Dawkins "...there is actually not the slightest thread of evidence that any kind of supernatural being exists."
Craig: "There are quite a number of different arguments for the existence of God." Lists 6 arguments. Evidence provided: 0.
Dawkins "...there is actually not the slightest thread of evidence that any kind of supernatural being exists."
Evidence for barter economies ranges from the speculative to the anecdotal.Svartalf wrote:Not by much though, give me a whole deer, and I'll give you a branch with my new invention, fire, on it.
WTF? Archeological proof of long range commercial exchanges can be found dating back to at least the neolithic, long before money was a concept, much less a reality.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:57 amEvidence for barter economies ranges from the speculative to the anecdotal.Svartalf wrote:Not by much though, give me a whole deer, and I'll give you a branch with my new invention, fire, on it.
Go back to bed, old man...
Ah, but your comment was in relation to capitalism - specifically as a kind of foundational social principle of value exchange. You've even used the term 'commercial exchanges' there in relation to past societies and cultures, implying that people have always exchanged surplus material assets of roughly equal value (at least to the parties involved). How do we know that material exchanges between parties have always proceeded under these kinds of mutual assumptions about the exchange value of things - that people have always traded in things of surplus material value, as it were, rather than engaging in, say, gift economies or systems based on honour and obligation?Svartalf wrote:WTF? Archeological proof of long range commercial exchanges can be found dating back to at least the neolithic, long before money was a concept, much less a reality.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:57 amEvidence for barter economies ranges from the speculative to the anecdotal.Svartalf wrote:Not by much though, give me a whole deer, and I'll give you a branch with my new invention, fire, on it.
Your reply is as reasoned as I expected.superuniverse wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:21 pmGo back to bed, old man...
Well, you know, unless the 'exchange' is done at sword point (or business end of whatever weapon is used), at which point it can't be called a commercial exchange, it is fairly safe to assume that whatever goods people gave in exchange for something were stuff they felt they could live without, and that the type/amount of goods given were regarded, if not of properly equivalent value, at least as an acceptable exchange. It is quite possible that either (or both parties) felt they conned the other, receiving hard to get goods of great value/usefulness in exchange for worthless stuff you could get just by bowing and picking them up (say, seashells on a beach), but of course, the value given such goods by the other party means THEY didn't feel swindled. It is also possible that either party felt the other had the better deal, but no so much better they'd refuse the exchange.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:29 pmSvartalf wrote:WTF? Archeological proof of long range commercial exchanges can be found dating back to at least the neolithic, long before money was a concept, much less a reality.Brian Peacock wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:57 amEvidence for barter economies ranges from the speculative to the anecdotal.Svartalf wrote:Not by much though, give me a whole deer, and I'll give you a branch with my new invention, fire, on it.You might find this article an interesting and diverting read: Give It Away, David Graeber, 2008 (PDF).Trigger Warning!!!1! :
I'm ready to go back to bed, but only if his dog garnishes it with a suitable bed partner.Hermit wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:37 pmYour reply is as reasoned as I expected.superuniverse wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 1:21 pmGo back to bed, old man...
Want to see you describe your God.superuniverse wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 3:37 pmThe trouble here is that if we provide evidence it will lead to your complete annihilation. Do you still see want to see?
Look, you credulous goatfucker, you created this very thread as "Scientific Proof Of God". Now, either you deliver, and since you warned us, if it destroys us, it will be on our own heads, or you go back tend your flock and will be welcome to report if the loving attentions you dispense your beasts result in any miraculous offspring.superuniverse wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 3:37 pmThe trouble here is that if we provide evidence it will lead to your complete annihilation. Do you still see want to see?
Your God.superuniverse wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:14 pmIts already done. He is just a blind fk...
See if you see yourselves in this video...
*twattery*
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests