^

I cri

@Missy Stop crying about metaphysics. It's legit man. You don't need to be empirical to know things

You just keep saying it

But you've demonstrated you haven't actually researched thoroughly any of this

You linked the first article that comes up on Google after searching with metaphysics

Because I went and checked lmfao

Wtf you were asking about their metaphysical laws

So I linked you it

I can't summarize it in one post

theories*

@chuckayy Established theories. Classical theism is built off them two

we're talking about *what is possible* and if the existence of god is *possible*, so this is irrelevant. we're talking from the true perspective that you don't know anything except for what you are sensing and thinking at the moment. yes the laws of physics are *almost certainly in line with reality in one way in another*, but you can't know for certain.

Also just to make it clear, I'm not really *open* for say of the idea of a god existing but it is undeniably possible, but there is no rational reason to believe in god just like there is no rational reason for me to believe that there's a glowing hippo fairy standing on my back.

An established theories are not laws

Let's not be unintelligent pricks

LIKE THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION

^ Theory of evolution is proven. To argue against that is stupid.

@waiting for silksong Do you think moral facts exist? You're limiting yourself to empirical evidence, is there anyway that you can argue against that the laws of physics are not in line with reality? Saying there is a possibility without reasoning is stupid.

Again, where is the reasoning for this, if metaphysical forces are actually evident in reality?

While science deals with specific situations, metaphysics deals with general matters. For example, whilst a scientist talks about the laws of nature, a metaphysicist will study what the characteristics are to make that statement to qualify as a law.

Well I've never heard of the law of evolution. I've heard of the law of gravity, but evolution is still just a theory

Things still change, yes. But Evolutions reasoning as to where we come from is completely false

How is it not?

Please state your reasoning.

Did he just say evolution was proven

Because that's the exact arguement against it

@Missy State your argument against evolution.

Is that they're is too many missing links and not enough evidence now in nature

I'm not fucking with your dumbass again

No no

So why bother to say something you can't back up?

Imagine saying missing links but not saying which ones

Dude

Dude

Go into VC and I'll happily debate you

No ty my stress has finally been lowered

Imagine having stress

<:honk:583238347124637707>

<:cheers:591247651022962689>

Ok let's not drag evolution into this.

https://www.richarddawkins.net/2015/11/is-it-a-theory-is-it-a-law-no-its-a-fact/

Statements like "evolutions reasoning as to where we come from is completely false" will be met with extreme ridicule.