they will keep fighting, by any means necessary, forever.

yes

Let's say you programmed a robot:

but their "dreams" are incompatible with reality

so they'll never be able to achieve them

make it exterminate humanity

You can program a path navigation, but you can never test the robot in all conceivable environments.

Still, you can program a robot that does a decent job at navigating a room.

I have programmed such robots.

Its like trannies,

They might look like it,
They might act like it,
They might believe they are,

But they are not the other biological sex

hypocrit that you are, for you trust the same chemicals in your head to tell you they are chemicals

will you fight? or will you perish like a dog?

The algorithm is the scientific method - the specific rooms are akin to the knowledge and scenarios that I have tested.

Once I have test a lot of rooms, I get more confident. Do I have certainty? No.

because they factually aren't

even in failure post-modernists cause massive pain and suffering and threaten the entire world. the soviet union was the direct result of post-modern philosophy and not only did they kill millions, they very nearly destroyed the earth on several occasions.

Yes

and they never got their dream

isn't it even a communist motto?

"If you die from startvation, you just didn't want to live enough"?

lmao just dab on starvation

just eat xD

This topic will not go anywhere if discussed in this way. You can do good and bad things in the name of science and in the name of religion.

If we want to make sensible comparisons, we have to discuss its methods.

religion gives people a purpose greater than their own

for people who can't think of a purpose for themselves

What is our standard? My standard is how accurate each is at making sense of reality.

i dono i think its kinda the other way around

ideas have people

lol transgenderism as a social construct

The scientific method has an undeniable track record and where it conflicts with religion should supersede it.

checkmate

The scientific institutions, on the other hand, and our scientific knowledge, is imperfect. We have gender studies.

It is the difference between algorithm and implementation.

but thats the result of post-modernism which me and atkins discussed just now

A sorting implementation can be wrong, but it's algorithm, on paper, can still be correct.

The scientific method has been shown to be very good, but its implementation is lacking a lot of times.

people wanting gender studies to be a science, cuz they see it as being a science, that they decide the rules for

Yes.

And it can be disproven with science.

yes

The scientific method can show wether it is nonsense.

Which distinguishes the body of scientific knowledge from the scientific method.

but tahts the difference between "truth" as seen by post-modernists and normal modernists