The world is interconnected in a grand scale. Every action is essentially a time-bombed butterfly effect. If you don't see its effect, that doesn't mean that it doesn't come through. It's just a matter of opening your eyes and sometimes trying to let go of your ego. And essentially, it's much easier in our time, when everything is speedier (travelling to countries, receiving information, acquiring something etc.) and hence, the consequences of our actions manifest themselves sooner. Don't forget that our world is pretty firkin' complex too. Love and good deeds on a primitive level are black and white, but when we target certain social and cultural problems, it tends to get difficult, because peoples' ideals and morals and all sorts of other things get involved. Maybe Rousseau was right and we should as a species return to the wild -- who knows
Like that time your goverment gave rebels/seperatists in ukraine a couple of BUK missiles. and then nothing happened and the missiles were never there and the claim the rebels and the russians made that morning of a transport plane being downed was totally fake news and it was the ukrainian airforce? Oh, I get how you think observation method can change what happened in the past now. i'm not arguing the brightest minds of mankind, im not even arguing, that would require arguments which I have previously stated don't find worth the effort. if you consider what I do arguing I am not arguing the brightest either, I'm arguing you. you and your misappropriation of science and philosophy to try and make yourself feel like philosophy is a science. I must admit I changed the formula a bit because the C and B are not actually for the same individual. so going back to that and the R being very very very small...
I don't keep up too much with the politics of my country and I despise Putin's gang in power. You're contradicting yourself. You are arguing the brightest minds without knowing so, since I'm representing their line of thought, while you're representing the product of the ideas of post-modern collective mass subconciousness, without even going through the basic principles of such thought. It's pretty amazing sometimes how far ignorance can go. Extrapolating your sensual propensities on me is quite amusing, really, but I assure you, I don't need to spend so much time arguing a person just to "feel" that something is what I think it is. That is bizarre, I'm an adult and I have better things to do than that. You, on the other hand, seem very arduous and fervent in your attempt of trollish(?) chicanery (not the first time I notice this in you btw), that I hope you will forgive me for such surmise, if it's wrong? P.S. -- just noticed that you didn't even read how philosophy meets the scientific criteria. Just shows the level at which you debate.
Yeah I did, it doesn't and I just stated this is not a debate. lol, no. In order: you are? you do not. I basically admitted that a few posts ago it's like you don't even know me. you are forgiven for thinking philosophy is a science.
