![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/a18b0c69-23c9-4b2a-b8e0-3aca0172390d.png)
You did not in fact laugh when you read it.
You did not in fact laugh when you read it.
No, this one
As the Olympics will be on a lot of TV channels, here’s how to get TV stations:
Here are a lot of live TV channels as m3u or m3u8 links: https://github.com/iptv-org/iptv – VLC player can open them, e.g. if you command-line vlc https://dx4452e0qv6r9.cloudfront.net/tg4_vod_national.m3u8
then VLC starts playing TG4 live.
About 700 live channels here in the browser: https://dlhd.so/24-7-channels.php
useless comment
they invented those too afaik
Live sports generally:
try vipbox dot lc first
then try cricfree dot io if that doesn’t work
then try footybite dot one if that doesn’t work
this is the most blatant overblown reaction ever.
correct take
she begin asking a series of pointed questions: “What would you do if you found out that I was gone?”, “What would you do if the CCTV on our street is broken by chance?”, “What would you tell my mother if I went missing?”, “If I was actually kidnapped, would you kill the guy for me?”
Yeah these sound like tests.
what a good little bit of art
No, because it’s circular logic.
It is, and that’s inherent in the problem under consideration, the problem of the ‘uncaused caused’ or the ‘first mover’. Logic can either be A) circular or B) not-circular. Any not-circular logic must explain each element by referring to a prior, but then you’ve got an infinite regress. So you’re trapped in a dilemma: do you want the circular logic or the infinite regress? Liebniz’s choice was to say that God was inherently existent, like when Lao Tzu said 道法 自然
There’s no reason for a necessary being to exist before it does
Correct. It is necessary: it is self-causing. It does not stand upon a ‘reason’, unlike everything else in conditioned existence.
to exist before it does
You’re assuming it is subject to the laws of linear time and causation, and point out how that assumption leads to a contradiction. But Liebniz’s God is not subject to the laws of linear time and causation. Which is the whole point of positing it: because if it were subject to those laws: infinite regress.
and no evidence that one does in the real world.
Well the world exists, so all this existence must have some cause. That was the starting point of the conversation: Why is there something instead of nothing?
Well Liebniz said it’s because of a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself, if that helps.
deleted by creator
Why is there something instead of nothing
Cool story
Useless comment right here.