tadmjones

How is different from the idea of original sin? Baser instincts? Sadly?

oops did it again, or tried to

Apparently a failed attempt at ironic humor. I was buttressing your point about ethnicity and it being a human quality and not separable. EG could one define the whiteness as it applies to man, and could it be the same just cause most swans are too. Tried to be too cheeky adding a fallacious humor too

What about most swans, they are white

Noble Vision by Gen Lagreca is good novel about the difficulties medical practioners face when going up against state and corporate controls.

Things can always change, but.. most people think healthcare is either an ID card or a policy number. Market mechanics has been effectively divorced from the industry for so long now, that the impression of most is that the problems are with distribution alone. As the problems snowball , I fear the political will will be to seek a fairer and simpler solution. In the press I rarely if ever see doctor or hospital groups interviewed, and it seems the insurance companies have been promised a 'bailout' to offset profit loss due to implimentation of the ACA.

I do not know for certain particulars, but my impressions from the coverage I have seen(so based on the 'media', without fact finding on my part)is that he was duly elected by a large majority , served one(?) of five years, worked to make sure that racism wasn't used as a catalyst for violence against whites. And that he and his government and supporters are from the left.

I think the only route to the rational utopia you envision is a deterministic one.

I remember when asking, "Are you on facebook?", would have been a nonsensical question. At that time I think the idea that people would want to 'share' every moment of the lives with potentially the whole world would have been a ridiculous notion, what happened? And who is surprised when things like this occur?

Just googled her, ok, but I would still like to see her lap time in the Astra

I thought it was Top Gear

Along the lines of the OP, I'd say the silicon vallies make the others more precious , but I have no opinion I'm married

He is a magazine publisher of a politically oriented magazine ,and not exactly sure how he cast his ballot in the last US presidential election. Why wouldn't $13.26/hr be better or maybe $17?

Granted I may have misused the term , but I was responding to what seemed like an apology for Obama and his ilk( collectivists) in the poster questioning the depth of their psycoepistemologic makeup. If you could show that some aspect of their stated views or agenda wasn't consistent , like Toohey then perhaps they are just misguided. Or at least that was the drift of the off hand comment as I saw it.

A surgeon's skill/knowledge/scalpel is healthcare not a plastic card or identification number, what fence could there possibly be to be 'on' either side of? A knockout blow is only an appropriate analogy if you consider the slow culture rot that began with wage and price controls during ww2 as they concerned employee 'benefits' and 'healthcare insurance'. And yes Obama and his ilk ae nihilistic toward American 'exceptualism' , they despise it.

I think it is more of a case that western culture will need to re-inculcate those ideas and any current or future English idioms will then be the effect 'of'. As to the OP it is a lack of critical thinking that leads to anyone being 'swayed' by words.

What if everyone voluntarily pays their taxes?

Hd I do not understand what you are trying teach me, nor do I think you understand what SLmeant in the quote. You did not explain what identylessness refers to. Added to my confusion is your use of the terms metaphysical and epistemological.As a rule of thumb if you can not gather something in bucket and carry it around it is most likely an epistemologic concept. Show me a bucket full of random andiI will agree that there is metaphysical randomness

Is existence finite? It is the same question, yes?

Does infinite quantity of discreet objects sound, better ?

DA , for whatever reason(s?) I can not seem to use the quote feature properly, so I apologize if my responses seem disjoint, not to mention my thinking process and articulation and such. I was/am familiar with Peikoof's take on the (concept) of infinity, it is that concept I use when I use the term. My main point being that the concept Universe refers to the totality of existence taken as a whole. Or at least this is the way I understand or use the term(concept). It seems that these arguments or questions of the 'size' of the Universe seek to answer questions on a more spatial level. The finite spatial view would seem to suggest a boundary between existence and nonexistence. My understanding of nonexistence would not permit such a 'boundary'. I suppose this is the logical claim that you suggest may need to be revised? I think logical revision may need to be applied to the concepts or terms finite and infinite. And especially to phrases like " the universe and everything it contains", that seems like a description of two separable things or groups with the 'actual universe' being added as a third alternative, but perhaps I didn't understand the statements the way you intended. Finite or infinite, existence exists, so philosophically it would seem to be unimportant ( or perhaps even invalid), and since scientifically 'infinity' could never be conclusive , or have an end state, how could it be demonstrated?( the edge may just be a little further "along")

I am not sure if the question/answer is philosophically important, and fairly certain it is scientifically unanswerable/nonprovable.

I think there is a difference between every thing and everything, and what is meant by "our" universe?

If the Universe is taken to mean every thing that exists, what possible scale could there be to put it in perspective?

HD I am not well versed in formal logic or its notations, but it seems your last post was stating a proposition and showing a logical conclusion based on the veracity od the prop, or perhaps checking the veracity of the prop by the conclusion. Either way, identitylessness? What does this term refer to , it seems as if the argument as structured would rely on there being a referent to that term. In keeping with the OP , it seems this an example of misidentifying or context dropping of concepts as regards metaphysic and epistemologic. 'Randomness' refers to an abstracted quality , not existential 'thing'.