Prove my existence within a state

[jaamal]

Sythe exist in a state.

Logic

"Sythe.org" is a state.

"Sythe.org is a state, because it has all the characteristics of a state that we have agreed upon.

It has a definite location. Which isn't really necessary for a state.(WorldWIdeWeb)
And It has a body of people, who are governed.
(Members and staff members)

Proof that the staff members have authority is evident in there activities as moderators, administrators, etc...
(One of which you exist among)

We know sythe.org exist, because we can all visibly view it as something tangible.

WE KNOW YOU EXIST AMONGST THE FORUM/STATE, because you actively post in and participate in actives amongst us, that only members of the state could have the privilege of doing.

 

What did you think of the remainder of my post? :/

I did end up replying to it. I usually don't I rebut the definition (because when a premise is going the wrong way, the rest of the argument is too.)

As I identify with Collectivist, Philosophical, Voluntary, and Individualist anarchism, I find it difficult to commit myself to arguing your existence within a state because I know that to be erroneous unto itself.

You should not identify yourself by your conclusions. The conclusions are almost irrelevant, the important thing is how you got there. Reason and evidence, empiricism, etc.

'You use state-provided facilities,' addressing your participation in the state and society, 'you accept and adjust your life to the legal/social boundaries instituted by the state,' etc. are all wrong for reasons obvious to you and me.

Already responded to that here:
http://sythe.org/showpost.php?p=7363179&postcount=21

Nevertheless, I'm going to have a bit of fun. Let's pretend your name is Alan Clark (no implication of any sorts, I just made up the name).

You exist within the body of Alan Clark. This physical territory ('the body of Alan Clark') contains one individual ('Alan Clark'). The behaviours of the entire human constituency (all individuals) of this territory are governed by a set of morals and ethical codes (or biological impulses and complexes), instituted by and centralized in the nervous system of Alan Clark. Therefore, in the case of you ('Alan Clark') we have a confined physical territory, in which all individuals residing in this territory are governed by a single centralized system. Hence, you, Alan Clark, constitute the entirety of and live within that particular state (let's call it 'ACtopia').

Already made that point earlier as well. That most definitions of the state would imply individual sovereignty, which contradicts the commonly accepted notion of states.

But I would add again that the state is a fiction, a fabrication, an aggregate made up, like a number. It's a concept. It doesn't exist in the real world. Therefore even in the case of a one-person state, it still isn't the case that one person exists within a state. Nothing can exist within a state, as a state isn't physical.

 

Sythe exist in a state.

Logic

"Sythe.org" is a state.

"Sythe.org is a state, because it has all the characteristics of a state that we have agreed upon.

It has a definite location. Which isn't really necessary for a state.(WorldWIdeWeb)
And It has a body of people, who are governed.
(Members and staff members)

Proof that the staff members have authority is evident in there activities as moderators, administrators, etc...
(One of which you exist among)

Are you saying that I exist within a website?

 

[jaamal]

Are you saying that I exist within a website?

No, a citizen of a country, can be out of there country and still be a citizen. Why? Because location is not relative in a state.

A state does not require location, it requires people. People occupy the space. (Why land is usually associated with state.)

The state is governed by you and the other staff members. The location is Sythe.org. We all use the the space, it may not be psychical, but we still use the space. Read this.

But I would add again that the state is a fiction, a fabrication, an aggregate made up, like a number. It's a concept. It doesn't exist in the real world. Therefore even in the case of a one-person state, it still isn't the case that one person exists within a state. Nothing can exist within a state, as a state isn't physical.

Exactly, It is a concept. Somewhat of a label.

We can say we are in control. But ultimately control is a word, meant to label or express a position of power we are in.

A state is a word, meant to express the "government or authority" we endure. Yes endure....

Sythe.org may not be a large political world power, but it does oversee the activities of thousands of members daily and has over 200k people registered in this state. (loosely) That number is larger then most "states" and quite a few "continents".

It meets the criteria.

 

No, a citizen of a country, can be out of there country and still be a citizen. Why? Because location is not relative in a state.

A state does not require location, it requires people. People occupy the space. (Why land is usually associated with state.)

The state is governed by you and the other staff members. The location is Sythe.org. We all use the the space, it may not be psychical, but we still use the space. Read this.

I hate to have to repeat myself, but I don't exist within a website, and further, Sythe.org is not a "political organzation", it is a commerical organization. (I don't belong to any political organization.)

Really, again all you have done is defined a state as a house, then said "you live in a house, therefore you live in a state".

If you remember the context of the challenge. You have taken me to court for "not paying taxes to the state". Your definition certainly would not entitle you to extract taxes from me.

Sythe.org may not be a large political world power, but it does oversee the activities of thousands of members daily and has over 200k people registered in this state. (loosely) That number is larger then most "states" and quite a few "continents".

It meets the criteria.

Well sign us up for the UN then.

 

[Rabs]

If our own actions directly contribute or effect someone else... does that not mean we all indirectly belong to the same 'state' on a metaphysical level.

