₦airaland Forum

budaatum:
Yawn. It's not my bedtime yet. Stop boring me to sleep please.

lool ......keep the bullshit flowing......

budaatum:
By the way, notice how that created god thread is going? He's now begging for engagement

So you are indeed a true feline. You must have been so hurt online that it manifest in you offline. You still manage to include vaxx topic here.

I even wonder how you reach that conclusion that vaxx is begging for engagement ( perhaps the open question i ask that is yet to be answer) so that is how you can thoroughly thought it out.?

I say it again, that lack of understanding and/or misinterpretation will only take you to the place where you're not able to justify logic and reason anymore.

Are you that dense ?? I know you exhibit the trait of ignorance but that does not mean you should be dense too..... anyway that is your own issue

You can keep the bullshit flowing, but you proved my point and haven't noticed it.


Don't worry, that your overboiling emotion will be hotter than 100 degrees Celsius when powerd.


Devil dice game loading......

druxlazu:
I would put in my own 2 cents if you guys are serious. I am philosopher who aims to know the why? Who's interested in my belief

Game

Still waiting for you guys........ ........

006ixcovers:
Pls, I need details on how to get to study for masters in LMU Munich Germany.
Help a brother

calculate your entire undergraduate course work . If it is up to 200 credit point... pen down your email here.

I will forward you more details


Type"" bologna process"" on your Google page to get a reflective idea of German credit point and how your university credit point can be comparable.

tintingz:
Attempt suicide or suicide is a crime in some countries, even assist suicide is a crime in some countries.

In my own personal opinion, suicide should be legal and illegal depending on the case at hand.

It should be legal when one is suffering from pains of a medical condition and no treatment, such person should decide if he/she wants to leave this world.

It should be illegal when you have no meaningful and logical reason to end your life e.g depression, JW people rejecting blood transfusion. Government duty is to protect lives.

And it shouldn't be criminalize, it should be a psychological, medical case.

Successfully committing suicide cannot be criminalized.

You can't put a dead body in jail, nor can you try it for a crime.

But attempted suicide is illega as our cuture /law determine . The rationality behind it is not to "punish" the person who attempted to kill themselves, but for the state to intervene and assess the mental state of the person who did so, and if there is some medical issue, the state will force them into treatment so that perhaps they won't try it again.

Even as the case might be , rerely is someone who attempts suicide arrested, jailed, and tried for the crime.

I doubt this kind of case happen in Nigeria despite the law for it.. I seriously doubt it ...

We rather offer a helping hand....

And on the critical medical condition, the doctor alongside the family or state lawyer ( that is if there is no family) should be the people to determine that. Sick patient has no says in this case because of his health...


My opinion though.....

johnydon22:
It is in our criminal law. Whether we prosecute them on many cases is another issue

The law was abducted from British law. But anyway culturally is an abomination too in Nigeria.....Yoruba people for instance regards it as taboo and anyone who dare it successfully will have is family properly clean( traditionally ) in igbo land it is refer to alu .

purem:
So you will drive people to kill themselve if you can


This is what you deserve........

I agree with you....

Our nairaland mathematicians whatsup?

Since both equation prove non exclusive....

Let's apply "" epistemic probability"" to further balance this equation. ( henceforth EP)

But before then, i think we should know how EP work?
EP takes two compatible forms. In its first form, it deals with how we can determine the degree of confidence in a proposition, increasing from zero to one as their attitude goes from almost total disbelief to near certanity.

This kind of Ep is called credence, degree of belief, or subjective probability. The propositional attitude you get when you attach a subjective probability to a proposition .

Its second form, is associated most often with the term logical probability, here Ep determines the impact of a piece or pieces of evidence on a proposition. As such, it may not have the structure of a probability distribution, but it is related to a probability distribution in some straightforward way.

There is a foundational dispute between the proponents of the two forms of epistemic probability. It is not for existence but for primacy: the question is which of the two kinds of epistemic probability is the more epistemologically basic.


Now that we have gotten the basic fundamental of the this EP and how it works? I will like to know which of this will be more sufficient to use to validate our equations? ( i mean that will conform to knowledge)And at the same time give us the consequence of not using the other one . ""We have to be fair I think"".

