THE NEW Miscellaneous Talk That Doesn't Deserve A New Thread Thread Thread (Part 1)

[Evolution4Weak]

maybe Random Science Talk ?

but anyways that seems pretty cool, i think i remember seeing a video talking about that

[MGS (Larissa)]

hello people, i havent been here in a long time

[Deathwake (i nuked zenzone and will never let him forget it)]

Yellow. How have you been? Seen any interesting spec evo or other stuff?

[MGS (Larissa)]

No, i havent played the game in a long time, im gonna check it out

[Deathwake (i nuked zenzone and will never let him forget it)]

It’s got highly buggy binding agents now!

[DeepSix (Only you can prevent safety)]

Welcome back, MGS!

[blackjacksike (Weird FNAF cat)]

I’m (temporarily) back. What have I missed?

[Nigel]

uh…idk rlly, maybe the start of a new forum game? (Pandora horizon)

[Evolution4Weak]

We learn just how many ants we have on the forums

You can also click on latest and discourse will show everything you missed since your last vist

[Scyobi_Empire (has far too many pseudonyms)]

I, for one, welcome my comrades.

[DeepSix (Only you can prevent safety)]

With more ants we can call this forum a colony.

[Nigel]

Wheeze

Im bouta end 20 char post rule’s whole career.

[DeepSix (Only you can prevent safety)]

Well, okay…

[fralegend015 (Shroudmaster)]

You tried

[DeepSix (Only you can prevent safety)]

You used the <br> tag, didn’t you?

[OoferDoofer (Certified, Authorized, Qualified, Recognized, Ratified, Formalized)]

I forgot how to do this!

[blackjacksike (Weird FNAF cat)]

@Sentiant

Fun fact: @blackjacksike 's idea is based on the ‘orthogonality thesis’, which states that goals and the level of intelligence/argumentation of that goal are fundamentally unrelated. In other words: arguments and methods can be correct/incorrect, but goals cannot. Thus, since both grades and development are goals, not methods, neither is objectively the correct one to focus on.

Feel free to delete/move this if we are getting to off-topic.

No, I was just trying to say that there is no absolute objective answer to the question and therefore it could be considered as a logical paradox if not taken subjectively. It’s literally like asking who you would save between your mother and your wife. There is no right answer nor is there any wrong answer because it is subjective to take any decision. Ha ha! Actually, the only objective answer would have been not to come to the paradox in the first place.

[Sentiant]

That doesn’t make sense. The question ‘Who would you save, your mother or your wife?’ isn’t a paradox, it’s logically answerable:
If you value your mother more than your wife → save your mother
If you value your wife more than your mother → save your wife
If you value both equally → arbitrarily pick one to save.

The subjective part is whether you value your mother or your wife more, which is what I was talking about with the orthogonality thesis.

I should also point out that by your logic almost any question at all is a paradox. Is 1 + 1 = 2? That depends on your axioms, and those are subjective, IT’s A PArADOx!

So using this logic we arrive at the conclusion that you should never ask questions.

[Nover452 (Moss Enjoyer)]

@Sentiant

So using this logic we arrive at the conclusion that you should never ask questions.

what if i wanna ask questions tho?

[Deathwake (i nuked zenzone and will never let him forget it)]

Then do, don’t trust logic when it’s being odd.