X is wrong

That's a fair point.

Why should I not ask why? If they can't answer that then their argument has no validity, even if they are correct.

"If they can't answer that then their argument has no validity, even if they are correct."
why?

Why are you being so rude? You should try being nice to people!!

Because for an argument to be valid it must have reasons supporting it's declarations about something. For example, if I state that drunk driving is dangerous, if I do not explain why then you have no reasoning with which to understand "why" drunk driving might be dangerous. That reason being of course that it inhibits your mental faculties, making it likely that you might make a mistake and die.

>for an argument to be valid it must have reasons supporting it's declarations about something.
why?

Just do whatever the fuck you want in life, you're the one facing total damnation in the afterlife anyways, dumb sicko

Why is hurting others wrong?

I explained why, for an argument to be valid then it must be understandable. A statement without reasoning is not an argument and holds no weight in an argument.

While eternal damnation is hogwash, there are negative consequences to many options deemed "wrong"

>A statement without reasoning is not an argument and holds no weight in an argument.
why?

Because it does not present artifacts of data containing the necessary information to complete the argument and give it the classification of an argument.

>it doesn't present artifacts of data containing the necessary information
why not?

so nothing has meaning, we just die and stop existing?
why not just end it at once instead of being here then

You see, it has to do with how the listener can understand the argument for or against something without context. Let us say, for example, that I made the statement "the sky is blue", yet no sky was visible at the time and the person had never seen it. I must then provide reasoning for why it would be blue, and this would be because blue light is what most easily passes thorough the atmosphere.

This guy is a nigger. It all starts from the principle of non-contradiction and works it's way up to there

He may simply be retarded, no?

As far as we know, there is only one species capable of assigning meaning to anything. To say nothing has meaning is itself meaningless, since meaning is subjective.
It's certainly absurd to say that without a hell there is no meaning.

>blue light is what most easily passes thorough the atmosphere
why is that true? try to think ahead to where this is going and loop it back to the OP or we will be here for a while

I think he was referring to an objective meaning, not a subjective one.

Well, we have tangible evidence of the scientific phenomena and the details of it. It is, but we don't just say that without basis beyond our own feelings. We observe and then know. You must understand then that the concept of good and bad are simply replacements for the words like and dislike that are more powerful in affecting peoples minds

>we have tangible evidence
but how do you know it's tangible? why is that the case?

yes but he did not get it because in his head everything in life is subjective

I doubt there's objective meaning to anything. If there was, where did it come from?

Good and bad are determined by societal values.
If the people of a nation agree that murder is unwanted, then it's bad. If those same people accept that taxes are necessary, then they're good.

why? :v or8ginal

because she never wears underwear, and also is a cartoon character.

there is a thing called facts OP

they don't need to be explained. only retards with their subjective "facts" need to, its why most of /v/ is fucking trash.

Most things are subjective except some scientific laws.

What you think of as facts are merely working models. Something seems to work the way you expect it to, based on what you've learned or experienced.

In case you guys didnt know OP is mad because people called him out when he said he wants to have sex with 5 year olds

anybody who has the "nothing in life is wrong, there is no good and evil" is a maniac

Now that I think about it, someone could claim scientific laws are subjective because they're based in reality and reality is defined as what the collective deems it. Correct me if I'm wrong

Because she's a really entertaining character with a surprising amount of depth, especially if you read the novels. Also what said.

When people reply like this it's because that can't be bothered to explain basic shit to you.

there may well be mathematical laws to the universe, but our understanding of them is subjective and prone to flaws.

so what you're saying is facts are facts?

i mean i get the last part but what the FUCK do you mean by working models lmao.

Attached: 1527903267280.jpg (960x900, 49K)

I got u senpai. But don't tell nobody

Attached: aqua600.png (600x465, 258K)

>OP's reasoning is evasive and slimey in this thread
>he's fresh off trying to defend fucking a 5-year-old
checks out, glad I was a faggot in this thread and annoyed him

Is the universe even real? You and everything else exists inside my head and can be changed and altered by it to a certain extent. I know if I explored space there would be a universe out there but if I ended up in a coma I don't know if I could tell the difference between what's real and what isn't.

