HOME | DD

A-Demented-Loki In reply to Nanodoodle [2011-02-08 01:34:26 +0000 UTC]

correct!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

bluenova25 In reply to ??? [2011-02-07 21:38:27 +0000 UTC]

at first i dident get why this was soo popular when i looked at the thumbnail
now i do!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

AgentKatswell In reply to ??? [2011-02-07 21:26:02 +0000 UTC]

<33 Aww

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

snowwaterflower In reply to ??? [2011-02-07 21:23:51 +0000 UTC]

I knew right away it was memories... it made me cry a little inside Beautiful message.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SamBlob In reply to ??? [2011-02-07 21:21:04 +0000 UTC]

Memories don't really last a lifetime for those who live to be old. Memories die when you go senile.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-07 22:22:24 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, but not everyone goes senile do they? Dickwad. What a bias, one-sided and untruthful thing to say.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-07 23:06:11 +0000 UTC]

No, not all of us go senile. Some of us get cancer first. Or get shot.

Enough of us do go senile, however, for memories lasting a lifetime to be less than a certainty.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-08 18:31:30 +0000 UTC]

Erm, yeahh....not everyone gets cancer, or gets shot either.
Again, you have a very bias and overly negative opinion which isn't truthful or reliable. Do you read much? Maybe you should.

And actually, no. Memories lasting a lifetime are not less than a certianty. In fact, they probably happen more often than you think.
You can't read minds can you? I thought not. That too is just merely your own bias opionion.
Open you own mind a bit, it might work.

Then again, maybe not. You'll probably stay ignorant.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-08 21:29:38 +0000 UTC]

Truth: Everybody dies, one way or another.

Truth: Some of us live to be old.

Truth: Most of us who get really old become senile.

Therefore, quite a few of us will get senile and thus outlive our memories.

For most of us, our memories will last a lifetime, mainly because most of us will not live to be really old. Heart disease, auto accidents, home accidents, cancer, other diseases, homicide, and other killers will claim most of us before senility can really set in.

If you live long enough, however, you will almost certainly go senile and lose your memories and your marbles.

Such is life. Such is the future. You can sling as many adjectives at me as you like, but you cannot change the truth.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-10 16:05:25 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, but where's your proof that most of us become senile, have a heart attack etc etc? Health magazines? Internet articles? Yeeeah like THOSE are the truth *saracsm*. At the end of the day, you don't know everyone in the world. What your saying isn't the truth at all, it's an opinion made by your own bias observations.


'Heart disease, auto accidents, home accidents, cancer, other diseases, homicide, and other killers will claim most of us before senility can really set in.'

Depends really, on numerous factors. What country do people live in for example. The above list of things could certainly be applied to Kenya, but Great Britian or Japan? I don't think the same rules apply. I'm not saying the things DON'T happen of course, but they probably happen less than you think. You've probably read health magazine reports and taken that as the truth. It isn't. The media are bias too ya know...


It's all just your opinion. And actually, it's most likely that a vast majority of people die in there sleep and are able to retain memories up until the very last beath they take. Such is life. Such is the future.

'Almost certainly' is are words used when putting across an opinion. Therefore, it isn't the truth. Just because YOU have witnessed people 'losing there marbles' as you so put it, dosn't mean EVERYBODY ELSE DOES.

You can sling as many opinions at me as you like, but YOU cannot chnage the truth. Which is that things are never as pessimistic (or optimistic) as they seem. They are realist, which YOU are clearly not.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-10 23:42:09 +0000 UTC]

Something is only a certainty if it happens *all* the time. Anything that does not happen *all* the time is not a certainty.

This means that the only certainty is death.

Memories are not a certainty.

Learn logic sometime.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-11 16:14:18 +0000 UTC]

How do you know death is the end? Nobody knows that.

How do you know memories are not certainty? Are you in fact confessing that
ou know everybody? Because I don't think you do. Therefore your statement isn't a fact OR certainty.

And for the record, most scientist actually confess that they have no idea what the hrell happens after you die. Because science cannot disprove life after death, and neither can you. Trying to disprove or prove it only makes you look light a total douchbag.

At least I can admit I don't understand everything. You obviously don't/ cannot do that. But that's obviously your arrogant/weakness, isn't it?

Oh and for the record, memories can be certain. Not all the time, but sometimes. Because it's what makes you who you are right now. Without them, you wouldn't be you. Just because SOME people forget some shit, dosn't mean that it applies to everyone. Just because YOU, one mere person, thinks that memories are not certainlt dosn't mean that's true, because you are far from omipotent.


Learn logic sometime.

Or attain an open mind at the very least, because you are in desperate need of one. Very soon.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-11 21:51:47 +0000 UTC]

How do you know death is the end? Nobody knows that.

