pfried

They are clearly mathematical. Starting with definitions and axioms and deriving from there using mathematical statements.

But that's math. And its proof is math. And that proof is true everywhere forever.

I see philosophy as a place to make nonrigorous arguments. Eventually, other fields advance enough to do away with many philosophical arguments, like whether matter is infinitely divisible or whether the physical brain or some metaphysical spirit determines our actions.

Since this is a question that math hasn't advanced enough to answer, we can have a philosophical argument about whether other fields will eventually advance enough to get rid of all philosophical arguments.

You'll find that a lot of people here don't care how old Sanders is (older than McConnell). It's his turn.

I think a reasonable game could be played with those rules, given how quickly goals are scored and how hard it is supposed to be to catch the snitch. It's just that it didn't make sense at all that Krum was celebrated. Catching the snitch was worse than scoring an own goal in soccer because it directly and immediately caused his team to lose the match. The rioting of the death eaters after the match is understandable, but the way everyone else behaved towards this obvious fraud is not. The Ministry should have started a match fixing investigation.

The way to cause pain on both sides is to primary the Democrats who aren't helping and vote against all Republicans because none of them are helping. If you vote against Democrats in the general election, you are not causing pain to both sides. You're telling Republicans to continue.

Cannabis has been found to be ineffective for most of the conditions it’s prescribed for.

No, it hasn't.

From the very beginning of the linked article: "Medical cannabis lacks adequate scientific backing for most of the conditions it is commonly used to treat"

Reading is hard, as you say.

Cannabis has been proven to be a very effective treatment for nausea and seizures

Not "very" and not for "nausea and seizures" in general. It has shown effectiveness specifically for "chemotherapy-induced nausea" and "certain severe pediatric seizure disorders such as Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome" according to the very article that you claim to have read. For more, Dr. Chung explains

"Recently, cannabidiol (CBD) is the one that showed efficacy, but people tend to extend that into any other epilepsy.... It is confined, as evidence suggests, to those 2 syndromes, but not other types of epilepsy."

The standard of care treatment for chemotherapy induced nausea is antiemetics. More recently, Dravet Syndrome can be treated with Zorevunerson with over 90% efficacy. This is without the risk of cannabis associated psychotic symptoms. I have personally witnessed a smart kid at a top university succumb to debilitating marijuana induced schizophrenia and get banned from campus as a safety risk. That is not a side effect that patients should accept.

Regardless, cannabis has been an effective treatment for many medical issues for centuries for a reason,

Mercury was a mainstay in medicine for treating syphilis, constipation, and infections (using calomel) from the 16th to 20th centuries, often causing severe toxicity. Medical science is a relatively new concept. Doctors didn't start sterilizing their instruments until the late 19th century.

What am I ignorant about? Are you just going to let me wallow in my ignorance? So far, I have only stated things that are true as far as I know and presented my sources. You and the other lady say that I am misinformed but don't care to inform me.

You might enjoy Vinge's Zones of Thought series.

In The Goblet of Fire, Ireland beat Bulgaria despite Bulgaria getting the snitch. The problem with the snitch isn't that the team that gets it automatically wins but that this particular match didn't make sense because Bulgaria knew that getting the snitch would cause them to lose, so they would have instead focused on preventing Ireland from getting the snitch while they tried to get within 150 points.

He said that Biden might have bombed the nuclear facility. He said that Biden wouldn't have done the things after, including the war.

Video: https://youtu.be/NuhJS1d-F6Y

Transcript: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-04-19-2026/

"But we – he said, we obliterated their nuclear program. The question then is not about what he did in June. This war we were in now did not attack the nuclear facilities again. This was not about the nuclear."

And if the reporter had watched just one more minute of the video, she would have learned this too. He said that Biden might have bombed the nuclear facility. In the next minute, he said that Biden wouldn't have done the things after, including the war.

Video: https://youtu.be/NuhJS1d-F6Y

Transcript: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-04-19-2026/

"But we – he said, we obliterated their nuclear program. The question then is not about what he did in June. This war we were in now did not attack the nuclear facilities again. This was not about the nuclear."

You embarrassed yourself online because you have a weird offense to even the notion that weed can be used for medicinal purposes

Not embarrassed at all. If anything, I take offense to people being given bad medical advice. If you were prescribed cannabis, you would be among them.

What have I said that is demonstrably false? Please demonstrate. I'm all ears. What should I have researched instead of the HSA website?

Chill.