LustyArgonianMana

It is. Pregnancy cravings?

Okay, think about this - women are growing an entire new entity. This entity is made of flesh. The easiest way to get components to build this flesh entity is other flesh entities.

Eating flesh and blood is a woman thing in most species, yes, we agree. Glad you came around.

https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/earth/ask-a-scientist-about-our-environment/which-animal-group-has-the-most-organisms#:~:text=In%20terms%20of%20numbers%20of,documented%20and%20studied%20by%20scientists.

In terms of numbers of species, insects certainly represent the largest percentage of the world's organisms. There are more than 1 million species of insects that have been documented and studied by scientists

Well, agree to disagree then.

I never stated there was ultimate truth.

Fallacies are intrinsic to philosophy, so much so they are incorporated into the legal system, math, and sciences.

Bad faith is important all the time, not just during a debate. How many people would be in cults if they understood bad faith arguments? It would also be harder to scam people because most scams are also based on bad faith arguments.

philosophy is essentially just a means to an end. It’s a structure that allows you to get from point A, to any externally defined point, in some structured and consistent manner.

Yes, and that structured, "valid" manner has to do with logic, rationale, and fallacies. Fallacies are a failure of rationale or logic. They describe philosophical failures. I also disagree "philosophy is just a means to an end."

On the z axis, a rock thrown exhibits the same downward forces as a rock dropped. If you took physics and calculus, you might know that.

Bipedal motion is a little different than what dragonflies are doing, which is predictive math with an extremely high success rate.

No, kids are taught that it's a fallacy. If your parents explained it as "it's not polite," rather than "it's nonsense," that's on your education. But it already sounds like you personally dislike learning about fallacies and are now projecting it onto me and the entire subject of philosophy rather than acknowledging I have validity (and I do, as I've been entirely consistent - unless you think you know some kind of ultimate truth that should dictate how others believe).

By 'previous information,' what you meant originally and what I was addressing was previous formal philosophical info. Your original claim was that fallacies were too complex to teach to everyone. My point is that even children understand fallacies. It's not amd was never about whether you need language to understand communication, don't make up stupid stuff. Obviously if someone can't communicate at all, they would not take a course in any subject including logic and fallacies. Focus on your point and argue it. If you lose, maybe just accept that you're neglecting some education here in terms of fallacies and arguments.

it’s probably not relevant enough to the majority of the public to warrant teaching everyone about them fully

like i said i think teaching the basic tenants of fallacious thinking would be productive. Something that gives you a primer into the concepts would be largely beneficial.

This is NOT what you said. Scroll up. Look at my first comment to you about this subject. You've spent days arguing against this.

Here's my first comment to you, which you disagreed with:

Just need courses on logic and fallacies and that would be 🤌

Your response:

i feel like fallacies are a bit of a golden goose, if you’re educated in the field of fallacies, you’re basically just educated in the field of debate, being educated in philosophy is going to allow you to generically recognize these fallacies, though without being able to identify them, as well as all of the additional benefits of engaging in philosophy (like understanding the concept of worldviews)

another problem with fallacy, is that you can also just kinda, make shit up. Or accuse people of doing the same fallacy you’re doing, it’s sort of cyclic in nature like that. It’s interesting in theoretical thought though, i’ll give you that one

But honestly, THANK YOU for demonstrating how properly identifying and refusing to accept fallacies wins an argument. I got you to change your mind according to your own comments. Maybe you should find fallacies a little less boring 🤷🏼‍♀️ Wouldn't have lost if you were arguing from a strong, rational position. Instead you were being reactive because it was about a subject you struggle in and find boring, by your own admission.

Where am I backtracking?

I'm not a Democrat.

Taxes provide a legal precedent for what you claim is "unconstitutional" regarding scaling fines.

This is honestly stupid. The capitalists are the problem in capitalism because it affords them too much power.