I didn't say death was the end. I merely said it was the only certainty.

How do you know memories are not certainty? Are you in fact confessing that
ou know everybody? Because I don't think you do. Therefore your statement isn't a fact OR certainty.

If there is a possibility that it might not happen, then it is not a certainty. A possibility exists that senility (or amnesia, for that matter) can remove one's memory before one dies. Therefore, memories lasting a lifetime is not a certainty. As I said, learn logic sometime.

And for the record, most scientist actually confess that they have no idea what the hrell happens after you die. Because science cannot disprove life after death, and neither can you. Trying to disprove or prove it only makes you look light a total douchbag.

I have not claimed that there is no life after death. Personally, I believe in the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. However, life, as defined as the time we spend on earth in the body we have now, is conventionally treated as ending upon death. It is a reasonable convention and most people use it.

At least I can admit I don't understand everything. You obviously don't/ cannot do that. But that's obviously your arrogant/weakness, isn't it?

We all have our weaknesses. There are some who presume to know those of others.

Oh and for the record, memories can be certain. Not all the time, but sometimes. Because it's what makes you who you are right now. Without them, you wouldn't be you. Just because SOME people forget some shit, dosn't mean that it applies to everyone. Just because YOU, one mere person, thinks that memories are not certainlt dosn't mean that's true, because you are far from omipotent.

We are all human. We are all fallible. Anything can happen. As a result of this, nothing is certain. It is not certain that memories will last a lifetime, It is not certain that either of us will live to be old. It is not even certain that either of us will live to see tomorrow.

Learn logic sometime.

Or attain an open mind at the very least, because you are in desperate need of one. Very soon.

I would state here the analogy of pots and kettles, but, given the maturity you have expressed in this conversation thus far, you would probably extend your accusations against me to include racism.

Have a nice life, however much or little of it is left.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-11 22:15:18 +0000 UTC]

'I didn't say death was the end. I merely said it was the only certainty.'

Yeah, you've said, only a billion times.



'If there is a possibility that it might not happen, then it is not a certainty. A possibility exists that senility (or amnesia, for that matter) can remove one's memory before one dies. Therefore, memories lasting a lifetime is not a certainty. As I said, learn logic sometime.'


How do you know that everyone looses all their memories, even if they are senile? Or have amnesia? Memories lasting a lifetime for some people does happen. Sometimes it dosn't.

Therefore memories are certian for some people and not for others.
The possibility exists that you won't get senality at all or amnesia for that matter.
Like I said, learn logic sometime.
Memories CAN be certain, to certain people.
You keep on saying that memories don'tlast for EVERYONE, making you false by default, because;

A) You don't know every human on the earth, all 6.8 billion of them.



B) You CANNOT and WILL NEVER be able to read somebody elses mind. Only interpret their actions.




'I have not claimed that there is no life after death. Personally, I believe in the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. However, life, as defined as the time we spend on earth in the body we have now, is conventionally treated as ending upon death. It is a reasonable convention and most people use it'


So, basically death is not certain. You've just beat yourself at your own game, because to you, death dosn't exist, because it means starting a new life. I rest my case.




'We all have our weaknesses. There are some who presume to know those of others.'


I rest my case. You are one of those people.





'We are all human. We are all fallible. Anything can happen. As a result of this, nothing is certain. It is not certain that memories will last a lifetime, It is not certain that either of us will live to be old. It is not even certain that either of us will live to see tomorrow.'




'You could use this poorly thought out arguement to say that your own arguement about our memories is fallible. How do you know that memories cannot last forever? You don't. It really is that simple. Amnesia and senality don't even come into it, because we can only judge people's PHYSICAL behaviour. Again, can you read minds? Because if you can, perrleaaasee tell me how.

Your logic has as many holes as swiss cheese.




'I would state here the analogy of pots and kettles, but, given the maturity you have expressed in this conversation thus far, you would probably extend your accusations against me to include racism.'




I see you've retained your enormous self of self-interest. Assuming things of others and then jumping to conclusions is a very irrational, immature and pathetic thing to do. Did, you know that the people who assume that things are 'racist' usually turn out to be the most racist of all..?

Food for thought...

'Have a nice life, however much or little of it is left.'


What is this? An attempt to try and depress me about my mortality? Haha, yeeah, dude, death dosn't bother me, so try usuing that as a chat up line or something intresting. I'm guessing that you, however, are terrified of it... that's most likely the reaon why you believe in rebirth and all that dog-shite...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-12 00:20:43 +0000 UTC]

Let me look at the post that caused all of this:

"Memories don't really last a lifetime for those who live to be old. Memories die when you go senile."

