Discussion What's a "controversial" belief you have? [Let's Discuss]

[pyx]

our age has exhausted its own creativity and thus will never produce any great individuals. only athletes, charlatans, political pundits and anaemic, weak-willed itinerary thinkers will be considered great, yet they stray so far from the standard of adequacy that it's embarrassing. there are no great writers, actors, playwrights, artists, etc. that are alive today. scientists do not count. defeatism is the only viable course.

 

[hematomatema]

We have very limited or virtually no free will. Our brain is already aware of our actions before we consciously are aware ourselves. Neurologists have already proven this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will#:~:text=Free will as illusion,-It may be&text=The discovery that humans possess,idea that intention initiates actions.

"One significant finding of modern studies is that a person's brain seems to commit to certain decisions before the person becomes aware of having made them. Researchers have found a delay of about half a second or more (discussed in sections below). With contemporary brain scanning technology, scientists in 2008 were able to predict with 60% accuracy whether 12 subjects would press a button with their left or right hand up to 10 seconds before the subject became aware of having made that choice.[6] These and other findings have led some scientists, like Patrick Haggard, to reject some definitions of "free will"."

I feel like it depends on what you define free will as. Perhaps the conscious does not dictate the resulting action but is instead a 'messenger' supplying reason to the individual for a particular action? If this were the case, it wouldn't disprove free will, it would just mean that the conscious, higher think-y part is just not the one making that decision. I guess it could be likened to flicking a switch on a computer program on and off; the user just sees a switch on a white screen that alternates between on and off (so they think that the switch alone is what controls on and off here) while there's so much more going on under the hood that actually dictates what action occurs or whether or not, in the case of free will, what decision is made. Even if it isn't the conscious making that decision and choosing something, there's something that is, so I don't necessarily see it as being too distinguishable from free will.

I think it's mostly down to what we define as free will. Free will as in, the conscious controls all, definitely not, but I do think that there is an element of free will presented by the brain in some capacity. Not to mention, those scientists in 2008 predicted with...60% accuracy. That's fluke-levels of accuracy. There's only two options. Not much better than 50/50. There's definitely more modern research on this topic that covers it better.

 

[waterworks]

guess i misinterpreted what you meant by "birthed", thats a vague statement

PS: I would really appreciate that you just summarized what you're trying to say. I really don't have time to sit through an hour of videos.

I don't think it's vague, I think you assumed something with little information. What I mean by birthed is that they are responsible for the existence of the homo sapien, and other primates that were contemporaneous to the homo sapien, neanderthals etc.

whatever alien civilizations are out there, theyre literally too far away. "light years" is not a joke or anything to underestimate. we cant just work around it nor the speed of light being the speed limit of existing. where were we millions of years ago? nowhere. we only see things millions and billions of years in the past because its that far away. by light. the "by time" comparison is mind numbing. the expansion of spacetime exiles us from other galaxies, but even within our own, we cant even reach the closest star and how many years have we been looking nearby? barely any and its still shockingly far away despite being relatively "close" for space. it is unfathomably vast, even nearby. we hardly see anything of the known universe, given how large its expected to be due to cosmic inflation.

I already addressed the problem with distances in space. A lot of what you're talking about is also being measured based on modern human biological composition and technological advancement. Even with our modern day concepts of life preservation, cryonics with time can easily shift from speculation to practice.

life is complicated and messy and far more likely to not advance to anything beyond bacteria; there are (potentially, according to microbiologists) up to 2 trillion species on earth and almost all of them are tiny, simple, single celled or very small muti-celled organisms with 0 intelligence to speak of. evolution does not favor intelligence if the spectrum of a species success involves "existing prolifically". it takes absurdly more resources to develop neurons, brains and larger bodies that can adapt to more than just "devour fuel and multiply dna" by the simplest means possible. it took billions of years for that to happen on earth. planets get wiped out routinely, not much in the universe actually remains stable long enough for anything resembling civilization to form. what little life may remain after the gauntlets of radiation, heat, cold and other small life consuming it are just too far away and not developed further.

