Yeah but if you’re being ridden your speed decreases to 30ft, plus then it’s only the one centaur walking with all the other ones on top of them
I believe it’s known colloquially is a Centower.
Shower thought: Turing frown face “:(” upside down is still a frown face “):”
Turning a frown upside down, however, makes it a smile
When someone says something there’s a chance it’s the truth. But there’s only 1 full truth. Everything else has a partial lie. Lies therefore are far more vast, infinite and have many reasons behind them. Lies can be kind, they can be malicious. It’s a case-by-case basis
What about a cup being both half-empty and half-full at the same time?
2+2 = 4, yet 3+1 also = 4
Mega Man is a name for the Blue Bomber, but so is Rock
The full truth is the glass is full. With 50% watwr and 50% air. Partial truth is saying it’s ‘half full’ or ‘half empty’
The full truth is 4 has infinite combinations to add up to and yet a seemingly higher infinite amount which add up to other number. Partial truth is only 1 combination
The truth is Blue Bomber has multiple names, not just 1. Partial truth is only one of the names
but that’s still the truth though :V
Relativism is self-defeating change my mind
Shower thought; Having an actual position on anything is self-defeating
Shower thoughts: Nihilism is a pretty easy position to live out in your daily life
EDIT it also happens to be self defeating
When in doubt, only have actual positions on shit that can be verified by empirical data and desperately try to ignore how obvious Descarte’s Demon is making it to figure out you’re just a brain in a vat
I am just a brain in a vat
I still don’t get Descartes’ "I think therefore I am " thing
Shhhh just use a cyclical argument to prove the existence of God and ya don’t need it!
tf you on about
Rene Decarte’s rejecection of solipsism is Augustine’s ontological argument of perfection; he believed that proved God’s existence as a perfect being and thus affirmed the existence of the world.
Like all arguments for God it relies entirely on already accepting that God exists beforehand, and is thus full of shit.
Anyway, back to useless insights into the real world
as a theist that hurts
but i still don’t get what you’re trying to say
you ever realise when you make snowmen, you put them in a field of their flesh
Essentially, the ontological argument is this:
- Can you imagine a perfect God? As in the most perfect being possible?
- Ah, but something that is perfect and exists is SURELY better than something that is perfect but dosen’t exist?
- Therefore, a perfect being exists
- Therefore God exists