Message from @Sorghagtani Beki

Discord ID: 324805289608216586


2017-06-15 06:56:50 UTC  

well there were numerous debates on death penalties around the world and it was found that many people are disgusted by it, so it became law that the practice was no longer enacted

2017-06-15 06:57:16 UTC  

Look everyone is going to use emotions in a debate regardless unless they're psychopaths and cannot feel emotion. However, You cannot make pure emotional statements with nothing to back its utility

2017-06-15 06:57:20 UTC  

Yeah that's retarded

2017-06-15 06:57:28 UTC  

Some people have to die

2017-06-15 06:57:39 UTC  

@מוות שחור#2673 There is a difference between something able to exist, and something being able to be argued for. Obviously, existence precedes reason. And reason never reaches infallible conclusions, it is relative to previous ones, and therefore can at once be totally wrong. Reason and debate exists on a lesser level than emotion: both produce our motivations in the world, but in terms of truth, the comprehension through emotion is capable of a higher level of understanding because it has the capacity to comprehend that which is yet unproven.

2017-06-15 06:57:47 UTC  

Like mob bosses and gang leaders who can operate within prisons

2017-06-15 06:58:20 UTC  

No emotion cannot comprehend what is yet unproven it *assumes* the unproven is proven

2017-06-15 06:58:27 UTC  

That's what makes it retarded

2017-06-15 06:58:31 UTC  

It *assumes* truth

2017-06-15 06:58:39 UTC  

You can assume truth on literally anything

2017-06-15 06:58:45 UTC  

A Muslim can assume truth

2017-06-15 06:58:48 UTC  

A Christian can assume truth

2017-06-15 06:58:54 UTC  

An atheist can assume truth

2017-06-15 06:59:24 UTC  

But sometimes that assumption resembles truth.

2017-06-15 06:59:29 UTC  

Assuming things exist is literally retarded

2017-06-15 06:59:43 UTC  

It resembles truth because you want to believe it does

2017-06-15 06:59:46 UTC  

It makes you happy

2017-06-15 06:59:49 UTC  

It helps you cope

2017-06-15 06:59:58 UTC  

Retarded line of logic

2017-06-15 07:00:05 UTC  

It says nothing about *truth*

2017-06-15 07:00:15 UTC  

Simply what YOU want truth to be

2017-06-15 07:00:20 UTC  

Do you understand?

2017-06-15 07:00:42 UTC  

truth seems to be an unrelated topic

2017-06-15 07:00:49 UTC  

No it's not

2017-06-15 07:00:59 UTC  

We're talking about the effectiveness of emotion in debates

2017-06-15 07:01:05 UTC  

In this case the existence of god

2017-06-15 07:01:08 UTC  

It is utterly useless

2017-06-15 07:01:20 UTC  

but im not talking about god

2017-06-15 07:01:23 UTC  

w t f

2017-06-15 07:01:30 UTC  

Then get out of the conversation

2017-06-15 07:02:02 UTC  

???

2017-06-15 07:02:06 UTC  

I'm not arguing two people on different topics at the same time

2017-06-15 07:02:09 UTC  

Wait your turn

2017-06-15 07:02:20 UTC  

I am stating that sometimes people believe in something before is has been 'proven' by reason. It is therefore possible to resemble truth through emotion, a hypothesis formed by intuition.

2017-06-15 07:02:54 UTC  

Sometimes people believe in things that are later proven

2017-06-15 07:02:58 UTC  

That's just confirmation bias

2017-06-15 07:03:05 UTC  

It says nothing about whether it is true

2017-06-15 07:03:10 UTC  

If I was some guy in 1000 ad

2017-06-15 07:03:16 UTC  

For some reason my emotions told me germs exist

2017-06-15 07:03:25 UTC  

I can't reasonably claim they exist without proof

2017-06-15 07:04:02 UTC  

There is some intuitive wisdom in emotion.