That poem you quoted is about Nazis, the oppressors. The poem doesn't go "they killed everyone and it is morally wrong for me to kill them back." Lol. You'll notice the Nazis aren't included in the poem? It's Jews, sure, but not Nazis? Why do you think that, oh brilliant one?

As a white woman who's gotten tickets - I only open my window 2-3 inches to hand my documents through. It's all I am obligated to do so we can communicate and I can provide documentation. Considering the amount of rape and murder the police conduct, I think this is reasonable. Idk why this man has to have his window down too. I've rolled mine up during traffic stops when it was very cold or very hot, as Florida probably is right now. It's a huge abuse of power and completely unnecessary to attack a citizen for rolling up a window. No one should defend this. It's fascism. There's no crime for rolling up windows.

Its probably hot there. Why must he keep his window down except to assert arbitrary control?

"Being rich" isn't a protected class. That's not discrimination lol lol. We already structure taxes like this lawfully.

Yeah it was kind of pandering in a way idk he's done before. I actually watched clips from the old episode where dick cheney had just shot someone and it's so different

https://mitpressbookstore.mit.edu/book/9780385350549

Eve: How the Female Body Drove 200 Million Years of Human Evolution

By biomass, yes most animal species do have females who engage in blood meals https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-the-biomass-of-earth-in-one-graphic/

No, I chose my words precisely here:

How can a student tell if a philosophy is valid if they don’t even know if it’s logically consistent or argued in good faith?

Define "validity" in philosophy and again explain how a philosophy can be considered valid if a person doesn't understand fallacies or good faith argumentation?

Yes, those different frameworks are considered philosophically relevant nd valid because they are consistent, rational, and do not generally involve fallacies. That's entirely WHY we teach Nihilism and not some random rant from an incoherent person.

Philosophy and math are intrinsically tied together.

Why is it beneficial to limit how much one knows about fallacies? Just because it's a lot to learn?

The math is generally the same? Lol no. I have completed Vector calculus and you aren't right. The fallacies aren't the same either or else we wouldn't define them differently.

Technically dragonflies innately do calculus to catch their prey. The basic concepts of calculus are pretty understandable even for kids, however the mathematical operations are beyond them. Similarly, ypu can explain fallacies to people even if they don't understand all the nuances of Kant.

Likewise, we teach kids name calling is wrong. We are telling them at a young age that ad hominem attacks aren't the way to argue. They do not need previous information to understand this.

I think we actually agree a bit. Whether the fallacies are explicitly labeled as such isn't so important, what's important is that people understand the formula and system of it and how they contribute to nonsense. That typically means they will have to define and understand terms to make sure they know what the fallacy explicitly is.

With math, we naturally do math already. The math we teach kids is actually a language helping them describe these systems. Rec the book "Where Mathematics Comes From"

It's not. You should develop some science literacy if you think that sounds made up and don't know how to verify it yourself. Ofc, I will say every species is a little different and not every single mosquito species even bites humans for example. But as a general rule, yeah, I'm right.

Only the female mosquito bites and feeds on the blood of humans or other animals. https://www.epa.gov/mosquitocontrol/mosquito-life-cycle#:~:text=Only%20the%20female%20mosquito%20bites,conditions%20for%20a%20few%20months.

an adult female flea lays eggs following a blood meal from the host https://www.petmd.com/dog/parasites/evr_multi_understanding_the_flea_life_cycle

After a female tick feeds and is engorged with blood, she releases pheromones to attract a mate. https://mosquitojoe.com/blog/understanding-the-tick-lifecycle/

The female then must locate a blood-meal to complete development of her eggs. https://mmcd.org/black-fly-life-cycle/

For the roosters - this is a well recorded and observed behavior you can watch on TT or wherever. Not all roos do it, but it's pretty common nonetheless with thousands of videos observing this: https://youtu.be/ynhzfbZ0oGk?si=vhEtGxP5VI33sB-L

Bring back mob justice