On 11/1/2012 11:59 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:52:06 -0700, the following appeared
> in sci.skeptic, posted by George Plimpton >:
>
>> On 10/31/2012 2:49 PM, Bob Casanova wrote:
>>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:59:53 -0400, the following appeared
>>> in sci.skeptic, posted by dh@.:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:26:24 -0700, Bob Casanova > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:42:55 -0400, the following appeared
>>>>> in sci.skeptic, posted by dh@.:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>> I challenge you to try to help the Goober and/or "Bob" and/or yourself try
>>>>>> to explain what you think is preventing you from benefitting from your life. Go:
>>>
>>>>> Already been done, multiple times. And just as above, you
>>>>> snipped the explanation and pretended it didn't exist.
>>>>> You're an idiot.
>>>
>>>> Try presenting an example if you think you're aware of one.
>>>
>>> No examples exist of "benefitting solely from life", which
>>> is the point. Try to keep up, even if you are an idiot.
>
>> We have shown beyond dispute that one *cannot* benefit simply from
>> coming into existence. It is based on the definition of benefit. A
>> benefit is something that improves the welfare of an experiential
>> entity, but coming into existence does not do that - it *establishes*
>> the welfare - and therefore, coming into existence is not a benefit.
>
> Prediction: The logic will again be ignored or denied, and
> dh will continue to exhibit a complete lack of anything even
> faintly resembling an ability to think while demanding
> examples of what doesn't exist.

****wit - 'dh@' - is worse than merely stupid. He actually *works* at
being stupid.


>
> (My spellcheck is smarter than dh; it wanted to change "dh"
> to "duh".)

Ha ha ha ha ha! Excellent!