site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 8824 results for

domain:archive.ph

Coffee smells lovely all the time. It's its taste that is comparable to the worst kinds of medicine. Which is weird, because the cooking nerds convinced me that most of the food flavor comes from the smell.

I’ve noticed this effect with coffee. I love the smell of coffee in the morning, but I hate it in the evening. It could be because I associate the smell of coffee in the evening with some hellish all nighters I’ve pulled.

That's a very apt way of putting into words my own suspicions, but I keep thinking there must be more out there, something I've missed or have misapprehended.

$6 for RN to have a straight up majority

Thanks, I think that's the best explanation of the three, if I understood it right. A mutually agreeable statement if A, then B can mean that either B is true, or A is false, depending on your other beliefs, right?

He’s an anti-establishment but not socially conservative candidate. That leads to lots of his supporters treating him as a black box they can paint their own ideas on.

This, but unironically.

I’d be interested to hear more about your experiences. What’s the situation like on the ground? What

I wish I could wrap my mind around that. Is it performative? Is it a fetish? Or have these people been subjected to so much demoralization propaganda that they now worship ugliness and degeneracy? That they've been pavlovian trained to wound themselves spiritually on uglification?

It's a brief way to point out that arguments must be taken to their logical conclusion in order to be properly considered, and people who refuse to "bite the bullet" and address the full implications of the positions that they espouse are either stupid or lying. Below are some examples found with Google.


Example

Premise: All human life is equally valuable.

Observation: I can point to a human life that has approximately zero value.

Conclusion: Either all human life has approximately zero value, or all human life is not necessarily equally valuable. Anybody who tries to take a third position on this issue is either stupid or lying.


Example

Premise: Permanently damaging a healthy human body in order to alleviate a mental condition is bad.

Observation: Sex-change/gender-affirmation surgery involves permanently damaging a healthy human body in order to alleviate a mental condition.

Conclusion: Either sex-change surgery is bad, or pemanently damaging a healthy human body in order to alleviate a mental condition is not necessarily bad. Anybody who tries to take a third position on this issue is either stupid or lying.

The terms “modus ponens” and “modus tollens” come from formal logic. They tell you how to deduce conclusions from statements.

Modus ponens says that if you know that A is true, and that B is true whenever A is true, then you can deduce that B is true. For instance: “If someone is a hunan, then he is mortal. Socrates is a human. Therefore, he is mortal.”

Conversely, modus tollens says that if you know that B is true whenever A is true, and you know that B is not true, then A is not true. “If someone is a human, then he is mortal. Zeus is immortal. Therefore, Zeus is not a human.”

The full expression extends these terms to the realm of politics and morality. For a naive culture war adjacent example: “Christianity says that gay sex is bad. Christianity is good. Therefore, gay sex is bad.” This is a sort of moral equivalent to modus ponens as described above. But, if you support gay rights, then you can do this in reverse: “Christianity says that gay sex is bad. Gay sex is good. Therefore, Christianity is bad.” This id the equivalent of modus tollens.

The expression thus can be viewed as saying “if you support a consequence because a preexisting belief of yours says that it’s good, then someone else could just as easily reject that consequence and say that your preexisting belief is bad.”

Let's say you have a statement:

If A, then B.

There are two syllogisms that can be derived from this statement, one of which is referred to as Modus Ponens and the other of which is Modus Tollens.

Modus Ponens: If A, then B A Therefore, B

Modus Tollens: If A, then B Not B Therefore, not A

Where the statement / joke comes in is when you start making an actual argument where the two people agree on the conditional, but one is arguing that A is true and the other is arguing that B is false. Let's say something like:

If morality is objective, there is a God.

The first person takes the objectivity of morality as proof that God exists, but the second person takes the non-existence of God as proof that morality can't be objective. Despite both parties accepting the conditional, they still believe different things.

Hard to say. I'm certainly typically more sober earlier in the day. Also there must be some rancid oil or something in the early morning that maybe is taken out or otherwise disposed of in the evening. I don't think I'm alone in thinking the smell can be quite strong, but it may be that the smell is also quite different at these differing times.

Starlight is supposedly one of the more effective do-gooders but she can't even make a dent in Homelander's popularity, can't do any material damage to Vought, and can't even shift political outcomes in her side's favor.

Not just that. Starlight thinks she's in a war for America's soul, but is also so concerned about her purity that she refuses to go out and motivate people because she hates the Starlight brand....while also using it for her bullshit ramshackle charity org? It's past incompetence to even consider this.

As someone who grew up watching Supernatural, Kripke going "woke" seemed like a blackpill but are we sure this whole thing isn't some not-so-veiled critique of left-wing activism?

It wouldn't be a proper comic book story without a egregious, poorly-researched error.

The allure of the smell of ramen shops is inversely related to the hour of day-- meaning in early morning the smell is revolting. Late night, enticing.

Is this an observation of your internal state or how the smells change during the cycle? (They boil bones for the broth for around half of the day, don't they?)

Ahhh I see you're like "the few examples of actually good uses of military action are incredible and I want more of it."

Sadly I just agree, The Saga of Tanya the evil was the best war show of all time in spite of it involving fucking magical girls. The levels of thinking in those books/shows was just off the charts. I get a lot of the same vibes as when I hear Skullagrim review mary the virgin witch somehow by having higher variance the animated shows can have some of the best depictions of conflict.

I really liked the Saga of Tanya the evil and am looking forward to season 2, Season 1 was so good and while the books are ok, the animated version really sells you on the "this is what war is like" doctrine (except for mary sue fuck mary sue)

Your observation is preempted (kind of) by Frank Herbert, when Miles Teg is tortured by the returners from the Scattering, he notices that the man in charge must be high status because of how impractically tiny his briefcase is.

a clear upper hand

Operation Bagration was a clear upper hand. Right now, the Russian army is strong enough to exploit Ukrainian tactical failures, but nowhere near strong enough to create opportunities of its own.

Can somebody explain to me in simple, preferably monosyllabic words: what does the expression One man's modus ponens is another man's modus tollens mean?

I mean, are there any indications that Saudi Arabia is actually going to start accepting other currencies?

I finished House To House. Not much more to say about it than what I said last week. The remainder of the book is mostly minute-to-minute gory detail of SSG Bellavia's mostly single-handed fight to retake a particular house in a tricky location from some well-dug-in insurgents. Exciting and engaging stuff for sure. but not a ton of deep insight.

Started reading The Devil's Chessboard by David Talbot. Non-fiction, apparently about how Allen Dulles and I guess associates formed a sort of secret government starting in the 60s or so I guess. I suppose I'll see how good it ends up being.

Can you tell me which rule I broke, and whether the decision to ban me came before or after identifying that rule?

Physically, middle-aged. But in my mentality towards the opposite sex I fully identify with the male character.

/r/PoliticalCompassMemes of all places tipped me off about an entertaining animated short movie depicting two mercenary groups in realistic urban combat: https://youtube.com/watch?v=OTLGWNruuOE

Very inferior in quality to Astartes, but still quite nailbiting while dialogue-free.