This is speculation. I'm not sure if you're relying on probabilities or just being biased towards to earth's history, but none of that impedes the advancement of an even type 3 civilization on the kardashev scale.

recent updates to the fermi paradox math have reinforced that we will almost certainly not encounter any life and it will not encounter us

"fermi paradox math"? Where are you getting that math? The fermi paradox is not specifically a mathematical equation but a thought-provoking question regarding the apparent contradiction between the high probability of extraterrestrial civilizations existing in the universe and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.

as for the warp drive and wormhole stuff, if a physicist or engineer ever figures out how to overcome something plank length sized, "exotic matter" or contend with the gravity of a black hole and survive it (which is what all these ideas seem to rely on), congrats to them they've won every nobel prize ever lol.

Of course they would win it, because then it's no longer speculative science but proven fact. I think you're missing something here, wormholes and warpdrives are theoretical speculation and are subjects of ongoing research and debate among physicists and astronomers. The current models we have of the physical universe allow for such things to exist even though their practical applications are still debatable. The Planck length is a tiny unit of length represents a scale at which quantum gravitational effects are expected to become significant; wormholes, if they exist, would not necessarily be constrained to this size. The size of a wormhole, if it were to exist, would depend on the specific conditions and properties of spacetime in which it forms, which are currently unknown.

substances that cannot exist in the universe and forces matter cannot endure. its literally impossible for humans or anything, really, to physically overcome. it isnt plausible. mathematics also doesnt forbid the statistical possibility of spontaneously popping out of existence here on earth and reappearing at some random point in spacetime. michio kaku (a fucking crackpot but hes not bad at math) required his grad students to find the correct statistics on exactly that to graduate his theoretical physics class at one point. math saying its possible doesnt automatically make it physically possible for us. its not and i wish certain public speakers would stop these doublespeak psych out propositions like it is just for money and clicks. very long and im sorry for the rant but i study physics and this is a point of contention for me if you cant tell lol

I can tell you're uh passionate about this topic. But regardless, you're not exactly disproving the basis of my argument.

 

[divinemistress36]

That Earth is a prison planet and a form of Hell

 

[thetruetato]

Anyone interested in friendly discussion/debate? If you are, what's a belief you have that's controversial? Keep in mind others will be free to challenge your belief and argue against it or just have a discussion.

So please don't bring up topics you are sensitive about or just avoid saying anything please. I'm not trying to create a toxic thread and get myself banned.

My "controversial" belief is that humans were once ruled by extra terrestrial life. These ETs were the ones that birthed the old civilizations (Sumeria) and inevitably influenced ancient writings including the Torah and Bible. In short, the Christian "god" was an ET, or one of several anyway.

Every single thing that has ever happened was predetermined by the arrangements of the atoms which make up the universe. It's like a math problem with an inconceivable amount of variables. Almost like how physics can be calculated by humans and be somewhat accurate, but if you calculated every single atom you would be able to perfectly determine how something would happen. This could also apply to how people think, as brains are just bundles of neurons and electrical charges.

 

[lita-lassi]

"fermi paradox math"? Where are you getting that math? The fermi paradox is not specifically a mathematical equation but a thought-provoking question regarding the apparent contradiction between the high probability of extraterrestrial civilizations existing in the universe and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.

should probably read more about the physics of what youre arguing against

"The first aspect of the Fermi paradox is a function of the scale or the large numbers involved: there are an estimated 200–400 billion stars in the Milky Way[24] (2–4 × 1011) and 70 sextillion (7×1022) in the observable universe.Even if intelligent life occurs on only a minuscule percentage of planets around these stars, there might still be a great number of extant civilizations, and if the percentage were high enough it would produce a significant number of extant civilizations in the Milky Way. This assumes the mediocrity principle, by which Earth is a typical planet."

its a math formula, the updated estimates of numbers of stars and galaxies in the universe as we learn more get plugged in and the rest of it adjusted. enrico fermi was a physicist. and earth, as we're learning more, is NOT typical.

youre also not proving anything you said to be accurate by any milestone. in a debate the burden of proof is on both parties, youre not right by default and youre clearly not going to be convinced by actual experts words despite wanting to debate. thats why i posted the videos. im not an expert, so i refer to those that are. are you an anthropologist or archeological expert with proof or credible evidence of alien interference?

 

[Kavka]

1) posts demanding FC be reinstated should be kept in their own containment thread

2) FC did deserve to be banned

3) animal cruelty should be punishable by death

Wait a minute, are you saying that everyone who isn't vegan should be punished to death?

