Causality or Causation - The Fundamental Fact Plainly Explained

Ahnimus

Pj_Gurl wrote:

i don't know why anybody would even bother trying to have a discussion/debate in one of your posts. this is how it looks to me. you start up a thread, looking as though you are keen to throw something on the table for discussion. angelina comes along, gives her views on the subject at hand, and you then tell angelina 'her view is an enigma, wrapped in a riddle on a sesame seed bun of mystery'. it's insulting. i don't know why angelina even bothers with the constant back and forth with you. and why insult someone just because they tell her they agree with her post. is that not allowed here? or is it because someone is not blowing smoke up your ass that you don't like it???

from the mouth of the great Ahnimus.......



mmm hmm. and that's something that you are not very good at isn't it.

Is this just another one of your antagonist posts, lacking in detail, such as AngeliCa's name?

Dan, has a history with me of simply trashing my posts, misinterpreting them and praising any woman that posts a response. I doubt he is even a rational being that can see anywhere beyond his primative drives.

Angelica is totally delusional, which is apparent in her posts. She makes absolutely zero effort to read up on the material and makes assumptions about it. She also has a keen way of discrediting everything by some irrational and perverse philosophy.

If she had any clue about the history of epistemology and the results that have been achieved by the various techniques, she would know that her methods are a completely dead-end, and the scientific method, to date, is the best thing we have. You can't wake up in the morning without science. You can't do a thing in modern life without science. Yet, she irrationally tries to subvert it with some incomprehensible psychobabble. Furthermore, she claims to have knowledge pertaining to psychology and sociology, but in-fact, she is a charlatan with no knowledge of either.

I personally continue to study Epistemology, Causality, Psychology, Sociology, Biology, Neurobiology, etc. etc.. etc.. and I will never stop. I've read the material here, and Dan thinks he's smart telling me my interpretations of Hume are wrong, when in-fact, he's probably never even read any of Hume's work.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

You haven't read any of the material!

You came in here with your usual mixed-up an irrational comments. There is nothing for me to respond to, your entire philosophy is untouchable because you guard it by talking in an irrational code.

You may have had a point 2,000 years ago, but even Democritus would have slammed the door on you. Nothing you are saying has any incling of rationality to it.

There is no justification for trying to give away your own inner conflicts. It doesn't work. The conflict hangs on you.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

There is no justification for trying to give away your own inner conflicts. It doesn't work. The conflict hangs on you.

I don't have an inner conflict Angelica. Get it? Your comments aren't rational, they make no sense and they are wrong.The conflict is between you and I, because I try to have a rational discussion and you strut in here on your chariot trying to pretend you have the knowledge of God.

angelica

Pj_Gurl wrote:

i don't know why anybody would even bother trying to have a discussion/debate in one of your posts. this is how it looks to me. you start up a thread, looking as though you are keen to throw something on the table for discussion. angelina comes along, gives her views on the subject at hand, and you then tell angelina 'her view is an enigma, wrapped in a riddle on a sesame seed bun of mystery'. it's insulting. i don't know why angelina even bothers with the constant back and forth with you. and why insult someone just because they tell her they agree with her post. is that not allowed here? or is it because someone is not blowing smoke up your ass that you don't like it???

from the mouth of the great Ahnimus.......



mmm hmm. and that's something that you are not very good at isn't it.

What it comes down to is that Ahnimus is the only person who owns his poor behaviour. I don't internalize it or accept it because it's not about me. When he chooses to step out of balance and reason, he chooses to live and experience that.

At at the same time, there are many open, questioning, visionary and intelligent people on this board. These conversations go far beyond a two person exchange, so to me, they are often very worthwhile having.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't have an inner conflict Angelica. Get it? Your comments aren't rational, they make no sense and they are wrong.The conflict is between you and I, because I try to have a rational discussion and you strut in here on your chariot trying to pretend you have the knowledge of God.

You can make your conflict outer all you want, and project it on others. It's still your own.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

What it comes down to is that Ahnimus is the only person who owns his poor behaviour. I don't internalize it or accept it because it's not about me. When he chooses to step out of balance and reason, he chooses to live and experience that.

At at the same time, there are many open, questioning, visionary and intelligent people on this board. These conversations go far beyond a two person exchange, so to me, they are often very worthwhile having.

