Godwin's Law

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by clgustaveson

Oh you mean Herod from Mat 2 lol

No, they didn't have the internet.

It's kinda of silly to call it a law because all your saying is if it hasn't happened then the discussion hasn't gone on long enough. It’s kinda like evolution, if a theory doesn't work just throw a few more million years at it and then it's obvious that it happened that way. You could probably say the same thing about the term "heretic" or "heretical" in any religious discussion that goes on very long.

[clgustaveson]

Stick to legal code bro.... leave the social laws up to us.

Thats not true a law is rule of thumb in all sciences , like gravity and all others the law is simply a rule that applies to most.

Odds are that it will happen, but we are talking about arguments not discussions, but then the odds increase that it will become an argument at some point.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by clgustaveson

Stick to legal code bro.... leave the social laws up to us.

Thats not true a law is rule of thumb in all sciences , like gravity and all others the law is simply a rule that applies to most.

Odds are that it will happen, but we are talking about arguments not discussions, but then the odds increase that it will become an argument at some point.

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true. http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

I think it falls more inline with a theory or maybe a probability but not a law.

[clgustaveson]

Again you can look up definitions and not understand what a scientific law and even more specifically a social law is or you can take it from someone with a degree in psychology working on an MS in Microbiology to get into med school.

I am just saying we have Stanford Prison study that postulates laws. The Aronson laws of psychology, social predominance, all laws yet all situational.

The wonderful thing is this law is a mathematical equation let me show you n= length of argument

(n-1)(.3)^2/n(2)

The fact that it merely approaches one means it is not inevitable. Just like the laws of gravity all objects exert a force toward mass yet based on a law items fall at a rate of 9.8 m/sec^2 but an object reaches a terminal velocity based on its mass-- you cant exceed that so law of equal and opposite forces acts as a counter balance on the law of gravity.

The simple structure of my supposed formula shows that it can never equal 1.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by clgustaveson

Again you can look up definitions and not understand what a scientific law and even more specifically a social law is or you can take it from someone with a degree in psychology working on an MS in Microbiology to get into med school.

I am just saying we have Stanford Prison study that postulates laws. The Aronson laws of psychology, social predominance, all laws yet all situational.

The wonderful thing is this law is a mathematical equation let me show you n= length of argument

(n-1)(.3)^2/n(2)

The fact that it merely approaches one means it is not inevitable. Just like the laws of gravity all objects exert a force toward mass yet based on a law items fall at a rate of 9.8 m/sec^2 but an object reaches a terminal velocity based on its mass-- you cant exceed that so law of equal and opposite forces acts as a counter balance on the law of gravity.

The simple structure of my supposed formula shows that it can never equal 1.

Nazi.

How we define things determine what we mean. For instance if you write a law (as in the legal code) and I get to determine the definitions, you have no control over your own law. So don't knock definitions too much. For me a law is what the standard definition is, it universal and always true. That doesn't mean it can't be acted upon by another force, but all things being equal it always reacts the same. Now if you want to define a law as you did earlier as a rule of thumb, what do we call universal truths?

[clgustaveson]

Well there is no law that has always been true, there are exceptions that prove the rule! This simply means that we can narrow the laws applicability by exceptions.

For instance all objects fall at a rate of 9.8m/sec^2, drop a peice of paper not crumbled into a ball. The mass of the item counteracted the rate of fall at such a short pace, leading scientist to conclude the terminal velocity can be shifted if the object weighs more, the more it weighs the more negligible the forces against it (at shorter lengths).

Definitions take things out of context, interpretations do not. That is why you are a Nazi and I win.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by clgustaveson

Definitions take things out of context, interpretations do not. That is why you are a Nazi and I win.

Definition give us points of reference, interpretations twist the point of reference. Communist.

[clgustaveson]

Hitler hated communism too!

With pure definition applicability is lost! With interpretations we gain applicability!

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by clgustaveson

Hitler hated communism too!

With pure definition applicability is lost! With interpretations we gain applicability!

With interpretation you corrupt the definitions, with your Stalin like corrupted mind.

[clgustaveson]

Definitions are incorruptible even when interpreted by you, a Hitler lover.