Our awake or 'conscious' mind seems to be our only 'mind state' capable of interpreting our surroundings as they are presented to us.. giving the perception of existence.

On anther subconscious/higher level i think we all belong to a state.. but it would be impossible to prove. DMT has a lot to do with it i think.

 

If our own actions directly contribute or effect someone else... does that not mean we all indirectly belong to the same 'state' on a metaphysical level.

Our awake or 'conscious' mind seems to be our only 'mind state' capable of interpreting our surroundings as they are presented to us.. giving the perception of existence.

On anther subconscious/higher level i think we all belong to a state.. but it would be impossible to prove. DMT has a lot to do with it i think.

Read the thread.

 

[jaamal]

I hate to have to repeat myself, but I don't exist within a website, and further, Sythe.org is not a "political organzation", it is a commerical organization. (I don't belong to any political organization.)

Humans are very selfish. Which is why all governments fail. Because our human nature to draw power, money, land or whatever to us makes all forms of governments and organizations into a commercial government.

You can not have a political government with out having it turn commercial.
Can you name one government on this planet that does not have a commercial link to it?

Really, again all you have done is defined a state as a house, then said "you live in a house, therefore you live in a state".

Then where do you draw the line between what gets the label of a organization, house, or state?

A house is a group of people/family or coming together for any which reason usually commercial.
Organization is the same by definition just larger.
A state is even larger by definition.

So what number must sythe.org meet in order to become a state? And if the number is higher then 200k. Next do the states and countries with a population below 200k no longer get to carry their title?

If you remember the context of the challenge. You have taken me to court for "not paying taxes to the state". Your definition certainly would not entitle you to extract taxes from me.

My challenge was to prove you exist within a state. Not one that has the right to collect/extract taxes.

Also a state only has the right to collect taxes, if taxes are agreed upon, or if the state is commercially illegal. Taxes have not been demanded in all forms of governments in the past. Nowhere in a political government is it necessary to pay taxes. Nor should it be. It is just normally accepted by the foolish mass of today.

Well sign us up for the UN then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty

If I owned my own home and the land it is on. I should be able to become a sovereign state and have protection under the UN.

But due to hypocrisy it wouldn't be allowed. So sythe.org isn't allowed by your standards due to hypocrisy.

First you say sythe.org is commercial.
Then Sythe.org is not considered a state, because it has no right to extract taxes?
If sythe.org extracted taxes with-out your permission it would be commercial and very illegal.

The world mass, is now very dim at best... They all allow people to have a state that is by your definition. (didn't post, because you said you didn't want it here.) Which is the very idea of hypocrisy. Using the laws to break the laws. that is the definition of a terribly corrupt state. But a successful state has those in power who naturally are the best at what they do and are helpful to the mass. I have proved you exist amongst a successful state where people actually donate to contribute. Where the leaders of the state/forum are those who ideally want to help the mass.(may charge for their time, but not ridiculous) The fruit of state is evident in the forum's continual existence and lack of major corruption.

If you want an example of a hypocritical commercial state. Look at the United States... It has its fingers in all types of forms of business and media. Labeling it different things from regulation/deregulation, censorship, permits, business licenses, etc... And the State charges obscene amounts for these things and still shows little to no fruit. These things would naturally balance out by a truly free market with-out the burden of taxes.

 

Humans are very selfish. Which is why all governments fail. Because our human nature to draw power, money, land or whatever to us makes all forms of governments and organizations into a commercial government.

You can not have a political government with out having it turn commercial.
Can you name one government on this planet that does not have a commercial link to it?

Fallacy: Affirming the consequent ( See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent )

A house is a group of people/family or coming together for any which reason usually commercial.
Organization is the same by definition just larger.
A state is even larger by definition.

So what number must sythe.org meet in order to become a state?

It's your definition buddy. You want to call an apple a spoon and a raccoon a leopard. Go ahead. I have productive things to spend my time on.

My challenge was to prove you exist within a state. Not one that has the right to collect/extract taxes.

Also a state only has the right to collect taxes, if taxes are agreed upon, or if the state is commercially illegal. Taxes have not been demanded in all forms of governments in the past. Nowhere in a political government is it necessary to pay taxes. Nor should it be. It is just normally accepted by the foolish mass of today.

Taxes have been demanded in every form of government ever in existence ever. Find a single example to the contrary.

If you think paying taxes is voluntary then try not paying them.

As to your declaration of victory. Sythe.org is not a state in the context the thread presents. That it is a group of people who are organized in some fashion, is true. If all you wanted to say was that sythe.org is a group of people with an organizational structure, then you might have saved me some time by saying that up front. It is certainly not a state by any standard of the term that I am aware of.

Further you failed to show I exist within a politically organized body, or am a member of one. (I'm not a member of sythe.org by reason that the rules don't apply to me.)

 

[jaamal]

Fallacy: Affirming the consequent ( See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent )

A system built to have authority over people must accompany the faults of those people. If it can not, it will fail.