 

[ultrasharpy123456]

So like, Ryu in street fighter, his fighting style, is pretty cool. I like magic. Revising arguments is nice. I like anime and game characters a lot, like say Lucina from Fire Emblem or the Wii Fit Trainer for example. Lore can be pretty cool.

Revision is really cool. Before working a job or going to school, working on therapy and mental health can be pretty nice. Teens should learn the effects of suicide and what it can do to you as a person so they can make the right choices. So hopefully with all this you can understand what I mean.

 

[Saturn_]

I mean, I like pineapples on pizza...

 

[waterworks]

oh ok you dont know anything youre talking about then got it

I already said don't talk about topics you're sensitive about. Now here you go being toxic.

"The first aspect of the Fermi paradox is a function of the scale or the large numbers involved: there are an estimated 200–400 billion stars in the Milky Way[24] (2–4 × 1011) and 70 sextillion (7×1022) in the observable universe.Even if intelligent life occurs on only a minuscule percentage of planets around these stars, there might still be a great number of extant civilizations, and if the percentage were high enough it would produce a significant number of extant civilizations in the Milky Way. This assumes the mediocrity principle, by which Earth is a typical planet."

sigh The Fermi Paradox arises from the discrepancy between probabilistic arguments suggesting many possible civilizations and the lack of observable evidence or contact with such civilizations. What you are doing here is probabilistic math, not "fermi paradox math"; is this just a deliberate poor choice of words? Since you're quoting wikipedia, did you just gloss over this "The Fermi paradox is a conflict between the argument that scale and probability seem to favor intelligent life being common in the universe, and the total lack of evidence of intelligent life having ever arisen anywhere other than on Earth."

its a math formula, the updated estimates of numbers of stars and galaxies in the universe as we learn more get plugged in and the rest of it adjusted. enrico fermi was a physicist.

It's not a formula, there is no fermi paradox formula. The fermi paradox, in simple words, is a thought experiment that questions why the high probability of extraterrestrial civilizations existing doesn't align with our lack of observations or contact with such civilizations. You might be misconstruing it with Drake's equation, which at times helps to demonstrate the disparity presented by the paradox.

youre also not proving anything you said to be accurate by any milestone. in a debate the burden of proof is on both parties, youre not right by default and youre clearly not going to be convinced by actual experts words despite wanting to debate. thats why i posted the videos. im not an expert, so i refer to those that are. are you an anthropologist or archeological expert with proof or credible evidence of alien interference?

What exactly have I had the opportunity of proving? You literally started your reply with a strawmann argument, here "sounds like youre discounting evolution as a whole and underestimate early human innovation". I've been trying this whole time to explain to you, what my argument is firstly, and that your post doesn't discredit it. You claim to know how debate works, but you are acting differently, and here you start off with a "rant", in your own words.

If you are not knowledgeable about something, why are you debating it? You sent me an hour's worth videos, and it's just not worth the time to watch them. If you don't know what they say, why are you sending them? You don't have to be an expert, but I'm sure you've heard of citing? You are able to quote a Wikipedia article, but can't quote/paraphrase what you learned in the videos you sent?

I'm not an anthropologist nor an archeologist. But I'm able to speak to the things I learned from experts in that field that have similar opinions as mine.

Every single thing that has ever happened was predetermined by the arrangements of the atoms which make up the universe. It's like a math problem with an inconceivable amount of variables. Almost like how physics can be calculated by humans and be somewhat accurate, but if you calculated every single atom you would be able to perfectly determine how something would happen. This could also apply to how people think, as brains are just bundles of neurons and electrical charges.

So how do you reconcile this with the mainstream understanding that quantum physics is nondeterministic? Which I think would be a huge chink in that variable math.

So like, Ryu in street fighter, his fighting style, is pretty cool. I like magic. Revising arguments is nice. I like anime and game characters a lot, like say Lucina from Fire Emblem or the Wii Fit Trainer for example. Lore can be pretty cool.

Revision is really cool. Before working a job or going to school, working on therapy and mental health can be pretty nice. Teens should learn the effects of suicide and what it can do to you as a person so they can make the right choices. So hopefully with all this you can understand what I mean.

This doesn't sound controversial, unless I didn't understand correctly. Seems very reasonable. Either way, I agree.