Yes, I see the mistake I made. I assumed that senility was certain for all who lived to be old enough. It isn't. It is, however, very likely.

But what, exactly, is *your* argument? Is it that memories are *certain* to last a lifetime, that memories *can* last a lifetime, or that memories can last *forever*?

The argument that memories are *certain* to last a lifetime is very easily disproved. All I have to do is find *one* person who has lost his or her memories. I don't have to look very far to do so.

It would be very difficult, on the other hand, to disprove the argument that memories *can* last a lifetime. All it would take to *prove* the argument, actually, is to know someone who died with his or her memories intact. This requires a bit of speculation, but not much, I think I have an example there, too.

As to memories lasting *forever*, that sounds like either a wonderful dream or a nightmare for historians and archaeologists. It would be a wonderful dream if they could find some everlasting memories of the lost civilizations of Minos or Phonecia that could tell them what they want to know instead of them having to figure it out from artifacts found in digs. It would be a nightmare because the everlasting memories would make them redundant.

To sum up, it is *possible* for memories to last a lifetime, especially if that lifetime isn't particularly long. It is, however, *not* certain.

And that last bit of the previous message was intended to be a brush-off. For the record, it still is.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-12 09:11:29 +0000 UTC]

I never said memories weren't certain for everyone.

;Yes, I see the mistake I made. I assumed that senility was certain for all who lived to be old enough. It isn't. It is, however, very likely.'

WERE'S YOUR PROOF THAT IT IS LIKELY YOU? How do you know it's not less that likely? How do you know that you are more likely to retain important memories rather than forget? YOU DON'T.


'But what, exactly, is *your* argument? Is it that memories are *certain* to last a lifetime, that memories *can* last a lifetime, or that memories can last *forever*?'

'As to memories lasting *forever*, that sounds like either a wonderful dream or a nightmare for historians and archaeologists. It would be a wonderful dream if they could find some everlasting memories of the lost civilizations of Minos or Phonecia that could tell them what they want to know instead of them having to figure it out from artifacts found in digs. It would be a nightmare because the everlasting memories would make them redundant.'

What the fuck is this shit? Historians and archaeologists are not neuro-scientists!

And they would't be able to find memories in Minos or Phonecia, because the people are dead. I thought we were talking about memories that last a life-time, when it actually matters? And how the fuck can you disprove that memories we collect in this life don't go into another, after we 'die'? Again you need to get an open-mind. You have obviously clouded you judgement with 'logic' and 'science' (by the way, scientist cannot disprove anything about memories NOT lasting a lifetime, even if you are senile or have amnesia. They just think people like that cannot communicate effectively, because the neaurons have trouble using the data it's recieved over the years in a manner seen as 'appropriate' to healthy folk. So yeah, get your facts right before you try and disprove anything.


They can, for the vast magority of people.
It's all relative to the matter of opinion. You think people cannot retain memories forever. I can. We can either both be right, both be wrong, or one right or one wrong. It's that simple.

'The argument that memories are *certain* to last a lifetime is very easily disproved. All I have to do is find *one* person who has lost his or her memories. I don't have to look very far to do so.'


This dosn't proove anything. It proove one person has lost his or her memories, not the rest of the 6.8 billion. Idiot!

It's all about you, you, you. What YOU've seen, therefore, you are likely to be wrong. And how do you know that the person who lost their memories cannot retrieve them again? You have no idea. Open-minds work wonders.





'It would be very difficult, on the other hand, to disprove the argument that memories *can* last a lifetime. All it would take to *prove* the argument, actually, is to know someone who died with his or her memories intact. This requires a bit of speculation, but not much, I think I have an example there, too.'

This is all merely just a matter of your own personal opinion. Personally I'd find it harder to find somebody who CANT remember important memories, the ones that matter, than not. Plus, if you'd read my previous message, I asked you a question. How do you know that somebody with amnesia or senality is STILL ABLE to remember, but UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE THEM TO YOU IN A WAY YOU CAN UNDERSTAND? Think about it.

Like you clearly put, speculation. So when your saying things like 'highly likely', then it's a speculation. Clearly you might be completely wrong about everything, because I exist and have another opinion about it. If memories didn't last forever, I'd have the same opinion as you. DUR.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-12 12:10:34 +0000 UTC]

What the fuck is this shit? Historians and archaeologists are not neuro-scientists!

And they would't be able to find memories in Minos or Phonecia, because the people are dead. I thought we were talking about memories that last a life-time, when it actually matters?

So did I. You're the one who mentioned "forever": How do you know that memories cannot last forever?

_________________________________________________________

by the way, scientist cannot disprove anything about memories NOT lasting a lifetime, even if you are senile or have amnesia. They just think people like that cannot communicate effectively, because the neaurons have trouble using the data it's recieved over the years in a manner seen as 'appropriate' to healthy folk. So yeah, get your facts right before you try and disprove anything.

