mawibse

For the purposes of thoughts and decisions, yes I know what the soul is, a wish for something more comforting, a me that would last for eternity. No, the Hyperdrivemotivator. But there is no point in assuming there is a single part of the brains that makes our decisions and is the root of our egos, since we pretty much need the whole brains for that. Like I said before, why would I need to imagine a non-physical entity that makes me conscious, have thoughts and make my decisions when the brains, according to most scientists and cognitive researchers, does it fine already?

No, but its like a large prison run by millitaries. Is there something specific you want to know about it? Lets not get philosophical in this thread shall we. http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.a ... 26&sid=WOR http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/20 ... 135746/024 http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/n ... tmo01.html Well that sounds really tough n all but... I dont believe it for a second. Hmmm Wasn't there a really big smear campaign in the US of a UN weapon inspector prior to the Iraq invasion? So am I.

That was wrong. But I was refering to Guantanamo Bay, not an incident in war zone where the guards got out of hand, whom has been punished for their actions btw.

Wicked groovie stuff! 2D pictures is one thing though, wonder how it works in stereoscopic vision aka "being there".

Perhaps the word torture is a bit misleading, we are talking about sleep deprivation, prolonged solitary confinement and force feeding of starvers, common "stress and duress" techniques. Not pulling fingernails or electric shocks! Also the U.N investigators has not even been to Guantanamo Bay, despite being invited. And The Postman, it's the validity of the accusations i'm discussing, not some persons lack of love for the biggest upholder of democratic values in the universe.

A U.N. investigation has concluded that the United States committed acts amounting to torture at Guantanamo Bay. American officials said the most significant flaw of the report was that it judged U.S. treatment of detainees according to peacetime human rights laws. The United States contends it is in a state of conflict and should be judged according to the laws of war. So torture is not torture when in a war? http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/02/13/un ... index.html

Now now Scraps, don't get "elitistic" on me. Descartes view on the soul, the very short version: The soul is exclusive for humans and is responsible for our thoughts and resides in the pineal gland. Sartre didn't from a philosophy perspective go into the soul that much. He was into existentialism which rejects some fundamentals of Descartes philosophical views though. Think Sartre thought of the Soul as the sum of actions of a person. That the soul somehow makes the decision instead of the brains is to me is a totaly unfounded notion. Nothing but my imagination would support such an idea.

"'Whither is the man with free will'? He cried. 'I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. All of us are his murderers...'" "...the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners; and they to were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern on the ground, and it broke and went out. 'I came too early then,' he said; 'my time has not come yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering -it has not yet reached the ears of man."

Well the brains is a physical object so... Lets go with the fairy tale soul and say that the soul is a non physical thingamabob that gets information from the brains and then sends back decisions. What would that add? Nothing. It would still base its decisions on what the physical brains gives it just as the brains would. I dont get what the soul would add in regards to "truly make its own choices"?

I'm with you Kosmo. *mawibse hugs Kosmo* Kosmo: Yeah yeah. *mawibse hugs Kosmo* Komso: .. ok thats enough. *mawibse hugs Kosmo* Kosmo: Please stop. *mawibse hugs Kosmo* Kosmo: K, thats enough, let me go or I'll headbut you. *mawibse hugs Kosmo* Kosmo:....... *SOCK!*

If it bothers you just say the safe sentence; "mawibse is god" and I'll stop responding to your posts until you say othervice. You have just taken one of Intelligent Designs prime argument for making ID a valid thing to teach in Science class and turned it into a defense for your personal beliefs in Fairy tale stuff. Unfortunately, anything man can make up, from Mind reading to Santa Claus, falls under that very defense. "It might not be discovered yet" You're no better then the religious yahoos, you dont need facts or studies, faith alone suits you fine. Nothing wrong with it, just wanted you to realize this.

No, it says evil is what I think it is. The exact state of the brains at the moment of a "decision" is what makes it, and brains is where a thought begins and ends. You have an Evilometer? You know those things are said to have a direct link to the will of god, who else could judge such things, surely not man.

If you think about it it is only logical that there must be a God. What else would create the universe? The soul, Karma and Rebith is as scientific as the Fairy King.

