Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

Do you really think I've misunderstood Popper?

But it's entertaining to see the variety of boxes one can construct that enclose normal, everyday thought…
Did you mean something more, or something different?

It doesn't matter at all because you are not interested in the ontological nature of things

Was it good, for you? )
Had you kept your head out of the clouds, you could argue otherwise…

Nihilism is the thesis that there are no composite objects: every object is mereologically simple (i.e., partless). Together with the plausible assumption that ordinary objects (if they exist) are all composite objects, nihilism entails that there are no ordinary objects. Nihilists typically accept that there are countless microscopic objects: although there are “simples arranged dogwise” and “simples arranged statuewise”, there are no dogs or statues. But nihilism is also compatible with existence monism—the thesis that there is a single, all-encompassing simple (the cosmos, a.k.a. “the blobject”)—as well as the extreme nihilist thesis that there are no objects whatsoever.

Although I like the term blobject (kinda mystical, i'n't? ) I see in most philosophical "positions" little more than posturing: Head-in-the-clouds playing with words; word-play, where the usual rules of language are changed and, usually, kept mostly secret…  
(That may be giving "philosophers" too much credit, however: They may be unaware that they've in fact changed the rules! Or -a kinder way of putting it- simply get caught up in the excitement of the game!)
But, of course, I doubt that's what ersi meant by calling me a nihilist. He most likely meant to call me either immoral or amoral…because, yes, I'm comfortable with locating morality entirely within human groupings. (Which is not to say that anything goes!) And I could probably be called an atheist, too.
———————————————
A side note: I don't think the term falsification should be used outside of its technical sense, which is that of providing a better justificatory warrant for the truth of scientific theories than confirmation…
You may be confusing me with Sparta?

All possible languages already exists. Everything already exists, the Creation was total and perfect, not partial and imperfect.
It couldn't had been any other way regardless what we can be conscious about,
That's man condition, discovering the miracle of God's creation, one step at the time.

I see in most philosophical "positions" little more than posturing: Head-in-the-clouds playing with words; word-play, where the usual rules of language are changed and, usually, kept mostly secret…   

@Belfrager: If the point of the game is "salvation," I won't play. If I don't believe in your God, "salvation" is a culmination that's unreachable. I am not Sisyphus!
You can play the part, if you wish. But your anguish isn't an object of admiration…

I finally understood the deep meaning of the Tower of Babel thing. 

When you finally realize that that's what and all there is from which to "construct" a philosophy, you'll be knocking at the door of Wisdom.
And when your knock is answered, from the path behind you, you'll realize that Wisdom is often outside in the same world you yourself roamed. If you are startled, at first, you'll come to share in the laughter such provoked!
Thus spake OakdaleFTL.

Whatever you worship, that's God.

if God was standing directly before me [...]

This is the principle. Everything else is less relevant.

Quote from: ersi on 2014-07-11, 20:55:06

This is the principle. Everything else is less relevant.

This is why I mis-trust mystics and practitioners of term-logics: Reality be damned -they say– and proceed to do whatever the heck they want… Justified by what would "normally" be laughed at!

Atheists will… They can't help it: They define themselves by their opposition to a Straw Man…

Atheists will… They can't help it: They define themselves by their opposition to a Straw Man…Particularly straw men of their own making.

You are a special case, James! Your ability be offended is phenomenal — no doubt, you practice a lot. Still, there had to have been some native talent there to begin with.

Atheism, for the first time, has theoretical scientific evidence that God cannot exist […]

That's a bold statement! Would you care to point me to this evidence?