A woman who had been married for the twenty-five years between her wedding and her husband's death cannot recall having had a husband. There's both a fact and a rather effective communication.

_________________________________________________________


This dosn't proove anything. It proove one person has lost his or her memories, not the rest of the 6.8 billion. Idiot!


It proves that memories *can* die before the person does, and therefore *disproves* the proposition that memories are certain to last a lifetime. Anyone even briefly acquainted with logic would know this.

_________________________________________________________

This is all merely just a matter of your own personal opinion. Personally I'd find it harder to find somebody who CANT remember important memories, the ones that matter, than not. Plus, if you'd read my previous message, I asked you a question. How do you know that somebody with amnesia or senality is STILL ABLE to remember, but UNABLE TO COMMUNICATE THEM TO YOU IN A WAY YOU CAN UNDERSTAND? Think about it.

Considering that you posted this particular piece of flaming opposition in response to a statement where I actually *agreed* with you, I would say you need to work on your reading comprehension as well as your logic.

For what it's worth, the speculation in question regarded whether someone shot and killed at the age of thirty-three still had his memories when he died. I believe he did, but it would be quite Pythonic to ask him...

__________________________________________________________

Clearly you might be completely wrong about everything, because I exist and have another opinion about it. If memories didn't last forever, I'd have the same opinion as you.

Yes, I might be completely wrong about everything, but neither your existence nor your opinion have any influence on whether I am wrong or not.

And again with "forever"! Please keep your parameters consistent. Is this about a "lifetime" or about "forever"?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-13 21:50:10 +0000 UTC]

I love the fact you've completely overlooked more than half of my arguements. And it was you who was struggling between your parameters. That's probably why I'm getting condfused over 'lifetime and forever.'

'Yes, I might be completely wrong about everything, but neither your existence nor your opinion have any influence on whether I am wrong or not.'


I might as well use this arguement against you.

'A woman who had been married for the twenty-five years between her wedding and her husband's death cannot recall having had a husband. There's both a fact and a rather effective communication.'



'It proves that memories *can* die before the person does, and therefore *disproves* the proposition that memories are certain to last a lifetime.'


But how do you know a person truelly looses his/her memories? Or 'die'? You do realize that the idea that memories 'die' is a hypothetical speculation derived from mere scientific observations, nothing more? The fact you are so certain that they 'die' is infuriating beyond belief, most educated scientists would agree with me.


'Considering that you posted this particular piece of flaming opposition in response to a statement where I actually *agreed* with you, I would say you need to work on your reading comprehension as well as your logic.'


Erm, no. I didn't agree with what you said at all. You basically said memories that last a lifetime were virtually impossible. That was your origional arguement. In fact, they are highly possible, even certian for most people. Grow up.




Really? Or does she recognise her husband, but is unable to communicate it through words in a way we can understand? Is there a distruption between the mind and the body? Again, you cannot disprove this, neither can any scientist, even though they've tried. Go figure.

The fact that I'm repeating myself proves some flaw in your understanding.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-13 23:01:55 +0000 UTC]

The fact that I'm repeating myself proves some flaw in your understanding.

There are other things that would cause you to repeat yourself. One possibility is that your head could be harder than steel-reinforced concrete, with the consequence that you would be unable to understand what I'm talking about.

In any case, we are not going to agree. Have a nice life. Or a miserable one. I really don't care.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-14 10:01:06 +0000 UTC]

I do understand what your saying. Considering my grandama has amnesia hereself, I'd be pretty dumb to not understand what your going on about.

I just don't agree.

And if you didn't really care, why bother saying 'have a nice life' in the first place? Be mature and don't do that, it only makes you look like a complete faggot.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to ShrimpyAssassin [2011-02-14 12:39:43 +0000 UTC]

I had actually deleted this from my message inbox, but I just have to note that it is hilarious that someone who apparently cannot spell and substitutes profanity for logic is telling me to be mature.

Begone, gnat.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShrimpyAssassin In reply to SamBlob [2011-02-14 16:57:10 +0000 UTC]

And who are you exactly, the fucking grammer nazi? Jesus, you have some very petty issues you need to sort out. Get a backbone, for one thing, because believe it or not, people can use profanity and be educated at the sametime. SHOCK HORROR. Plus, I was only stating what I thought. I'm pretty sure you are not a faggot, but you just seem like one to me, though I'd clear that up.

I also like the fact you've completely given up and have now just changed the entire course of the original arguement, by trying to dismiss me.

Name calling? Seriously?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Mikoroh In reply to metalik-fairy [2011-02-07 22:39:19 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0