I'm sure there's a better term for it. We operate under the assumption that what we think is true is so. Fact carries the connotation of an undeniable universal truth.
People are operating based on millenia of guesswork based on the input from their senses.
>Based on how I perceive light, I guess that x
>Based on how I perceive sound, I guess that y
Any given assumption about how things are could be upturned by some new technology or discovery. An example of this is germ theory. Not a big deal anymore, but a huge step for medical science compared to what came before. That's enough foolishness out of me.

more like its because they are retarded

>why is the sky blue mummy?
>because it is
Oh boy she must be retarded

Could the law of gravity be upturned?

You're being talked to like you're a retard. If you dig back far enough the answer to "why?" will eventually be "because it is" wrapped up in the most intelligent way possible.

>Why is the man guilty
>because he is
>why?
>because he is
Superb reasoning user. Its like theirs no other way to prove things without circular reasoning or repeating yourself

That's a good example. While it seems preposterous that someone could come along and disprove gravity. It's not impossible that we've been mistaken in some way. I'm not some genius that can disprove gravity, nor do I doubt it. But to say that we couldn't possibly be wrong about the laws of science is hubris.

I see where you're coming from. I'm sure there will be several new discoveries that make us question certain laws and things we thought were objectively true.

>will eventually be "because it is" wrapped up in the most intelligent way possible.
No it isnt. For the why is the sky blue, you give the reason of how the light from the sun is scattered due to the gases in the atmosphere and because blue light is scattered more, it is the dominant colour for most of the day

No, you don't understand. In legal cases, of course you need reasoning. But when user is asking normies stupid questions, most don't think he's worth the time to be explained things to. They don't need to prove anything.

Why is the light from the sky scattered more due to gasses in the atmosphere?

>dominant color for most of the day
which will lead to why it's the most dominant color, which will lead to why light works the way it does, which will eventually lead to physics principles that are dominated by mathematics formulas, and when you ask why a mathematical formula is the way it is, the answer is "because it is" dressed up in the most intelligent way possible. "Because that's our best knowledge."

They have plenty of time to tell him why, they probably spurted out in the first place. Its not he asked something about science/mathematics/economics etc. Probably something trivial was brought up and OP asked why

I understand, but then you could ask why when they say because it is. Usually correct reasoning should be able to answer most questions. If someone asks why 2+2=4 they can only asks so many whys

Why does 2 + 2 = 4?

Yeah, everybody knows it's blue because Aqua is best girl.

Draw two sets of dots, each containing two dots. Then add those sets together and we have more dots than we had before. The sound we make with our mouths to convey to others of how many dots there are is Four. Since we cant get another number other than four from the equation without fucking it up, it is four

Tbh that is how bestiality is proven wrong
>farm them only to eat them
>keep them as pets where they can't make any true decisions
>cut off their balls without their consent
So why can't we fuck them? I mean it's disgusting and I think it's wrong but like... I can't argue why it shouldn't be ok.

Why can't we get another number from the equation?

>What is Canada

Because the dots dont just magically disappear or appear out of no where user

>you could ask why to that
I don't care really because as I said here this was the inevitable answer and I'm glad you now understand that. It will eventually be "because it is" in some way as the answer.

Because they don't? That's the case because it is? Magic doesn't exist because it doesn't?

No, because we cannot prove magic is real, and therefore we believe that magic doesnt exist. If we can prove it exist, then it is real

Meant for Origininalll

Sorry, what I meant was I understand why you believe or would say that, but I still think we can give definite answers rather than vague and self-fulfilling answers

Why can't we prove magic exists?

Because we cant prove it in the first place. Do you believe things that we cannot prove to exist?

"because it is" is an indicator of the limit of one's understanding. When I was young I believed water turned to ice when it got cold and that was the end of it. I learned later it's more complex than simply "cold water becomes ice."
But in any given case I can imagine, there reaches a point where one could say "I don't really know why it is, but I believe it is."

That's not a solid explanation as to why we couldn't prove that magic exists or that it doesn't.

Why not?
Also answer my question on believing things we cannot prove

Why should I?
Ihv

Why shouldnt you? If you answer my question above you get the answer yourself

Also
>avoiding the question

Why would that give me the answer?

Because you would have proper justification for weither you believe in the unprovable or not

If you believe in the unproven, then I could be enlightened in how I was wrong in

Why would that give me proper justification?
Can I tap out and someone switch with me and ask why questions I'm getting tired.

>thinking you could tire me with questions but tire yourself instead
>avoiding the questions
Pathetic
>can I tap
If you wish

Attached: D2F3253F-92CD-4CA5-AD86-61E50E858C59.jpg (489x318, 50K)

Tap out*