let's do a litmus test, perform the same analysis on my quotes on this thread—Let's start from here!

Also, what you wrote is clearly an exaggeration! My point being his over reliance on AI to dismiss biblical narratives😅! He said we lacked critical thinking, some thing that stems from using the muscle of the mind—which is also hypocritical coming from him!🤣

What do you mean by "suggestions from extension is very funny"?🤣🤣 Do you know how many extensions that are powered by LLMs? Stop capping rubbish!

Once again, If you have anything "useful" to say, kindly do so!

What's getting you so worked up? 🙂

Gabrielshow24:
That's a lie. My posts are not written by AI from start to finish. Let's do a litmus test, perform the same analysis on my quotes on this thread—Let's start from here!

I wasn't exactly referring to this thread when I said you had posts entirely copied from AI. When I said your posts, I was speaking of certain posts scattered across other sections here.

I mean, I've only seen one here copied from AI on this particular thread, but do I really need to see more?

Gabrielshow24:
Also, what you wrote is clearly an exaggeration! My point being his over reliance on AI to dismiss biblical narratives😅! He said we lacked critical thinking, some thing that stems from using the muscle of the mind—which is also hypocritical coming from him!🤣

Okay? So you decided to challenge him by copying from AI too? 🤔

Gabrielshow24:
Once again, If you have anything to say, kindly do so!

I'm really just trying to understand the logic behind using AI to tell another person that he lacks critical thinking skills for using AI.

I mean, if he said that you guys lack critical thinking skills, don't you think the worst way to reply to him would be by using AI? Won't you technically be proving him right in an absurd twist? 🤔

Gabrielshow24:
it goes to show, I am living rent free in your head 😂. Is there anything I said that suggested hypocrisy?

I didn't paint the use of AI as bad, only its total reliance—A lot of people use AI on this platform from Gemini to GPT, some use it as a source of truth while others like op use it indiscriminately!

Also, some of it were suggestions from an extension. You can kindly check all my posts, if you like, I don't use AI for the totality of my speeches. I write well myself!

If you have anything better to say, kindly do so🤨 !

Living rent free in my head? That's a strange thing to say. Dude, I barely even know you. I'm only following the conversation going on with all the monikers here. 😂

And yes, you did sound hypocritical when you tried to mock Omoawoke for relying on ChatGPT in the post of yours that I initially quoted. Here it is again, in case you missed it:

Gabrielshow24:
Right? It's like watching someone try to win an argument by throwing a smartphone at it instead of actually thinking! 🤣 I mean, relying on AI to dismiss biblical narratives is like using a calculator to argue that math is just a myth. If he thinks the Tower of Babel is impossible, maybe he should try building a bridge between his logic and reality! But hey, at least he’s got GPT to back him up—because clearly, he’s running on empty! 😂

Nobody is saying ChatGPT is bad. I certainly didn't say that about you. But the optics don't look good on you when you ridicule someone for relying on AI, and yet your entire post in some of your comments (not all) are written by AI from start to finish. You ain't even editing them, it's just straight copy and paste from the bots. 😂

Like, what's the point? Are you trying to prove a point? What are you using ChatGPT to communicate, that you can't just communicate with your natural words? If that's not relying on AI to you, then I don't know what else to tell you.

It just looks weird, that's all I'm saying. If you want to make a point about others relying on AI, it doesn't make sense to generate responses using AI yourself. What's the logic behind that? It just looks weird, that's all.

And I know you don't use ChatGPT for all your posts. I've seen a few of your posts that read natural, so relax.

Suggestions from an extension is funny though. Issorite. Let me just believe you. 😉😁

Depends on my mood, but bread and eggs with steaming hot chocolate is a vibe tho. 🤧

Mom007:
True. Even works with bread.

The first time I tried bread with egusi was when I was down with serious malaria. The bitterness in my mouth made it feel so bad. I'm sure it's nice but that experience traumatized me. 🤢

Gabrielshow24:
Right? It's like watching someone try to win an argument by throwing a smartphone at it instead of actually thinking! 🤣 I mean, relying on AI to dismiss biblical narratives is like using a calculator to argue that math is just a myth. If he thinks the Tower of Babel is impossible, maybe he should try building a bridge between his logic and reality! But hey, at least he’s got GPT to back him up—because clearly, he’s running on empty! 😂

I didn't want to bring this up. I honestly wanted to keep quiet when I discovered you were doing it the first time, but I don't like it when people are being deceptive and hypocritical.

Like the saying goes, before you remove the speck you see in another person's eyes, remember to remove the log of wood in your own eyes.

At least Omoawoke is honest about his use of ChatGPT. What about you?

I actually don't care about people using gpts in debates, as long as they're honest about it and can defend their views. But it's weird to be painting the use of AI as a bad thing when you're doing it yourself. You did it in your post that I quoted below, and I suspect you did it here too.

Please let's try to be transparent when we're discussing on this forum. I know it's an anonymous forum, but there has to be a limit to the gimmicks. I have nothing against you. I just have a problem with hypocrisy. Thank you.

Gabrielshow24:
Ah, the self-proclaimed arbiter of intellect graces us with his presence! 🌟 It’s amusing how you claim to engage with 'high intellect' while simultaneously resorting to insults rather than substantive debate. But let’s not forget your earlier promise to provide evidence to dismantle the plausibility of the Tower of Babel.

You were tasked with properly dating the Tower and presenting evidence of languages that predate that period. Yet here you are, more focused on belittling others than actually delivering on that challenge. It seems your lofty claims of intelligence are as empty as your arguments!

You may think you’re above the fray, but true intellect isn’t just about throwing around insults; it’s about engaging with ideas and backing them up with solid evidence. So, while you eliminate those you deem 'dull,' perhaps take a moment to reflect on your own contributions—or lack thereof. After all, it’s easy to feel superior when you’re standing on a pedestal of your own making, but real wisdom lies in humility and the willingness to learn from others.

So, let’s see that evidence you promised! Or will you continue to hide behind your self-inflated ego? 🤔

Lucifyre:
Like i always tell you its your children i pity for. To have to constantly call a dedicated oaf like you father would weigh heavily on the mind.

💀💀💀💀💀

The ChatGPT civil war. 😂😂😂