Chicken! *BWUAAKH* ..oh wait, WTF is the soul RD? Is that where free will comes from? Its slightly left of God isnt it? You know where whats Evil and Good gets decided. MWUAHAHAHA! The vanity of mankind! A soul! What folly!

Your sidetracking but I'll humor you; We where talking about the balance of Nukes in the absence of nukes, not the balance of the scale they where measured with. Would you say that the "nothing" that was on the scale in your example was in balance? Scientists don't and neither do I. And to steer it in a slightly more on topic direction, even with the fairy tale dream of a world without nukes, the balance of war technology would still heavily tip in favor for USA so... Ahh my mistake. I thought the plural "them" was referring to Afghanistan and Iraq not to USA. My bad, sorry. The notion that the only thing keeping countries from using nukes is that other countries have them is of course extremely oversimplified. If USA had nuked Afghanistan no one would have nuked USA for it.

How odd, everybody wins, wonder where the fools are at?

Example Scraps, in regards to the post you responded to, please?

Thanks very much for rubbing my points in The Postman and Scraps but three against one seems a little unfair don't you think? Glad someone finds humor in it, personally it just want me to cry like a man... yeah! like a man! Got a problem with that?!? *glares angrily and teary eye*

Usually one refers to balance as forces canceling each other out. Not the absence of forces. But that’s not the main issue, so.. if you want to get rid of all nukes why allow Iran to have them? One would think that would be counterproductive to your agenda? Pleeaase say that again about Russia not "going all ChucK Norris" on Afghanistan, it gives me Goosebumps. *pops in RamboIII in DVDplayer* Derogatory comments like "dear sir" and "Thx" really helps your case. What I posted was irrefutable truths which you nicely collaborated in your post. However you added some additional information clearly containing strong bias towards one party, words like terrorists and pre emptive strikes like, duh, gave it away. And you say that I manipulate facts to make my point? I think you just did my point. You kidding me? Go read a history book or google it, geez!

No no your other left.

1956: Israel with help of French and British forces attacked Egypt. 1967: Israel attacks Syria, Jordan and Egypt. 1981: Israel bombs a nuclear reactor in Baghdad. 1982: Israel invades Lebanon. And I'm not going to mention all the later "skirmishes" where Israel forces goes into Lebanon and such to find opposition. All these can off course be said to be done in self defense, just as USA's current occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq are self defense. But then, how can you tell if not all attacks is "pre emptive attacks" and in self defense? If you judge how justified to have nukes a country is by if neighboring countries shows any hostility then... Or perhaps nuke a country? We should give killertomato a nuke as well Kosmo, for balance sakes don't you think? Yes of all countries in the world I think Afghanistan and Iraq being referred to as "rather peaceful countries" is dead on. Like ketchup in coffee and hot dog with mustard gas.

Heres somthing you should know DD: The big bang theory has nothing to do with god or ID. If god created the universe there is no reason not to conjure it in any state god so wished, singularity is not an issue for god, for man perhaps but not god. That train of thought is like saying evolution supports the notion of god because all life forms start with one type of very simple organism and all others evolves from it. When it comes to cosmology there is a shitload of "holes" because we currently dont posess the means to validate and experiment on theories on that scale, dont mean its got something to do with god or ID.

Personally I have been banned by MikeZilla, called more names by Fletch then I can count and been put on the leeper colony list by The Postman. And I say they are doing better then alright, keep it up guys, I love ya!

No worries Kosmo, I'v got the perfect book.

Whimp. Oh. So because you think Santa is as real as Jesus that means I believe in a Fairy King, makes perfect sense. Yes. You mean the dictionary where Nazi = USA? Sorry, don't have that one. ???? Okok so your saying that if everybody has nukes the balance (of nukes?) will prolong all life? Heheh, thanks I thought it was pretty clev... hey! Did you just call me Hitler?? Ok, I'm culturally closer to US then Iran, big deal. You know that they eat babies for fun and constantly rapes white virgins, right? Don't need a tinfoil hat if I'm already brainwashed by the secret government agencies do I? I think the scientific term is "conspiracy nut". What do you think I'm doing right now? I think you confuse how much publicity a war has with its global effect. Auch, im sorry. My condolences. Stop being such a baby! Not if you compare it to a stone. And so what, the idea of "free will" is allot older, doesn't mean you don't believe in it? My act will be as clean as yours. What can I say, I calls it like I sees it.