I await your impressive answer before I continue.....


To those of us who may wish to learn more........


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_interpretations

1 Spearman correlation theory

2 Infinitesimal calculus

3 optimisation mathematics

Just to mention some few are what is giving me lot of headaches currently.......

Every computing related student can testify , and if you find these easy...kudos to you.....

I just wish this cup can pass me by

johnydon22:
I have addressed the question of human moral basis

Direct me there?

In 100 or 200 years time, we may look back on the way we treated animals today as something like we today look back on the way our forefathers treated slaves - ""Richard Dawkins"" arguably the most famous atheist of 21st century......

LordReed:
Yes it is animal slavery.

kudos....it shows you are abreast with what I am insuniating.


What if reviving them become a breakthrough to what We become more beneficial to humanity...

LordReed:
The question as framed in the op kinda means nothing as far as I am concerned. It is like asking me is it ethical to impregnate a woman. When you now attach purpose to such a question you can now evaluate the ethics of it. You indicated you want Neanderthals for a slave race, it goes without saying that that is a terrible thing to desire for sentient beings.

That is why it is called a thread., you find nothingness in the question , You ask for the point that is fine ( we do not have the same understanding)I let you know why it will be fine to have them with us, you see it as slavery , good , I actually agree with you. Now the basis of the question become more meaniful to you than the initial stage when you find nothingness in it.

That is how disscussion should be. We are not mandated to understand each other at a go.

Similar question was asked by an athiest...

LordReed don't you thinks having pets too can be classified as animal slavery?

LordReed:
Basically raise a slave race. LoL. I don't even need to elaborate on that.

That is why the question is asked ? Do you think it will be ethical?

That is the whole purpose of this thread....

And let your ass licker knows that this thread had a tiitle and the discussion shouild be based on that. I will not reply red hearing.

LordReed:
What will be the point? A species you can put in a zoo and study? If a fully sapient Neanderthal is revived can you fathom the disadvantage such a species would have at this point in our evolutionary development? Your interest I think is not enough to necessitate their revival, not unless you will allow them not become as developed as you, rendering your interest in them devoid of those things that made you interested in the first place.

so many reasons , medical research (at least to understand human genetics better) economic purpose ( replace man power ) experimental uses ( use them to test the latest drug or any scienctifc discovery that human are directly required) war purposes ( replaced human solders and use them instead) Etc..
.
I generally like to draw on common historical themes, or examples when answering these kinds of questions. But with this one, we obviously don't have an example to pull from. I'm going to give it a go anyway.

I guess we have to look at why this sub-species of humans was able to survive in this scenario that would be different from our timeline. I think the general consensus among anthropologists today is that they were out competed for resources by proper humans. They also bred with many groups of humans, which led to a more of a melding of the two groups, instead of an outright extinction.

So to have a full fledged group of Neanderthals reviving today must mean alot to us human in general, they will be more closer to us than chimpanzee. Infact i suspect that if they were revived in many , they will flee to somewhere like British island or antratical island due to their adaptation to cold where they could potentially avoid direct conflict/competition until a much later date

Empiree:
No, you should ask. And the answer is, prophet Muhammad was one then and the same person now. His message is one till now. Any questionable messages attributed to him will have to be weigned with Quran. But you failed to see what Alfa is saying regarding isese. As for Ifa aspect, if Ooni is not historian nor babalawo, then, he is simply wrong to come out publicly and made obnoxious statements that even fellow Obas disagree with. Going through your thread now. I am sure you aren't saying anything new . Eleribu ni awon oyinbo yen. Won pa itan ki tan fun wa

isese is a combination of primordial customs and culture. It is subjected to changes as the society evolve. It is not meant to be permanent ...yes they are isese that will be meant to be so. For example ""idobale"'(prosrating for the elders) will remain constant till infinity regardless of modern age.

Alfa point is not well substantiate enough. All what he pose in challengies to isese can be use against Islam too. For example, the use of horse and microphone and the technical language of English that can not be found in Arabic.

And regarding Islam, islam has different types of rulings: which are simply divided into three...

1 rulings that are fixed and not liable to change,

2 rulings that change depending on the place, time, conditions, etc.

