Vorlon's citation on mental health

[purplepurpose]

Sorry for the off topic.




"6 When the day came for the heavenly beings[b] to appear before the Lord, Satan[c] was there among them. 7 The Lord asked him, “What have you been doing?”
Satan answered, “I have been walking here and there, roaming around the earth.”
8 “Did you notice my servant Job?” the Lord asked. “There is no one on earth as faithful and good as he is. He worships me and is careful not to do anything evil.”
9 Satan replied, “Would Job worship you if he got nothing out of it? 10 You have always protected him and his family and everything he owns. You bless everything he does, and you have given him enough cattle to fill the whole country. 11 But now suppose you take away everything he has—he will curse you to your face!”
12 “All right,” the Lord said to Satan, “everything he has is in your power, but you must not hurt Job himself.” So Satan left."


And yet Satan is presented as independent evil in modern preaching that opposes God's good will. Lies upon lies.

[Amarok]

aw such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." Physicist Stephen Hawking

"We're nothing but a soap bubble, floating in a bubble bath of soap bubbles." - Michio Kaku, theoretial physicis, speaking of our universe within the "Multiverse"

"So it takes no energy to create a universe.  Universes are for free. A universe is a free lunch." - Michio Kaku

"The highest dimension is eleven. We cannot go beyond eleven because universes become unstable beyond eleven." - Michio Kaku
[Physicists become unstable talking about free universes and the Multiverse.]

"An entire universe can come from nothing because its entire energy can be zero." - Physicist Lawrence Krauss

"Our universe is a small, random accident in a Multiverse." - Lawrence Krauss

The same fellow said the foregoing with a straight face, and then said this:

"We don't know that for certain."

"In science we have to be quite skeptical." [He says after claiming the universe to be "small, random accident."]

"Without empirical evidence, it's all just talk."  [You're telling US!]

Star man does realize the difference between a scientist  stating a personal opinion and stating  scientific fact . And he seems lost on the principle that one can state something as tentatively factual that it's possible to claim something while remaining skeptical . And one can state something without being 100 % certain.   Note that he never challenges these idea's he just proclaims them wrong . As for any of these idea being empirical they are they are based on empirical data and can be affirmed the same way  . By the way it's interesting that some experts who agree with him are beyond reproach . But ones who don't are worthy of scorn .

---

As for his rubbish of calling everything faith he gets the order backwards

---

Calling others "idiot" doesn't get one banned, but expressing one's reasonable opinions does?

Yup if the person being called it is acting like an idiot . And no your opinion was not reasonable . 

How typical of atheists, who have no standards of decency or decorum.

Lol and you just dripping with both 

I can buy and sell you, lad.   Many times over.  So spare me your petty name-calling childishness.

Lol what was that about pretending to be superior

[Fireball]

aw such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." Physicist Stephen Hawking

"We're nothing but a soap bubble, floating in a bubble bath of soap bubbles." - Michio Kaku, theoretial physicis, speaking of our universe within the "Multiverse"

"So it takes no energy to create a universe.  Universes are for free. A universe is a free lunch." - Michio Kaku

"The highest dimension is eleven. We cannot go beyond eleven because universes become unstable beyond eleven." - Michio Kaku
[Physicists become unstable talking about free universes and the Multiverse.]

"An entire universe can come from nothing because its entire energy can be zero." - Physicist Lawrence Krauss

"Our universe is a small, random accident in a Multiverse." - Lawrence Krauss

The same fellow said the foregoing with a straight face, and then said this:

"We don't know that for certain."

"In science we have to be quite skeptical." [He says after claiming the universe to be "small, random accident."]

"Without empirical evidence, it's all just talk."  [You're telling US!]

Star man does realize the difference between a scientist  stating a personal opinion and stating  scientific fact . And he seems lost on the principle that one can state something as tentatively factual that it's possible to claim something while remaining skeptical . And one can state something without being 100 % certain.   Note that he never challenges these idea's he just proclaims them wrong . As for any of these idea being empirical they are they are based on empirical data and can be affirmed the same way  . By the way it's interesting that some experts who agree with him are beyond reproach . But ones who don't are worthy of scorn .

---

As for his rubbish of calling everything faith he gets the order backwards

---

Calling others "idiot" doesn't get one banned, but expressing one's reasonable opinions does?

Yup if the person being called it is acting like an idiot . And no your opinion was not reasonable . 

How typical of atheists, who have no standards of decency or decorum.

Lol and you just dripping with both 

I can buy and sell you, lad.   Many times over.  So spare me your petty name-calling childishness.

Lol what was that about pretending to be superior

Dude must have more than two nickels to rub together. If he's actually religious, he'll remember that bromide about the rich and heaven. Commie Jesus said so, therefor it is true.   And I guess he supports slavery, what with the buying and selling of you. Excellent xtian attitudes!

[Amarok]

How typical of atheists, who have no standards of decency or decorum

Says the man who lacked the basic decency  to write an introduction post . And who's opening post was barrage of insults .