Go ahead, have them somewhere else. I created a thread about CAUSALITY. You have nothing to say about causality, you acknowledge it exists. Ok, let's move up to psychology, oh you know nothing about that, sociology, you know nothing about that, biology, you know nothing about that. I can't have a conversation with you. I can ask; Show me free-will in the brain? You could say, check the intralaminar nucleus of the hypothalamus, or check the area of the frontal lobe in the intrahemispherical fissure, but you don't, because you are completely ignorant. Instead, you talk some bullshit that doesn't apply to the topic and act as if you are all high and perfect with the wisdom of the Gods. Get over yourself and stop degrading me with stupid comments like those above. You are the antagonist.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

Go ahead, have them somewhere else. I created a thread about CAUSALITY. You have nothing to say about causality, you acknowledge it exists. Ok, let's move up to psychology, oh you know nothing about that, sociology, you know nothing about that, biology, you know nothing about that. I can't have a conversation with you. I can ask; Show me free-will in the brain? You could say, check the intralaminar nucleus of the hypothalamus, or check the area of the frontal lobe in the intrahemispherical fissure, but you don't, because you are completely ignorant. Instead, you talk some bullshit that doesn't apply to the topic and act as if you are all high and perfect with the wisdom of the Gods. Get over yourself and stop degrading me with stupid comments like those above. You are the antagonist.

Oh, I take responsibility for challenging you. Again, if you opt to step out of balance, and into petty insults--if you choose reacting, rather than responding from a place of balance and intellect that's your choice.

If you prefer to not be challenged, and to have people reflect your beliefs and methods to you, I wonder what you are doing on a message board.

Ahnimus

angelica wrote:

Oh, I take responsibility for challenging you. Again, if you opt to step out of balance, and into petty insults--if you choose reacting, rather than responding from a place of balance and intellect that's your choice.

If you prefer to not be challenged, and to have people reflect your beliefs and methods to you, I wonder what you are doing on a message board.

I don't mind being challenged. I want a debate, but not with you because you ignore the material and you are crazy! You harp on the same crap all the time. All of your statements have identical meanings but are paraphrased differently, and the moral doesn't make any sense.

Then you go off on this tangent of degradation, trying to blame your subversive behavior on me.

Anon

Ahnimus wrote:

Is this just another one of your antagonist posts, lacking in detail

bite me.
again. just because i don't agree with you doesn't make me antagonistic. get over yourself.

Ahnimus wrote:

I personally continue to study Epistemology, Causality, Psychology, Sociology, Biology, Neurobiology, etc. etc.. etc.. and I will never stop.

thats nice. i'm happy for you. whatever floats your boat. i work in the Health Industry as an Intensive Care Paramedic and i have studied long and hard for my qualifications. just so you know, you're not the only person on the planet whose brain cells are alive. and just because i don't agree with you, doesn't make you any better than me or any one else here. and vice versa. i accept that. it's a pity you don't.

Ahnimus

Pj_Gurl wrote:

bite me.
again. just because i don't agree with you doesn't make me antagonistic. get over yourself.


thats nice. i'm happy for you. whatever floats your boat. i work in the Health Industry as an Intensive Care Paramedic and i have studied long and hard for my qualifications. just so you know, you're not the only person on the planet whose brain cells are alive. and just because i don't agree with you, doesn't make you any better than me or any one else here. and vice versa. i accept that. it's a pity you don't.

What do you mean you don't agree with me? You aren't here to debate the topic of causality, you are here to piss me off.

angelica

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't mind being challenged. I want a debate, but not with you because you ignore the material and you are crazy! You harp on the same crap all the time. All of your statements have identical meanings but are paraphrased differently, and the moral doesn't make any sense.

Then you go off on this tangent of degradation, trying to blame your subversive behavior on me.

If you don't want a debate with me, why are you engaging with me? It's always your choice to engage or not. It seems that your actions speak to something else entirely--that you actually do want a debate with me.

Ahnimus

I don't even know why I bother with this board. The mods will let you fucks say anything you want, be total pests and irritate the hell out of people. But when I retaliate I get banned, it's so fucking disgusting. This page is a clique of ignorant fucks all patting each others backs for being so loving and caring without realizing that loving and caring alone doesn't solve many problems. You can be sympathetic for the rapee, but that won't stop the next guy from commiting rape. You need to sit down and learn what the fuck actually makes a rapist and then you can stop it and you won't have to worry about victims cause their won't be any. But everyone on this page has a victim complex.

Anon

Ahnimus wrote:

What do you mean you don't agree with me? You aren't here to debate the topic of causality, you are here to piss me off.

no. my initial post to you was about the way you spoke to angelia and Dan. that's what i didn't agree with. i thought i made that perfectly clear.

Anon

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't even know why I bother with this board. The mods will let you fucks say anything you want

i said i didn't agree with what you said to angelina and dan and i spoke up? i don't think the mods would have a problem with that?