3 rulings that have no verse/hadeeth/consensus narrated about them.

The first type does not change and may not change, but the last two are subject to changes at any time.....

Oni is simply doing his diplomatic work....and anyone interested in knowing the truth should seek further.

Oyinbo are the Victor. .....history always favour the Victor.. .But we are in the age of enlightment where oyinbo will be stop to used their bread to pack away our delicious soup.

As we know doubting means uncertainty .if you face this issue Mathematically. you will apply law of probability. the option of chance that one is likely to be correct. We shall be using this probability to demosrate the existence of God.

let's do the same mathematics here......law of probability.......

Supposing you have two options, out of which one is right and one is wrong the chances that you will chose the right one is half. which mean one out of the two will be correct. You have 50% chances of being correct. Similarly if you toss a coin the chances that your guess will be correct is 50% (1 out of 2) 1/2.If you toss a coin the second time, the chances that you will be correct in the second toss is again 50% that is half.

The chances that you will be correct in both the tosses is half multiplied by half (1/2 x 1/2) which is equal to 1/4 which is 50% of 50% which is equal to 25%. So If you toss a coin the third time, chances that you will be correct all three times is (1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2)that is 1/8 or 50% of 50% of 50% that is 12½%.

Therefore the chances of God existence and non existences mathematically is 12 percent.


I think is getting interesting here ( The chances for both side's are equal) good they are not mutually exclusive, which means they can both be true.....



So what should be next forward thinking ( mathematics student what do you think)?

Though There is fantastic solution to this , I shall update it later......

Empiree:
when you have time watch this response to Oni


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3sItKTs35A&t=3559s

I have repeated it overtime that oni is not an historian or babalawo that will be versed in the knowledge of Ifa.

Oni ogunwusi is a leader and leaders are known for their use of sophistry to influence their subject.

Ifa is the only template that answer that question
perfectly..


Regarding the objection raised by the ustaz, I can also play the same similar game with Islam. I can ask if the same Islam of muhammed is still the same as of today. They are so many evidence that go against it.

Anyway, I am not gonna do that , I will rather enlight you and the ustaz on the subject of Ifa.

Pls try and show the ustaz this thread.


https://www.nairaland.com/4680091/traditions-great-isese-dara-pupo

purem:
I expect something more honest and humane

lol.....would you play this kind of game instead....

Before this probability. Let's examine this rethorical question. How can physical atoms and molecules for example, create something that exists in a separate domain that has no physical existence?


I think this below link got some interesting information..... An exentisive research was written on it.


.:http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1cg4m4s

Red hearing candidate spotted.

I may be reluctant to answer any response I perceived detrimental or may block this thread for further update.

If you find this thread allergy to your reasoning, kindly use the left door. I am broadcasting to cyber space not you.

The so called intelligence you hold had been put into test and could not even comprehend what is been posted here after breaking it down. The older thread prove it. You can't even break the simple so called Socratic method. But i will not simplify it Ilike I did in the former thread.

Now that we have established that infinite regression is paradoxical and sufficient explanation shouild be favour instead. Can we now move forward. But let's not forget the principle of sufficient reasons as lay down by Leibniz. ....i have directed us to the links above...

Breaking it down further, There are two senses in which we speak of the Principle of Sufficient Reason .(henceforth abbreviated as ‘the PSR’):

On epistemological sense: all true propositions have a justification, that is, a reason by which they are true. No statement is a “brute fact” or “simply true”


On ontological sense: all things or events in the world have are caused by something else, and there are no self-caused events (except, perhaps, the first mover).

Philosophers argue over both what Leibniz meant and which view is correct.

This is one potential reading of the so-called “epistemological” PSR. Some philosophers argues that we can hold the PSR as a brute fact, or that we can have a series of axioms that are assumed true or are self-evidently true, and that all theorems can be explained in such a way..

