Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NullRad t1_ja9dxjm wrote

Reply to comment by ErisWheel in AI cannot achieve consciousness without a body. by seethehappymoron

Evidence? I don’t need shit to make a tongue in cheek comment on r/philosophy.

0

ErisWheel t1_ja9fdlb wrote

"My argument is bad and I don't care/don't believe it anyway."

Gotcha.

1

NullRad t1_ja9fned wrote

How’s throwing ad homonyms & snuck premise at people who don’t care working out for you?

0

ErisWheel t1_ja9hpir wrote

Do you know what ad hominem means? Because this ain't it.

You said you don't need evidence because you made a "tongue in cheek" comment on r/philosophy. Which seems to suggest either a) you don't think evidence is important for arguments, b) you don't know what tongue in cheek means, or c) you think r/philosophy isn't a place that requires the above, or some combination of all of that.

How's what working out for me? Calling out a bullshit argument? Not all that hard, really. Feel free to provide support if you don't think that's true, but I'm not sure why you're upset that someone doesn't take your point seriously when your justification is "I don't need shit because my comments are flippant and this is r/philosophy".

1

NullRad t1_ja9i11x wrote

What do you get when you Hitchens a Diogenes? Behold, a chicken.

0

ErisWheel t1_ja9j5s9 wrote

>when you Hitchens a Diogenes? Behold, a
>
>chicken

Cool, man. You've read some ancient philosophy somewhere and mish-mashed it with name-dropping Hitchens for some reason. Good stuff and keep those quips rolling, no matter how nonsensical they may be.

Whatever bone you've got to pick from here on out, the bacteria idea you offered earlier wasn't a good one.

1

NullRad t1_ja9jdqh wrote

How’s that working out for you… your dopamine bound to winning low risk arguments?

1