Ahnimus

Pj_Gurl wrote:

no. my initial post to you was about the way you spoke to angelia and Dan. that's what i didn't agree with. i thought i made that perfectly clear.

That's none of your damn business, is it? So, you want to just come in and tag team me to escalate the conflict even further? What is your motivation?

Anon

Ahnimus wrote:

That's none of your damn business, is it? So, you want to just come in and tag team me to escalate the conflict even further? What is your motivation?

no. i don't come in to tag team you and escalate the conflict even further. my motivation? there isn't any. it was simply a case or reading ANOTHER one of your posts where you invite someone in to discuss something rationally and then YOU attack them. in hindsight maybe i should have shut my mouth and just said nothing. hindsights a powerful thing isn't it. yes you are right, it's none of my business. at least i have the guts to speak up if i think someone is being unfairly treated. i don't know any of you people and i don't know if you are one of the 'popular people' here and that saying what i said will get me plenty of grief from others. but i don't give a fuck Ahnimus. i thought you were an unfair to angelina and i said it.

angelica

Pj_Gurl wrote:

no. i don't come in to tag team you and escalate the conflict even further. my motivation? there isn't any. it was simply a case or reading ANOTHER one of your posts where you invite someone in to discuss something rationally and then YOU attack them. in hindsight maybe i should have shut my mouth and just said nothing. hindsights a powerful thing isn't it. yes you are right, it's none of my business. at least i have the guts to speak up if i think someone is being unfairly treated. i don't know any of you people and i don't know if you are one of the 'popular people' here and that saying what i said will get me plenty of grief from others. but i don't give a fuck Ahnimus. i thought you were an unfair to angelina and i said it.

I appreciate the support, friend. It's highly doubtful that you would get grief from others around here for speaking your mind, or for standing up for someone.

OutOfBreath

Ahnimus wrote:

You never have anything to add. You kiss some peoples ass and you rag on others. That's about it.

Grumpy, aren't we?
And not very fair either.
I will refrain from dragging out all my long-ass replies in your threads.

Peace
Dan

OutOfBreath

Ahnimus wrote:

Dan, has a history with me of simply trashing my posts, misinterpreting them and praising any woman that posts a response. I doubt he is even a rational being that can see anywhere beyond his primative drives.

I personally continue to study Epistemology, Causality, Psychology, Sociology, Biology, Neurobiology, etc. etc.. etc.. and I will never stop. I've read the material here, and Dan thinks he's smart telling me my interpretations of Hume are wrong, when in-fact, he's probably never even read any of Hume's work.

So, when I debate with you, you just construe it all as an elaborate attack on yourself? And you're the one talking objectivity. I often support angelica against you, but mostly because you are plain rude with her many many times. I dont totally agree with angelica either, but I agree with many of her points. As I do with many of yours, actually, unless you haven't noticed. I just dont agree with your philosophical stance, which is usually what you put up for debate. But if you interpret it as my crusade against you when I am questioning your position, I dont know what to say. How can you have a debate, if discussing the positions becomes personal? Me arguing against your position is not me "out to get you".

As for the Hume thing, I backed that up through discussing with my master in philosophy friend, who agreed with me, along with reading up on wikipedia. And when you bring up Hume, you bring up philosophy, and the baggage that is tied to Hume's philosophy. If you dont want to discuss your interpretation of Hume, why bring him up? I know you intended that post as a show-stopper, but I pointed out how it isn't quite that, since Hume is pretty double-edged in that regard.

I only rag you about the wanton insults you can come with out of the blue. (as you did with me just here, and angelica as usual) Otherwise, I am questioning and debating your rather adamant positions on these subjects.

If you really hate debating with us, then why do you? At length, for pages? That's what I really dont get.

PS: The really fun thing here is that between you and angelica, I actually lean a bit more to your arguments. But I can't accept the inherent arrogance baked into them, and the uncompromising rejection of anything not scientific, or just not your own approved science. Well that, and the resorting to insults when people dont agree with you. So your views, with a spoonful of humility and a dash of keeping options open I would probably agree with 90% of the time.

Peace
Dan

Kann

If I consider that :
a) causality is a necessary basis for a scientific explanation of natural events
b) science explains a lot but not all
c) I have no idea if causality is true in fields that science has not yet reached

How could I rest assured that causality rules the entire universe? The more we seem do discover the less we seem to know. I'm not sure everyone really understands the implications of the discoveries of the various fields in science (let alone the discoveries themselves), so having arrogant certitudes is nice but should be reserved to 18th century philosophers.