>objective vs. subjective
Is the universe really only objective or subjective? It seems to me that some things are objective, and some things are subjective. I don't view it as completely true to say the entire universe is either objective or subjective.
For example: things that involve human nature like personal preference or happiness tend to be subjective. There is no one best way to live, it is decided by each person for themselves.
Or things like science, physical existence, or falsifiable claims tend to be objective. The circumference of the Earth is 24,901 miles, any other answer (in miles) would be wrong. There is an objective answer to this falsifiable claim.
So again; is it logically correct to say that the universe is subjective OR objective? Or is it better to believe that the universe is subjectively objective and objectively subjective?
>>3341933
Bumping for later
>>3341933
All we experience is subjective. So where did the idea for objectivity come from, and what makes us, as subjects, think we have access to it?
>>3341960
Like I said, human experience is usually subjective; but I didn't ask about that, I asked about the universe.
Things like hard science (ex physics) are objective, it is objectively true that for example the acceleration caused by gravity on earth is -9.81 m/s^2, that is true regardless of experiences and personal beliefs, which is objectivity
There is no evidence that God created a universe, but math shows the monkeys will eventually create Macbeth. I think theists are deliberately refusing to admit to understanding the thought experiment?
Faith does not mean what they say it does. It's a word with multiple meanings, and one of them is pretending to know things you don't know, so I prefer to avoid it. I know however with certainty due to my understanding of how probabilitity works that the monkeys would create Hamlet.
I refer to monkeys hammering randomly at a keyboard die a long enough time.
>>3341892
this is a great example of when theory becomes useless. don't get me wrong, i understand the concept here, but it's absolutely impractical. not only would no one seriously attempt to carry out such an experiment, but it also may.not.happen. there's always that chance, right?
It would however eventually happen if you had enough time. That's how probality works. Agree?
Do you think Germany would be able to push through French defenses directly through the border instead of going through Belgium?
Germany did have the most powerful army in the world at that time.
>>3341880
Not quickly. Limiting the war's scope to the Franco-German border sharply limits how many troops can effectively be brought to bear and more or less nullifies Germany's advantages in numbers and faster mobilization.
>>3341895
EXPLAIN
>>3341916
What exactly is unclear? I thought the statement was very straightforward.
>south america directly after independence
>an interesting continent with a shit ton of interesting empires
>modern south america
>boring third world shithole
>>3341772
Eurangutans...
>>3341785
el peruANO
> Europe in the 1500s
> an interesting continent with a shit ton of interesting empires
> modern Europe
> allahu akbar
In terms of general intelligence and characteristics of the Irish, English, Scots and Welsh.
English
>Extremely smart, ordered and ambitious upper class.
>Extremely unintelligent, arrogant and ignorant middle and lower class.
>Scots: Extremely smart middle class
>Welsh: Not particularly smart at all on all levels, but cheery and prideful.
>Irish: Witty people, quite the oddity as intellectuals can be found in the lower, middle and upper classes which has led the Irish to be inconsistent throughout history.
The Scots are the most ignorant and arrogant imo.
>>3341714
I hinestly believe the English upper and working classes are basically separate races.
>>3341714
>Scots
>Extremely smart anything
What does /his/ think of the The Holocene calendar?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czgOWmtGVGs
>>3341710
Too much work to make the adjustment.
>>3341710
its gay and retarded as fuck. theres literally no point to it.
>>3341710
Seems kind of points. AD and BC already work. (Or CE AND BCE, if your gay)
Why don't more people rank Mohammed as the greatest man of all time?
>>3341667
>Why don't more people rank Mohammed as the greatest man of all time?
Roughly 23% of the world's population does believe that, though.
>>3342539
OP said people, not apes
Because European society that shaped the modern world is mainly based on the teachings of the Christians, as they descend from Medieval societies.
Sand people didn't get to vote in those lists.
What's his name again?
Pompeii "Party in my anus" Magnus
Butcher's Boy
Pompey "Suck off Lepidus" Magnus
>Socialism doesn't wor-
>>3341591
>cuba
>socialist
>>3341591
I remember going on vacation in Cuba when I was a kid and Havana looked like a shitshow. So many fucking homeless and poor people bothering us on the street for $$$.
>>3341591
>be wealthier than Spain or Finland
>have most doctors per capita than most of Europe
>stagnate for half a century
>end up poorer than most of the Western Hemisphere
Cuba would already be a First World country if it hadn't gone communist. Pls KYS.