I can buy and sell you, lad.   Many times over.  So spare me your petty name-calling childishness.

You certainly have bought a lot of bullshit 

And you could not sell it to it to a dung beetle 

And you have the tone of a tempermental six year old . So  calling some else lad is like cat barking .

[shadow]

Excellent observation.  Couple this with the observation by the late Milton Friedman:
"Public education is a socialist monopoly, a real one."

Milton Friedman was a hack 

Atheism promotes socialism and vice versa.  What are reviled by the godless left are called "right wing religious extremists."  Is not the opposite side of right wing religious people left wing atheists?

Ayn Rand promoted socialism ?
LaVeyan promoted socialism ?
Sargon of akkad promotes socialism? 
Lee Doren promotes socialism? 

And nope atheists promote nothing and can be anywhere on political spectrum . And no the opposite of right wing  religious  extremists are not left wing atheists . That's just dumb 

I love his argument: that someone who promotes education and rational thought is more likely to have left wing beliefs, therefore... it's the left that's wrong?

[vulcanlogician]

Milton Friedman was a hack 


Ayn Rand promoted socialism ?
LaVeyan promoted socialism ?
Sargon of akkad promotes socialism? 
Lee Doren promotes socialism? 

And nope atheists promote nothing and can be anywhere on political spectrum . And no the opposite of right wing  religious  extremists are not left wing atheists . That's just dumb 

I love his argument: that someone who promotes education and rational thought is more likely to have left wing beliefs, therefore... it's the left that's wrong?

Out of curiosity, Shadow, (since you're a libertarian) what are your feelings on public education? How robust a system of public education ought we have?

[shadow]

I love his argument: that someone who promotes education and rational thought is more likely to have left wing beliefs, therefore... it's the left that's wrong?

Out of curiosity, Shadow, (since you're a libertarian) what are your feelings on public education? How robust a system of public education ought we have?

In my opinion, it is crucial that an education system is both as strong as possible and socialized, for a few reasons. Firstly, education is almost paradoxically what informs people of the value of education. If a child is born into a society that supports public education and really drills skills into them, by the time they need to choose their path, they are as ready as possibly to make that decision. In Canada's that's around 16/17 years old... you either choose a university/professional path or you don't, and that path shapes your standard of life heavily. I strongly support individual freedoms, but you can't expect someone unaware of the world's opportunities to have a real chance to exercise their will. Thus, education is like the first great equalizer for decision making and freedom.

Related to that, until a child is economically separable from their parents, they're not really an individual economic actor. Giving parents complete responsibility over their children's fates largely denies the child the chance to make their own decisions once they've started thinking for themselves. As well, it's not fair that if someone's parents are economically unable to provide for their education, they should be locked out of any opportunities upon birth.

Thirdly, education is the backbone of economic functioning. This is also why I support socialized healthcare (though that's another essay I'd have to write). If there is something that completely inhibits or deters people from otherwise creating more value for an economy that's totally outside of their control (like how much money their family has, or getting sick), that's not efficient at all. Education is an investment that pays off so massively in the long run, it would really pain me to see people not going to school because they cannot afford it. That benefits no one: not the economy, because they then do less skilled labor and add less value to the economy, and certainly not their own welfare.

Fourthly, given that our society employs democracy, democracy without an educated populous is disastrous. The more people know, the better they are able to see through the kind of populist crap prevalent in some countries (ahem) that is a pure distraction from policy, tell the real news from the fake news, and provide reasoned opinions on collective decisions. Kind of related to that, people can't even be rational economic actors if they're uneducated, so that's a further level of inefficiency that poor education causes.

Basically, education is such an efficient and fair tool, the more we can promote it, the better. That's the ideology I've always been after... efficient and productive systems, in which our policy serves to maximize the ability of people to make their own decisions and pursue their own goals. In doing this, we end up with as much effort towards human endeavors as possible (goods/services/arts/sciences), but balanced so we get what of those fruits of our labour we, as individuals, desire. It's technically a libertarian view, but just one that doesn't naively assume chaos leads to equal opportunity.

[vulcanlogician]

Out of curiosity, Shadow, (since you're a libertarian) what are your feelings on public education? How robust a system of public education ought we have?

In my opinion, it is crucial that an education system is both as strong as possible and socialized, for a few reasons. Firstly, education is almost paradoxically what informs people of the value of education. If a child is born into a society that supports public education and really drills skills into them, by the time they need to choose their path, they are as ready as possibly to make that decision. In Canada's that's around 16/17 years old... you either choose a university/professional path or you don't, and that path shapes your standard of life heavily. I strongly support individual freedoms, but you can't expect someone unaware of the world's opportunities to have a real chance to exercise their will. Thus, education is like the first great equalizer for decision making and freedom.