 

[lita-lassi]

knowledge about counterarguments isnt worth time apparently

 

[waterworks]

knowledge about counterarguments isnt worth time apparently

Not at all what I'm saying sigh. When you read a research paper, do you see people copy/pasting entire books in there, or do they cite particular phrases and statements that are relevant to their point? Suppose I send you a 1 hour video every time you have a counter argument, will you diligently sit through and watch each one, or would you ask me to cite what is pertinent to the discussion? You can AT THE VERY LEAST, put in timestamps to mark which parts I should watch. I think you've not been considerate this whole discussion. Anyway, we can end it here.

 

[Chinaski]

Wait a minute, are you saying that everyone who isn't vegan should be punished to death?

HEY CHECKMATE FUCKO no i am clearly not saying that however as an actual meat eater l concede that there is no logical reason to not be vegan in the year of our lord two thousand and twenty four, also don't harm animals for pleasure, it's bad

 

[ms_beaverhousen]

Ducks are horrible creatures who deserved to die.

I was chased by geese and a rooster (I was carrying my dog during the rooster chase and lost my flip flop during the run.) but I don't wish them death upon either of them.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

I was chased by geese and rooster ( I was carrying my dog during the rooster chase and lost my flip flop during the run.) but I don't wish them death.

If you were to wish death on geese then they would hunt you down and kill you. It's illegal to wish death on them.

 

[ms_beaverhousen]

People have always struggled with thinking for themselves - we're a social species and unconsciously feel safer in numbers.

I would even argue the internet has made it easier for people to think critically and come to their own conclusions by being exposed to ideas and people outside of what they would ever experience in day-to-day life.

Of course echo chambers are an issue. I think at the end of the day, the people who cannot think for themselves would have been that way anyway, the internet just gives them a platform, like everyone else

We think and act differently in numbers/groups too; it's gross.

DDMPA (that medical aid in dying medication) should be available for free with a waiting period of 1-2 months. For anyone over the age of 21.
A leaflet or booklet with instructions and information about that method is given with DDMPA as well.

I agree with this, but it needs to have an extremely heavily regulated process; "Denied, re-apply on 60days or 6mo." being an option. Maybe raise the age to 26, with some exceptions. A lot thought and restrictions would need to go into this. Options to have brains studied, body harvesting and donated options too.

Too bad this will never happen...

 

[WiltingBogStar]

It is perfectly moral to live on disability handouts and never contribute economically to a society which not only refuses to provide a way out for those who are genuinely not enjoying life but will even intervene when these same people resort to DIY methods, forcing them to continue a life which they very clearly did not want - often in an institution and/or with permanent injuries from their failed attempt. Those who intervened are then described as "heroes" despite facilitating the forced continuation of suffering.

I imagine the above isn't super controversial here but it is definitely controversial in the mainstream. The amount of times I've had somebody IRL try to debate me on this topic unsolicited, only to resort to ad hominem in response to the above argument, is mind-boggling.

 

[ms_beaverhousen]

1) Make hunting for sport illegal
2) The animals put down after injuring or killing a person, put them in a sanctuary or something.
3) Animals living on chains becoming illegal and penalized
4) Animal cruelty/death punishments as severe as if they were people
5) Removal of "under God" in the American Pledge of Allegiance

 

[Chinaski]

I agree with this, but it needs to have an extremely heavily regulated process; "Denied, re-apply on 60days or 6mo." being an option. Maybe raise the age to 26, with some exceptions. A lot thought and restrictions would need to go into this. Options to have brains studied, body harvesting and donated options too.

Too bad this will never happen...

I read this and assumed the thread had gone back on to FuneralCry being banned

 

[ms_beaverhousen]

I read this and assumed the thread had gone back on to FuneralCry being banned

Nah that shit needs to stop though. Her sheep can go talk about their sheperd on discord or a thread like you said. Said it before, will say it again...
"Voldy's gone moldy."
Her death-eaters can look for souls to slurp up elsewhere or go look for another Moaning Murtle to worship.

 

[Rev346]

Gods don't exist

 

[HighFlight]

I believe that human kind, as a whole, is inherently good. Circumstances may dictate evil behavior, and there are definitely some bad apples in the bunch. But as a whole, we try to do what's right based upon our beliefs.

If only we could put aside some of those differences and focus on our similarities, humanity can still be saved.

5. Anybody who voluntarily wants to reach old age are just irrational

Of course, I may fall into the irrational category.