If natural selection saw that depression wasn't beneficiary, it would have gotten rid of it a long time ago. There's obviously a reason depression is still a thing, it allows you to see the world more clearly, to see what it truly is. This could've helped archaic humans for many reasons, to strip yourself of all emotion and to hunt more efficiently. Basically, depression turns/turned us into ultimate hunter machines. I see now why it exists, depression isn't necessarily sadness, it's clairvoyance.
>>3341548
You're dumb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy
NATURAL SELECTION
What did he mean by this?
>>3341534
Ancient way of saying just be yourself
It means that if you know your strengths and weaknesses, you have the advantage. Either that or it's something about cactus juice.
>>3341534
1. SUN TZU DID NOT WRITE THAT 'QUOTE'
2. APPLYING THE 'QUOTE' TO A INSIPID BACKGROUND DOES NOT IMPROVE THE 'QUOTE'
3. THE WRITER OF THE 'QUOTE' DID NOT 'MEAN' ANYTHING BY THIS - HE WAS CLEARLY AN IDIOT.
"Middle class deserves what they get "
>If there’s any group of people in America who deserve to suffer, it’s the White middle-class. It’s the people who have been warned for decades about where this country is headed, but who were too shortsighted, too timid, and above all too greedy, too selfish, to do anything about it. During the 1960s, when Blacks were rioting and burning our cities, middle-class Whites refused to take a strong stand against them because that would disrupt the country even more and would be bad for business; instead they tried to appease the Blacks with all sorts of new civil rights laws and other government programs. They tried to buy them off. The Whites just wanted to continue indulging themselves; they didn’t want to do anything that might require a bit of austerity in return for the long-term improvement of the country.
>In the 1970s, when the real push was on to racially integrate the country through forced busing and forced housing and forced employment laws, and many White working-class people were demonstrating in the streets against this forced racial integration, the comfortable middle class, which was not being as adversely affected as the blue-collar class, refused to become involved. The White lawyers and doctors and accountants and professors and engineers and small businessmen just looked the other way and kept on stuffing their faces. Their kids weren’t being bused to Black schools; their employment wasn’t being threatened by affirmative action. They certainly weren’t going to jeopardize their own comfort and security and respectability, just because of what was happening to working-class White kids and working-class White parents.
Full audio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xef1GjjiVpM
The boomers deserve the scorn for letting the oligarchs back in charge of the country after they got sidelined in the 30s and 40s.
Niggers are a diversion, the real danger is organized money.
>>3341508
so they basically destroyed society forever
>>3341519
Or until we get Roosevelt 2.0 to start trust-busting and cracking down on lobbyists.
This will presumably happen some time after the boomers have all died, having robbed both their parents and children blind and left behind a ruined society.
>pic related
>>3341486
The Victorian era was sexy af
>>3341486
BLUE BOARD BLUE BOARD
>>3341486
Why was it so bloody and destructive, and how did China manage to recover from the worst the world could throw at them?
Why did the Battles of Wuhan, Shanghai, Hubei, Changde and Zaoyang–Yichang become so bloody?
What tactic's were used in order to achieve so many losses in weeks of combat?
What was the motivation of the average Chinese grunt to fight the Japanese?
What was the average Japanese civilian's view of the conflict?
What were the motivations of the IJA for their cruelty in Nanjing?
What was it that brought Soviet and American volunteers to fight for the Chinese? (pre-Khalkhin gol and pre-Oil embargo)
What sort of auxiliaries did the IJA put to use? (Seen White-Russian and Indonesians in Japanese uniforms)
Books?
>>3341484
I own a manga written by an IJA vet with one arm,
"Showa Era 1926-1939"
It covers the opinions on civilians at the time and veterans after.
The mangaka served in New Guinea where he lost his arm. He condemns Nanking iirc.
>>3341484
>how did China manage to recover from the worst the world could throw at them?
At a glance I'd say it was sheer landmass they could giveaway for time + Japan having to fight a major war in the Pacific against the US,UK&Commonwealth.
>>3341484
>What tactic's were used in order to achieve so many losses in weeks of combat?
Nothing special, the bulk of the Chinese military answered to its local leaders and no one else and most of those commanders were shitty leaders. It was pretty easy to beat the shit out of them in 1937
What would have happened to Italy if the Axis won ww2? Would it eventually be apart of the German Reich? Europe is too small for both Fascist Italy and National Socialist Germany to coexist in Europe.
>>3341479
This is like saying that Europe was too small for the United Kingdom and France. Nazi Germany mainly wanted control of territories Italy couldn't possibly control, so Italy would be used to control the rest.
>>3341479
It probably would become a vassal to Germany.
>>3341479
Don't you people get tired of keep asking similar questions over and over and over again? Always the same shits. Are you a bot?