Now let's look at probability of God existence ....

darkhorizon:
They were primitive, had more affinity for violence and had higher chances of mental illness just like theirdescendants . Why would you want such people back?They were recessive compared to modern human (100% homo sapiens).

lol hope you are not a racist? Neanderthals were both social and sapient, which means that they almost certainly had culture, even if it was basic. Because of that, they would almost certainly be entitled to the same rights and privileges that humans enjoy.

purem:
I just have the feeling inside me that there is God

Yeah I do noticed it whenever am arguing otherwise

And it's happens to most atheist too, something inside of you tells you that there is God but you keep saying there is no God on the outside

It caught me today so I repent and I want to be born again now and then start serving our heavenly Father

lol......say after me , ##### Jesus, I’m tired of the sin struggle in my life. I feel distant from You. My choices have not led me into the right places. I’ve listened to the whispers of my enemy intead of Your words in Scripture, and the result has been disastrous. So forgive me ramen ###### . You are born again now.

You can now blame the devil for your fuckup.

LordReed:
Doesn't answer the question.

it will perfectly make more sense....if you say this answer does not satisfy your curiosity.

You don't probe the answer nor query it, how will I know it does not answer your question.

LordReed:
SMH

should I take this as an open conclusion that you can't comprehend those facts.







I

will repeat it because your statement is how dogma is born. Don't question me because I said so. No, we shall always question it.

Dogma is an information, the only diffrence is they are not observable...empirical evidence is not the only method of truth searching.... . Even science is subjected to prejudice..

Budaatum refer you to mindfulness yesterday on a particular thread. It is one of the ways we seek truth for ourselves and likewise what we are doing here( called the socrate method )This are few...Sometime experiential evidence is all what We have when some answer to some questions seems paradoxical... and never forget intuition too. You don't need observational evidence for these .....

If the theistic dogma is the result of using logic and reason to arrive at their beliefs, just as philosophers or anybody else concoct a theory and then argue that their philosophy or theory is the result of logic and reason. Then it is perfectly valid dogma.

LoL you just omitted the fact that in your example the observed data for moon position is already known. Same for the observed universe, you can speculate with some degree of certainty because data already exists. Why do you not speculate that there are herds of elephants walking around on the rounbottom of the oceans?

Good , just like there are undeniable fact that the universe we are is alife and it is currently working with mathematical law. This are reasonable evidence to speculate the origin of the said existing mechanical behaviour of our umiverse

It will make no sense to speculate such paradoxical (-elepant walking around the bottom of the occean )since there is no prior information to that. Speculation works with existing knowledge not just emptiness....

darkhorizon:
Yeah cool, but why are you particular about their revival.

lol......All what I know about them is pratically all what i have learnt in textbook, documentry and in some cases from enlightened individual..

I really want to know if all what i have learnt about them are really true and at the same time, will like to investigate more.

LordReed:
Well show how doubt strengthens your hypothetical position.

Well , if it is a known fact that matter constantly vibrates with energy, and likewise dark matter contain energy, then It is scientifically accurate to say let's investigate their origins..People delude themselves of the facts when it stares them in the faces, i mean the perfect relativity throughout all forms of life is a pointer to this knowledge. if only we would take the veil of our faces and see things as they are...There will be nothing called nothing cause nothing is the aftermath or rather a reflection of something as this universe itself.


Even the law of probability agree with this condition...

LordReed:
Its not even a hypothesis because as you point out there's not even a shred of evidence to support its formulation

The rationality of the universe to behave reasonable well is evidence, the starting point of the universe is evidence, the mechanism that operate within the frames of the universe is an evidence. So many.....

Speculation with no observation is useless because then you are making a baseless speculation with no way to proceed from there. The same problem this god speculation falls into which need to be constantly defended by subtle "Bleep off" statements like "In this case of God acceptance.. .It is your personal choice to reject the idea or accept it but you do not have any scientific or logical claim that he did not exist ." LMFAO!

Not true . I have refutes this claim earlier not all knowledge are demonstrable or simply can be observed. You are still repeating it

Speculation is about how you can use your knowledge to make predictions about things: for example , you can predict the location of the moon with your eye closed. You can speculate that the moon will be there when you re-open your eyes, you know where it will be. This can be speculated without observation. And That's what makes knowledge about it valuable. Maybe it "disappeared", in some sense, but it's not a particularly useful sense. You put together a model of the universe in which things persist when you're not observing them, and the utility of that model is the only thing that matters.