Brandon T. Adams

I like science, philosophy, movies, nerds, humorists, and funny scientists who appear in movies about nerdy philosophers.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

Twitter is my mental playground.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@mwill340 @TheWanderingAzn How is it objective (mind-independent)?

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@grok @Timcast Thanks! Fuck off, Tim.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

And @grok, isn’t this also true?:

California often releases large batches of results after Election Night. The public may see a race appear nearly complete, then suddenly shift as later-counted mail ballots are added. This does not necessarily indicate anything unusual; it is largely a consequence of the order in which different categories of ballots are processed.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

Well, your sources speak volumes about your critical thinking. Keith Moore is also a loon who thinks the Qur'an has accurate medical information in it about embryology.

So, once again from the top....
No one denies that a human embryo is human. No one denies that a new organism is created at fertilization. “Life” on the other hand is a continuous gradient. The sperm and ovum are both alive.

The question is about personhood and rights. It always has been. Science says nothing on both of those things, because those are decided by philosophy.

So, give me the argument that a zygote is a person with rights. You'll first have to define "person" and "rights" and how you've come to those definitions. I guarantee you will find neither definition in a science textbook.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

Sure. Logic is very basic in that respect. But wherever comprehension is communicable and assessable, logical coherence is a prerequisite, no?

But let’s set that aside. I think my main point is that we both agree it is incomprehensible, or at the very least, neither of us comprehend it. If you can’t comprehend something how can you meaningfully say you believe it? Isn’t comprehension a prerequisite for belief? If reciting nonsensical statements that clear the very low bar of logical form is a “belief,” then I think you and I have a different *comprehension* of what belief is.

Or do you merely *accept* the Church knows the doctrine is true? Is that where your belief lands?

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

Then you don’t comprehend it. Unless you’re conflating “following semantic rules” for logic. Logic is the basic foundation of comprehension. Isn’t that what presups and Thomists and proponents of divine simplicity tell us? Without God grounding logic there can be no intelligibility?

I’d love to comprehend it. Maybe you’ve got the logical syllogism or formula that can unlock it for me.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@aj_inapi Every other month is, ya dipshit. That’s why they have a special month to themselves. That’s how holidays work, too. “When do we get work days, or just regular days off without calling special attention to them? Enough of the celebrations!” That’s you. Ya dipshit.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@GusMc2025 @HannahStrege

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@MartinTweats Any idea can be judged. Especially the idea of a god.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@CollinRugg Well, now we know what the billionaires’ escape plan is for when the country goes to shit from all of their capitalist failures. It’s either this or the bunker.

[Amelia 🇺🇸 @amelia_tweetz]

Imagine if a woman president crashed the economy and started a war with no end in sight, and her biggest, seemingly ONLY concern was building a ballroom and redecorating the White House.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

You guys just cannot seem to grasp this. Circles and bachelors and numbers all have what in common? They. Are. Purely. Conceptual.

They are defined by humans, for humans. They are not empirically found in physical reality, because they are not real, causal entities. They do not manifest without your thoughts. The human men WE ascribe the category of “bachelor” to comes from a completely manmade institution called marriage. Marriage and bachelorhood are not mind-independent. And neither are shapes and numbers.

So, you’re unwittingly using mind-dependent concepts as examples to align with how you “know” God is real. But guess what? If numbers and shapes and marriage are all mind dependent, then you’ve just implied that your God is as well. Congrats! You’ve done my job for me.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

I think you must be confused. You’ve just described Trump. He tells people what they want to hear. He gives them permission to be ugly and small-minded, to follow him, not God. If there ever was an Antichrist, Trump fits the bill straight out of Central Casting. He’s fooled a third of Christians into following him instead of Christ. Just as Satan took a third of the angels with him to Hell. Look in the mirror and repent, Jackie.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

“God is going to judge justly.”

“Justly” according to what standard? Well, God of course! So, God is going to do whatever God wants. It’s all circular and pointless. Christians believe that God gives their life meaning and purpose, but what Alex was trying to point out is that at the very top, there is no meaning or purpose to any of this! God gonna God. That tells me nothing. That is meaningless.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

You have to be good with that for any of this to approach a sensible story. But then you’re faced with the question: Why is he doing any of this?

Just think about the blank page before God the author writes his story. Does he have to create evil at all? No. If he wants perfectly good worshippers, he can make them as such. And he did. He made the angels, made Adam and Eve. All were perfect, except he tempted Adam & Eve by putting a sin-creating fruit tree within reach. He did not have to do this. Would you, as a parent, place a dangerous object within reach of your innocent children? The only reason to create evil, or the passivity of evil, is for dramatic purposes. He wants a struggle. But again, why?

If he is perfect, he lacks nothing, needs, nothing, wants nothing. So he shouldn’t even want to create anything beyond his already perfect self. But let’s put that aside for the moment.

If he is all-knowing, then drama is pointless to him. He already knows the end of the story. There can be no drama for an omniscient being. So again, why is he doing any of this in this particular way?

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@RyanHaecker This guy sounds like the absolute WORST party guest.

[Brandon T. Adams @BrandonTheAdams]

@Acyn America is an idea. You can’t stop an idea.