 

[IDKWhatToNameMeself]

I believe god exists but he is an asshole who doesn't truly care about us, like all those wonderful people or children who get killed off by things like cancer and stuff, religious people will say that it's part of his plan and everything happens for a reason but what reason could that possibly be? Absolutely nobody benefits from a 4 year old little girl dying from cancer. All this though doesn't mean god doesn't exist, or lucifer is any better, it just means god is a fucking sadistic asshole. Another thing religious people say that bugs me is "they're in a better place now" yeah, they're in a better place until it happens to someone you love, aren't they? Like if their child died of cancer I bet they wouldn't be saying all those things

 

[wCvML2]

That mental illness should be diagnosed through objective measures with brain scans. The current way of testing is way too flawed and prone to mistakes. If I can lie to the tester and/or to myself and it effects the test results then the test is flawed.

 

[Dusk till dawn]

I believe that autonomy stands above everything else, to me if a 3 year old kid decides to try heroin it's his own decision, i don't believe in any form of "balance between autonomy and welfare"

Autonomy stands above everything else and should not be violated in any way regardless of how absurd the circumstances might be, even if it's a goddman 3 year old deciding to take a dose of 100mg of fentanyl out of curiosity to see what would happen (this amount of fentanyl is more than enough to kill 1k humans for context)

Absolute autonomy = True freedom

I also view suicide prevention and people who involuntarily force people into hospitals as human waste

 

[ms_beaverhousen]

That mental illness should be diagnosed through objective measures with brain scans. The current way of testing is way too flawed and prone to mistakes. If I can lie to the tester and/or to myself and it effects the test results then the test is flawed.

There are never any scans done, and this baffles and frustrates the hell out of me. Nor are there any testing of genes and whatever else that could be discovered to aid in any kind of recovery. This seems unethical and to be malpractice.

 

[Guy089001]

We deserve love in this world. I disfavour the common strive for "strength" and find it equivalent to the totem pole people in society generally try to climb to tower above others. I don't care about "strength", I care about love. Fuck strength. Fuck this obsession everyone has with being better than everyone else under whatever paradigm they can. Just give me peace. I also disagree with the norms and values of modern relationships built upon pop psychology bullshit, obsessed with boundaries, distancing and "responsibility" all of which mean nothing when we're honest about ourselves to each-other and just be alive. I'm tired of this world striving to fit in however they can to a mesh that gives them an illusion - we're spiritual people, aren't we? we enjoy connecting with nature, we enjoy surrender to what makes us truly happy? that's what we all want isn't it, to let go? so why? Why do people insist on this? Why? just tired of this world and its rules. I fucking can't stand rules. People who could say I have a problem with authority - *what authority?* I'm my authority.

 

[Scythe]

More death punishments, more cruel punishments, someone tortured an animal? Make them go through the same torture. Human traffickers should be dead, rapists should at least have their sex organ removed if not dead.

If you have disabilties that massively impact quality of life, and/or do not have enough money to ensure you child they can live without working you should not have a kid. If you want one, adopt one.

our age has exhausted its own creativity and thus will never produce any great individuals. only athletes, charlatans, political pundits and anaemic, weak-willed itinerary thinkers will be considered great, yet they stray so far from the standard of adequacy that it's embarrassing. there are no great writers, actors, playwrights, artists, etc. that are alive today. scientists do not count. defeatism is the only viable course.

Even the lesser known artists? I find a lot of good stuff if I stay away from popular media. Since the popular stuff are always going to be limited by *something*, lesser known artists have the freedom to do whatever the fuck they want.

Absolute autonomy = True freedom

I also view suicide prevention and people who involuntarily force people into hospitals as human waste

Oh hey, we got almost the same controversial take, mine's just not as extreme as yours. As in I wouldn't exactly give a 3yr old drugs or not intervene if I see toddlers doing drugs. But I don't exactly dislike your take. I would say teenagers and maybe below should be allowed to die depending on their reasoning to die. For example abusive family, that's usually something that follows ppl throughout their life and if someone wants to die to escape that, I would support their decision regardless of age. Or something like hating society, that's going to be a constant unless someone changes and accepts it. I also see no problem with the group mentioned above doing drugs because that might be what gets them through whatever they are dealing with.

 

[RoadBLOCK]

I believe that there is no problem with brothers marrying each other. There is no country that allows this except Sweden, but the brothers are not from the same father or mother.

 

[Living_Hurts_so_Much]

Honestly, to controversial to even say.