18 May 2019 election 	       51.5% 48.5%
15–16 May 2019 	Newspoll       48.5% 51.5%
13–15 May 2019 	YouGov/Galaxy  49%   51%
12–15 May 2019 	Ipsos          49%   51%
10–14 May 2019 	Essential      48.5% 51.5%
10–12 May 2019 	Roy Morgan     48%   52%
9–11 May 2019 	Newspoll       49%   51%

The two-party result is based on preference flows at the last election, allocating second preferences from One Nation and United Australia Party using a split of 53 per cent to the Coalition and 47 per cent to Labor.

When voters were asked how they would allocate their preferences, the survey produced the same result of 51 to 49 per cent in Labor’s favour in two-party terms.

The poll is based on 1842 respondents who were surveyed from Sunday to Wednesday, in the wake of Mr Morrison’s official campaign launch, the announcement of his scheme to guarantee part of the loans made to some first home buyers and Mr Shorten’s promise of $10 billion in funding for a Melbourne rail loop.

The survey has a margin of error of 2.3 per cent and was conducted by telephone with 46 per cent of the sample based on mobile phone calls. — Ipsos

If you're not convinced, tell me what WOULD convince you that the consciousness is simply a passive observer of goings on over which it has no control? — Unseen

I don't think we can have much more than a layperson's analysis of consciousness. I think it's probably a so-called "primitive" (primary, unanalyzable concept, known directly and in no other way). — Unseen

The proof that we can go without consciousness is that it actually does nothing. — Unseen

But intelligence doesn't need consciousness. If I were to create a successful Turing machine, it's absurd to suppose that it's anything other than a successful simulation, not a being having experiences. — Unseen

In a way, his epistemology was his metaphysics - what is known is identical to what is. — Merkwurdichliebe

Hume said that it was possible for events to not have causes. — Dusty of Sky

"We can never demonstrate the necessity of a cause to every new existence, without shewing at the same time the impossibility there is, that anything can ever begin to exist without some productive principle" (Treatise of Human Nature, Book1, Part 3, Section 3) — Dusty of Sky

We could guess that the initial method of reproduction was reproduction through cell division — Bitter Crank

Hume's beliefs about causation are antiquated. He didn't consider that there might actually exist natural law. — Relativist

You don't think AI comes close to human intelligence? — Unseen

The point I was making wasn't "haha, some people are blondes and some are brunettes, therefore inequality". I agree, that would be stupid. The question I was trying to raise was whether all people are of equal value. That's why I used the examples of Abraham Lincoln and the Sandy Hook shooter. — Dusty of Sky

Science doesn't even know what consciousness is or how it's produced, so science isn't much help. — Unseen

Meanwhile, we can see that AI is developing rapidly with no hint that intelligent devices have experiences of any sort, so it seems that consciousness isn't a function of intelligence. — Unseen

Humans behave as evolutionary forces molded us, but being conscious of what we're doing, experiencing it, seems gratuitous. — Unseen

Just exactly WHY are humans (and higher animals as well) conscious at all? It seems totally unnecessary and seems to have no survival value, either. — Unseen

many old-timers tell me the hay-day of online forums was i the mid/late 90’s — I like sushi

I have exactly NOT done what YOU ACCUSE me of which is blind prejudice. Nowhere have I said 'black people should not vote because they are black' or anything to the effect. — thedeadidea

But would this argument have the same force if applied to, say, wheels? Would we be surprised - or not - that aliens also have wheels? And would this mean that wheels (the quintessential 'invention') are therefore discovered? Do wheels have 'objective reality'? — StreetlightX

So, if an intelligent culture completely independent from ours happens to create the same concepts out of the infinite quantity of possible logical games, that would be a strong indication that there is some meaning in these concepts that is not related to logical games. — Mephist

The general idea here is that there is a world, and there is non-existence. Prior to ones birth into the world, one was in a state of non-existence, and was somehow plucked or pulled out of that state into being. — Inyenzi

It is an error in thought to mistake these worldly concepts for actual things or states (which is what we do when we talk about coming from nothing, or not existing in any sense prior to our birth). — Inyenzi

In other words, it's an objective moral goal of the universe ("ought") enforced by natural selection, which is a fact ("is"). Thus, from this point, the "ought" realm is bridged to the "is" realm. — Chris Liu

You are confusing being agnostic with being an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. The difference is that someone who is purely agnostic tends to take a neutral stand regarding whether or not God exists, because they do not want to take either side of the argument when they don't know either way. — Maureen

A statement is either true or false. If it is true that 'there is no objective truth' then that seems like a contradiction. — curiousnewbie

What is meant by "materialist"? Usually when people use that word they mean "causal reductionism". — i aM

Darwin's discovery of evolution — Chris Liu

So every life should strive for ever better form of continuation in order to achieve the goal of perdure, forever. That's the only meaning of life, if any. — Chris Liu

What philosophical tradition these thoughts are related or belongs to?
Has anyone proposed similar ideas to the public? Who if yes?
What flaws do you see in this essay? — Chris Liu

Thanks for the reply, my confusion arose after reading the following on the deductive reasoning page of wikipedia.
"Deductive reasoning goes in the same direction as that of the conditionals, and links premises with conclusions. If all premises are true, the terms are clear, and the rules of deductive logic are followed, then the conclusion reached is necessarily true". — Hume1739

Perhaps we can talk about 'the medical model' - behaviour understood as illness. — unenlightened

There is no bug, no gene, no chemical deficiency, no physical property at all that unequivocally marks out any psychological illness — unenlightened

the biological neuro-physical materialist objective approach has not been successful — unenlightened

So, I say all that to say is am I wrong for thinking this way meaning, are there some really disturbed individuals that tend to gravitate these types of discussion boards? — Anaxagoras

If I'm reading something that is hard to follow and the focus of what their writing is seems to go in all directions with no direction, I'd chalk this up as maybe the individual would not have a firm grip on the basics of writing. — Anaxagoras

It's my best guess. — coolguy8472

Double and triple hearsay is a persuasive enough topic for courts to at least discuss the issue before rejecting the idea of it being valid persuasive evidence. — coolguy8472