Dipshit Detector

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@amarrocking4u @OunkaOnX

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@MorePerfectUS Senators already trade with insider information on what is effectively their own personal prediction market: the stock market

Would love an explanation from the Senators who unanimously voted for this ban as to how the reasoning behind it doesn’t apply there too

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@Maxthebeast76 @kirawontmiss Genuinely?

I think “intentional design” being the limit of your understanding is simply the result of an inability to comprehend the scale of time over which organisms develop, mutate, and adapt

That, paired with an uncritical application of anthropocentric pattern recognition

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@conservmillen My non-sentient left nut could deduce that the image was a depiction of Trump as Jesus

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@nicksortor @tx4kids The right’s answer to Trump’s increasingly aberrant behavior is to assume he’s retarded

You have to believe he’s a real fuckin dumbass to think he didn’t understand what the image conveys, what figures it used to do so, etc.

If you’re right it’s an L, if you’re wrong it’s an L

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@nicksortor @tx4kids The right’s answer to Trump’s increasingly aberrant behavior is to assume he’s retarded

You have to believe he’s a real fuckin dumbass to think he didn’t understand what the image conveys, what figures it used to do so, etc.

If you’re right it’s an L, if you’re wrong it’s an L

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@PatriotBulldog4 @itsdeaann You’ve got a point

Christianity shouldn’t be taken seriously anyways, the jokes write themselves

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@audreymama_ @renikoyi @GodsgreatG Adam and Eve exist only as text in a book written by humans approximately 1,900-3,400 years ago

The fossil record on the other hand, exists in real life devoid of human intervention while telling a story over millions of years

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@GodsgreatG @renikoyi That’s the beauty of evolutionary theory

Your “agreement/belief” in it isn’t a prerequisite for its validity

Evolution, and the body of evidence supporting it exist independently of you—and will continue to do so regardless of your refusal to understand or acknowledge it

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@NEfuGnH @om_patel5 The same companies that have been actively lobbying the government to make no laws or regulations on AI for the next decade?

Fuck all the way off with this simp shit

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@elonmusk For a dude who proclaims his love of working from first principles, you sure do love to take things at face value

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 You’ve critiqued Legos generally rather than the analogy actually made—a set engineered to produce only one outcome is precisely the illustration of a being whose nature was designed to produce only one sequence of choices

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 This reads as an emotional response rather than a philosophical one

Analogies often require you to engage on their own terms to grasp what’s being conveyed

The analogy specifies a Lego set designed to only fit together one way—that constraint is the point, not an oversight

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 You can’t preserve all three simultaneously—omnipotence, omniscience, and genuine free will, without quietly emptying one of them

Based on your the response below, it seems you choose to quietly limit omniscience

[Adrian Barker @HadrianHarker]

@DipshitDetect @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 Here is my chain of logic: An omnipotent being can create someone with free will, based on the definition of “omnipotence”. And knowledge of those future free-will actions does not limit those actions, because foreknowledge is based on the actions, not the other way around.

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 I’m not limiting omnipotence, I’m following its implications in combination with omniscience

You’re the one with a hidden limit: your defense of free will requires God to create beings whose choices escape his foreknowledge—that limits his omniscience

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 Additionally, your foreknowledge argument requires God’s knowledge to be constituted by human choices—meaning God’s knowledge depends on what humans do rather than existing independently

That’s a significant limitation on omniscience you’ve quietly inserted

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 What specifically constitutes the free part that escapes everything God made?

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 It may not change the result of determinism, but it does change its character

Regardless, I don’t see much point in this response from you—as nothing has really been added and it only leaves me wondering what the point of it is

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 The question isn’t whether God could make a free being in the abstract—it’s whether knowing the complete outcome of your design before creating it is compatible with that design producing genuine alternatives

In my view, it isn’t

[Dipshit Detector @DipshitDetect]

@HadrianHarker @Aerondyte0 @shamanspirit13 @philosophymeme0 But if God designed everything you are and knew exactly what that design would produce before pulling the trigger on creation—in what sense did alternatives ever exist?