It's your definition buddy. You want to call an apple a spoon and a raccoon a leopard. Go ahead. I have productive things to spend my time on.

Things are labeled to communicate, I didn't change the definition of the words.
You also agreed to the definitions before, so what is the problem?
You refuse to mark a point of where you view something as a state, because then it will be definite.

Taxes have been demanded in every form of government ever in existence ever. Find a single example to the contrary.

You just said below, Sythe.org has its own form of government with-out taxation... (And you do exist within that government.)Example in point.

Right, by your definition, you have proved that there exists a body of people who are politically organized. Well done.

Webster definition of a "state".

A. A political organized group of people body of people usually occupying a definite territory.

B. The political organization of such a body of people

Sythe.org does falls under both definitions that we agreed upon for the debate so what is the problem?
Would you say sythe.org has all the characteristics of a state in your own definition that you pmed me?

If you think paying taxes is voluntary then try not paying them.

Sadly, the mass has agreed to pay heavy taxes. If I wish to continue to live amongst society, then I must continue to do so.

Thanks for wasting my and everyone else's time. Far from contributing anything productive you've used every pathetic fallacious tactic you could muster to deliver a sludge of accusations and equivocations against me and the site, and for what? So that you could say you've won the debate? Award by fraud is not winning. You knew going into the debate what the debate was about, perfectly well. I gave you the benefit of the doubt, let you have the broadest definition possible, and all you could do with it is cram it up your ass and tell me my site is a state. Thanks Captain Nonsense for your insightful assessment.

I am only saying states exist around the world in many forms, I pointed out one of many that is obvious and very easily to prove you exist in. Doesn't have to be insightful, you want that read a poetry book.

And the one fallacy I have used was, stating that humans cause the decay of governments", which is true, just a fallacy in debate.

We are trying to determine whether you exist in a government?
Are we not?

If you want me to prove your existence with documentation that you exist within a state that taxes, I do not have the time for that.

 

[malakadang]

Sythe, may I ask in this thread have you guys reached a consensus to the definition of the word "state"

Main Entry: state
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: government, country
Synonyms: body politic, commonwealth, community, federation, land, nation, republic, sovereignty, territory, union

Here are a bunch of synonyms from thesaurus.com


I think to help others tackle this problem, we must first reach a consensus of the definition of the word "state"

 

[aus aaz]

Now i may be way off but i heard story's from a bloke at work saying that with a drivers license you become a persons an are no longer a human being because you have signed your rights off to the state.

He has since been driving around NSW australia without a lisences for over 3 years and when he gets pulled over just takes the fine, goes to lock up for the 4 hours and get told to go to court.

When he arriaved at court he told me that they asked if his name was (i will use an generic example) John Smith

He said no he isnt john smith he is a human being, an when asked of his address he said that he lives in his own skin. There is alot more to the story but Im not the best at remembering + the law jargon but in the end he has been allowed to drive his car without a license because he does not belong to the state meaning he does not me the requirements to be punished under their laws also the travel is apparently a god given right an he used this in court.

I no this post was probably well off the mark but some of the shit i read in the last few pages have got to be worse then this. I just wish i could remember all the mumbo jumbo he was saying this his big law words FML

off the top of my head i know that a persons is something a human being can be the owner of, but a human being is bound by no man made laws only the laws of god or something along those lines. This shit goes so deep lol.... i cbf to read up anymore

-flame shield activated- LOL

 

[sneaky82]

Sythe although you may interact with me via the world wide web but there are still a number of reason’s I know you truely exist
For one there is no super computer that can intelligently post and respond as you have. Even if they did why would they waste such an asset to entertain others. Let’s say that you are somehow some supercomputer that they decided to use to post on a runescape cheating site you would still exist maybe not in a human form or even computer form but you are still interacting with me by posting on these foums thus the very proof of this interaction proofs you exist. In what form I have no clue for all I know you are a simple program developed to respond to others comments.

 

[Rejection]

I wish people would just admit that they can't. This tryfacing makes me trololol.

 

[sneaky82]

I wish people would just admit that they can't. This tryfacing makes me trololol.

It's the fun in trying the reason I participate in the SFA section is because it makes me a smarter individual for doing so I learn both the pro's and con's on every debate thus I have a more educated opinion on every matter I read about. Yea theres a very small chance that I will outwit sythe but If I'm learning something while trying why the hell not try??

 

[sw33tdwill]

Answer: Cannot Be Proven.

 

[Meth9]

Right, I was going to post something along the lines of Inception and The Matrix, but it sounded better in my head. I do not see how it could be proven really.

 

[Grrr]

Wouldn't a contribution to a common state imply existence? For example, you pay taxes?

 

[Andrew lRawr]

The question is not very well worded it really sounds like you put out a broad ass statement and have only one idea of an answer in your head.

tl;dr ask a better question get better answers

 

[wtp]

Your existence would be definined best by science. Biology understands what our bodies are made of. Physics talks about our physical limitations in the world. Psychology tells us the workings of ones brain.