Related to that, until a child is economically separable from their parents, they're not really an individual economic actor. Giving parents complete responsibility over their children's fates largely denies the child the chance to make their own decisions once they've started thinking for themselves. As well, it's not fair that if someone's parents are economically unable to provide for their education, they should be locked out of any opportunities upon birth.

Thirdly, education is the backbone of economic functioning. This is also why I support socialized healthcare (though that's another essay I'd have to write). If there is something that completely inhibits or deters people from otherwise creating more value for an economy that's totally outside of their control (like how much money their family has, or getting sick), that's not efficient at all. Education is an investment that pays off so massively in the long run, it would really pain me to see people not going to school because they cannot afford it. That benefits no one: not the economy, because they then do less skilled labor and add less value to the economy, and certainly not their own welfare.

Fourthly, given that our society employs democracy, democracy without an educated populous is disastrous. The more people know, the better they are able to see through the kind of populist crap prevalent in some countries (ahem) that is a pure distraction from policy, tell the real news from the fake news, and provide reasoned opinions on collective decisions. Kind of related to that, people can't even be rational economic actors if they're uneducated, so that's a further level of inefficiency that poor education causes.

Basically, education is such an efficient and fair tool, the more we can promote it, the better. That's the ideology I've always been after... efficient and productive systems, in which our policy serves to maximize the ability of people to make their own decisions and pursue their own goals. In doing this, we end up with as much effort towards human endeavors as possible (goods/services/arts/sciences), but balanced so we get what of those fruits of our labour we, as individuals, desire. It's technically a libertarian view, but just one that doesn't naively assume chaos leads to equal opportunity.

You have a very well-reasoned political ideology, Shadow. Even though I don't share it, I respect it. FWIW, I would take capitalism with a robust system of education for all over socialism without it any day.

[shadow]

In my opinion, it is crucial that an education system is both as strong as possible and socialized, for a few reasons. Firstly, education is almost paradoxically what informs people of the value of education. If a child is born into a society that supports public education and really drills skills into them, by the time they need to choose their path, they are as ready as possibly to make that decision. In Canada's that's around 16/17 years old... you either choose a university/professional path or you don't, and that path shapes your standard of life heavily. I strongly support individual freedoms, but you can't expect someone unaware of the world's opportunities to have a real chance to exercise their will. Thus, education is like the first great equalizer for decision making and freedom.

Related to that, until a child is economically separable from their parents, they're not really an individual economic actor. Giving parents complete responsibility over their children's fates largely denies the child the chance to make their own decisions once they've started thinking for themselves. As well, it's not fair that if someone's parents are economically unable to provide for their education, they should be locked out of any opportunities upon birth.

Thirdly, education is the backbone of economic functioning. This is also why I support socialized healthcare (though that's another essay I'd have to write). If there is something that completely inhibits or deters people from otherwise creating more value for an economy that's totally outside of their control (like how much money their family has, or getting sick), that's not efficient at all. Education is an investment that pays off so massively in the long run, it would really pain me to see people not going to school because they cannot afford it. That benefits no one: not the economy, because they then do less skilled labor and add less value to the economy, and certainly not their own welfare.

Fourthly, given that our society employs democracy, democracy without an educated populous is disastrous. The more people know, the better they are able to see through the kind of populist crap prevalent in some countries (ahem) that is a pure distraction from policy, tell the real news from the fake news, and provide reasoned opinions on collective decisions. Kind of related to that, people can't even be rational economic actors if they're uneducated, so that's a further level of inefficiency that poor education causes.

Basically, education is such an efficient and fair tool, the more we can promote it, the better. That's the ideology I've always been after... efficient and productive systems, in which our policy serves to maximize the ability of people to make their own decisions and pursue their own goals. In doing this, we end up with as much effort towards human endeavors as possible (goods/services/arts/sciences), but balanced so we get what of those fruits of our labour we, as individuals, desire. It's technically a libertarian view, but just one that doesn't naively assume chaos leads to equal opportunity.

You have a very well-reasoned political ideology, Shadow. Even though I don't share it, I respect it. FWIW, I would take capitalism with a robust system of education for all over socialism without it any day.

Thanks . What's your political ideology?

[vulcanlogician]

You have a very well-reasoned political ideology, Shadow. Even though I don't share it, I respect it. FWIW, I would take capitalism with a robust system of education for all over socialism without it any day.

Thanks . What's your political ideology?

Something resembling anarcho-socialism. So less government (like you!) but also tons of support for the working class. But really, any political system which supports education (both quantity and quality) appeals to me. Education is very, very, very, very, very important to me. Also, I'm not opposed to capitalism in and of itself. I just think that it's a system that treats human beings like commodities. Newsflash: Human beings aren't commodities.

I could really go into more detail, but I'll be brief for now. I'm not a standard pinko by any stretch. Karl Marx (Early Marx, specifically) had a theory of alienated labor. My main concern with Marxism is here, and not much with having a socialist/communist state. My ideal form of government holds these principles: freedom of choice and civil liberties, opportunity for all, and reduction of  alienated labor as much as possible.