fruitvilla

6 hours ago, KentVillan said:

Surprised by the low % for superstitions. I’m agnostic or “weak atheist” I suppose according to the above, but I touch wood and stuff like that.

I know what you mean ... I get taken in by essentialism sometimes ... I'm thinking of my lost father's penknife.

33 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

This is interesting. I'm way down at about 5 o'clock on this -- strong theist but on the gnostic side. Yes, believe in God, yes afterlife, yes pray, etc., yes superstitious, but don't want the state ever involved or people compelled to believe anything, hate proselytizing etc unless I get free food at the end of the spiel. My English dad is an atheist, mum RC -- fun marriage, that. It's interesting to see the results of this poll. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, because the data has been consistent on polls in the UK, but still -- I'm kinda surprised. 

I'm a bit like Bertrand Russel with respect to this ...

Philosophically agnostic but pragmatically atheist.

This diagram I think helps describe the positions. Of course there are other takes:

7 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I've never seen a demon. But I've seen horrors where people blame their own behaviors on "demons." You'd be surprised -- or maybe you wouldn't! -- by how some of the most supposedly eminent scientists in the world quite readily abandon science when confronted with, for instance, criminal behavior. 

Yeah ... some people like their pet speculations. When it comes to individuals and groups, doing science is really hard work. Personally, any horror I might create I blame on my brain chemistry. And should I conjure up a demon or two, in my saner moments that too would be my brain chemistry in action.

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

1. Consume the Indian soft cheese dessert rasgulla. Caught E. coli from it. Not pleasant.

While generally, I can't relate to eight of your ten points, this is sort of parallel ... Never order and eat steak tartare in a third-world African country.

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

       6. Go to a sports bar/sport pub etc. Hate 'em.

Locally, we have an Indo-Italian Pizza sports bar. While it is, actually, passable, just; but, No!!

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

We need a WHY?? thread.

This belongs on a philosophy thread ... but Why? is a dumb question ... How? Purpose? Meaning?

2 hours ago, QldVilla said:

I talked about unambitious people who work in mundane jobs and don’t have to try to hard and their job is never at risk

While I get your point here I do have some questions

1) Why would someone unnecessarily put their jobs at risk ... that is true for the vast majority of us is it not?
2) Half of us have an IQ below average, perhaps it is wise to stick to the short and narrow for many of us?
3) Being unambitious at work, might allow us to excel in other areas in our lives, eg posting on VT? 

5 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

For me it was Martinez at fault but I’ll get a better look on Match of the day shortly 

5 hours ago, troon_villan said:

Suspect Lenglet should have dealt with it

It would have been nice if Cash could have stopped the cross. In another universe Lenglet would have cleared, but I suspect he has put off by Emi coming out strongly.  I bet if Emi does not come out Lenglet clears, and if he doesn't Emi saves the shot in his sleep. Fulham got back into the game with that goal against the run of play goal.

Good game, Villa I thought deserved the win. Why does Ramsey not get an assist on the first goal? His tenaciousness that made the goal. Pau return to the team was excellent. Tielemans' assist was sublime. Somebody has sprinkled fairy dust on Bailey's feet. I thought everybody had a solid game.

The referee (I thought) was inconsistent and lost control, by and large Villa managed keep their cool.

4 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Some migrated, some fled, some were expelled. That seems quite balanced to me. 

While likely an accurate description ... balanced it is not.

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

You seem to be involved in an argument that I'm not making.

I agree with you on all the rest, but this is the only bit that's actually relevant to what I've been trying to say to you - that there were people who fled to Israel (pushed - ethnic cleansing if you like) and there were people that rushed to Israel (pulled - triumphant return to the homeland) - but crucially that both types of people exist and that a balanced perspective would recognise both of those circumstances and a whole range in between - something your initial post what feels like a long time ago didn't do.

Yes. Do you think there was a preponderance of one type, and if so which type?

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I've been wondering particularly what might have happened had the Nazis successfully invaded Britain in 1939 or 1940. 

How would the British resistance have differed from other resistance movements? Where in the UK would collaborationists have been the most commonplace?

As noxious as it sounds, I fear that the worst collaborationists would have been in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and that Ireland itself would have eventually fallen to the Nazis. I think the Nazis would have nurtured sectarian and regional hatreds and found purchase among various non-English nationalists. Thinking aloud here ...

I would not be here for a start on VT ... 

33 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Seriously? That's crazy. I know about some of the other establishment ties. But I feel this first layer of the establishment wouldn't really feed the rank and file street-level thugs. Remember nazification is also very socialist in how the nazis take over the means of production and direct industry and promise workers a paradise (while also using slave labour, too, and murdering trade unionist leaders). I guess I could see some anti-establishment workers getting seduced by all that, even in Wales, Scotland, etc.

According to chat 3.5

Did Prince Phillip's sisters marry Nazi's?

ChatGPT

Yes, two of Prince Philip's sisters, Princess Margarita and Princess Theodora, married German aristocrats who were affiliated with the Nazi Party.

Princess Margarita: She married Gottfried, Prince of Hohenlohe-Langenburg, in 1931. Although there is no evidence that Prince Gottfried himself was a member of the Nazi Party, he did serve in the German army during World War II. Princess Margarita and Prince Gottfried lived in Germany during much of the war.

Princess Theodora: She married Berthold, Margrave of Baden, in 1931. Berthold was a member of the Nazi Party and served in the German army during World War II. Princess Theodora and Margrave Berthold also lived in Germany during much of the war.

Prince Philip himself fought against the Axis powers during World War II as a naval officer in the British Royal Navy.

2 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I hear you. But what "world"? How do you know there's any "world"? And what is knowing? To paraphrase Boy George, "We are the world."

Of course, you are right here (I think). I can't think of an argument to defeat solipsism (and perhaps idealism). But I think Schopenhauer was right when he said of solipsism: … a small frontier fortress. Admittedly the fortress is impregnable, but the garrison can never sally forth from it, therefore we can pass it by, and leave it in our rear without danger.

I tend to come down on the physicalist/materialist side of things. And of course, epistemology is all about what we can know.

2 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I’ve been trying to get a better sense of the big philosophical discussions, and also movements in psychology, in the lead-up to and right after the Holocaust and fascist ascendancy.  So far, in my explorations, Heidegger and later existentialism don’t come off well.  Heidegger’s thinking, especially, seems to dovetail way too easily with Nazi ideology.  Of course, he was literally a Nazi, so that explains some of it.

My particular main dish is free will, with side orders of epistemology and perhaps theology. Of course, the rest of the universe impinges on these and other philosophical discussions.

6 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I've been reading Russell lately and he gives the whole list, all of which seem equally abitrary.

Interesting, I think ... a couple of examples? And perhaps a reference to look up?

3 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

@fruitvilla, any chance you might be willing to retrofit this topic as just plain Philosophy? Looking for a place to talk Wittgenstein and Heidegger and Adorno. Is that allowed here? I really want to talk about the "jargon of authenticity" -- and this guy particularly:

By all means, this was never meant to be absolutely inclusive, of all three ... philosophy, fandom and football. Having said that there is much that I disagree philosophically with fan's opinions of football.

With the little of the second-hand/third-hand stuff I have come across of Heidegger and Wittgenstein, I may not be on board with them. Adorno .. don't remember coming across this philosopher.

I thought the few minutes Diaby and Bailey were on together, the pairing looked bright. When Bailey went off Diaby disappeared a little.

8 time zones and  7 200 km

who's closest?

16 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

the potential BK has

44 = 4 + 4 = 8, BK8 ?

2 minutes ago, GeordieVillan said:

I don’t think he’s rubbish. I think he’s going to be a part of this squad for the foreseeable future and will improve under Emery in the next 12-24 months.

He was one of our better players yesterday.

4 hours ago, ender4 said:

So what to do with life now? Feels like I’ve completed this game. 

Help others? ... A Rotary club near you?

Only watched to the third goal. Probably, will watch the rest later tonight.

Up to that point, I thought Cash was as effective as anyone so I gave him the man of the match. The whole thing was lackadaisical.

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

It’s a media construct. It’s meaningless just as a linear left right axis is a simpletons guide to political thought. Even that x/y axis political compass thing is daft because the questions are extremely slanted

From their FAQ

Some of the questions are slanted

1 hour ago, HongKongVillan said:

 

Economic Left/Right: -3.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.67

Thought I was a little to the right in all, but seems like I'm wrong about myself

 

You probably are if you go by the people on this forum. There are communities where you would be a Bolshie

4 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

If you indicate strong support for deregulation and the free market, you're going to get bumped quite far towards the right, even if some of your social views are very left of centre. 

It's not the Wes Edens axis that bothers me too much but more the Nassef Sawiris axis. the WE axis is how much of your (and your neighbour's) money we are willing to spend for the common good vs the common good coming from working hard and smartly.

The NS axis is how much government we want in our everyday lives.

But of course, we do need to take the Political Compass with a bit of salt. I suspect the relative positions do reflect reality somewhat. If we were on an evangelical website there likely be more positive scores

Yesterday, Bruno Guimarães got an assist for the ball bouncing off his arm.