Thoughts on the Spirits of Old
To Viddax. No, it was not Thomas Hobbes who pointed out that causation could not be directly observed. Which is not at all the same as saying that it does not exist. It was David Hume. His argument was epistemological. He argued that all we could actually see was ‘constant conjuction.’ Although I have the greatest respect for Hume, who was probably the greatest English speaking philosopher, in this he has not been followed by other philosophers and certainly not scientists. I quote Hume himself, ‘I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that something could arise without a cause.’ I cannot comprehend how you can think that the physical world is not causal. Every single action you take is predicated on the assumption of causal laws. The whole edifice of science is founded upon the existence of lawful predictability.
To Jamis. I have not said that you are wrong. The usual straw man makes his appearance. I have suggested that there exists no evidence at all for your claims and asked that you provide evidence. You claim that there are forms of perception beyond the empirical senses. This may be the case, but again, there is no evidence. At least you have shown me none. To explain a mystery by appeal to a mystery is not a convincing argument. Where do these ‘occult, esoteric ancient lessons’ come from? What is their provenance? What is their justification? Where is the corroborative evidence? Why are there so many different occult traditions that contradict one another? Without some kind of verification how can you know that this is knowledge and not illusion?
To Magnetron. No, the concept of roleplaying does not escape me in the slightest.
So let us consider this idea.
If you are a single being engaged in this virtual reality game then we are back to solipsism and you are debating with yourself. If there are a multitude of beings immersed in this game then we are back to the other inescapable problem. In such a game you would be constrained and limited by the actions of others. You could not change your virtual reality as you wished. Whether it is real or virtual the world/game that we are immersed in is lawful and consequential, and you cannot escape the consequences. You cannot deny physical laws or the structure of the virtual game. In fact you accept this yourself, saying that the character ‘can not’ exit due to ‘biological limitations’. If you can create your own reality then abolish death and play fast and loose with whatever ‘limitations’ you wish.
Of course it may be asking too much for you to provide any evidence for the claims that we exist in another ‘plane’ and are merely playing some bizarre and rather sick game (consider the nature of this world), nor the reason for it. It certainly provides ‘a concept that would allow numerous personal realities to exist within the same dimension’, as, by the way, does a simple acceptance of the physical world by itself, but does not permit the creative freedom that you assert. To ‘see’ centaurs where others can’t, is possible, but to manipulate the reality around you, when everyone else is creating their own reality, and for it to be consistent, coherent and lawful, looks to be impossible. Unless you can give some account of how it could possibly work. A virtual reality scenario does not, by itself, provide such an explanation. And William of Ockham will be revolving in his grave.
To Jamis. I have not said that you are wrong. The usual straw man makes his appearance. I have suggested that there exists no evidence at all for your claims and asked that you provide evidence. You claim that there are forms of perception beyond the empirical senses. This may be the case, but again, there is no evidence. At least you have shown me none. To explain a mystery by appeal to a mystery is not a convincing argument. Where do these ‘occult, esoteric ancient lessons’ come from? What is their provenance? What is their justification? Where is the corroborative evidence? Why are there so many different occult traditions that contradict one another? Without some kind of verification how can you know that this is knowledge and not illusion?
To Magnetron. No, the concept of roleplaying does not escape me in the slightest.
So let us consider this idea.
If you are a single being engaged in this virtual reality game then we are back to solipsism and you are debating with yourself. If there are a multitude of beings immersed in this game then we are back to the other inescapable problem. In such a game you would be constrained and limited by the actions of others. You could not change your virtual reality as you wished. Whether it is real or virtual the world/game that we are immersed in is lawful and consequential, and you cannot escape the consequences. You cannot deny physical laws or the structure of the virtual game. In fact you accept this yourself, saying that the character ‘can not’ exit due to ‘biological limitations’. If you can create your own reality then abolish death and play fast and loose with whatever ‘limitations’ you wish.
Of course it may be asking too much for you to provide any evidence for the claims that we exist in another ‘plane’ and are merely playing some bizarre and rather sick game (consider the nature of this world), nor the reason for it. It certainly provides ‘a concept that would allow numerous personal realities to exist within the same dimension’, as, by the way, does a simple acceptance of the physical world by itself, but does not permit the creative freedom that you assert. To ‘see’ centaurs where others can’t, is possible, but to manipulate the reality around you, when everyone else is creating their own reality, and for it to be consistent, coherent and lawful, looks to be impossible. Unless you can give some account of how it could possibly work. A virtual reality scenario does not, by itself, provide such an explanation. And William of Ockham will be revolving in his grave.
Harpalycus said:
To Magnetron. No, the concept of roleplaying does not escape me in the slightest.
So let us consider this idea.
If you are a single being engaged in this virtual reality game then we are back to solipsism and you are debating with yourself. If there are a multitude of beings immersed in this game then we are back to the other inescapable problem. In such a game you would be constrained and limited by the actions of others. You could not change your virtual reality as you wished. Whether it is real or virtual the world/game that we are immersed in is lawful and consequential, and you cannot escape the consequences. You cannot deny physical laws or the structure of the virtual game. In fact you accept this yourself, saying that the character ‘can not’ exit due to ‘biological limitations’. If you can create your own reality then abolish death and play fast and loose with whatever ‘limitations’ you wish.
Of course it may be asking too much for you to provide any evidence for the claims that we exist in another ‘plane’ and are merely playing some bizarre and rather sick game (consider the nature of this world), nor the reason for it. It certainly provides ‘a concept that would allow numerous personal realities to exist within the same dimension’, as, by the way, does a simple acceptance of the physical world by itself, but does not permit the creative freedom that you assert. To ‘see’ centaurs where others can’t, is possible, but to manipulate the reality around you, when everyone else is creating their own reality, and for it to be consistent, coherent and lawful, looks to be impossible. Unless you can give some account of how it could possibly work. A virtual reality scenario does not, by itself, provide such an explanation. And William of Ockham will be revolving in his grave.
See, the difficulty for you is that it looks impossible.
The only way it will appear possible is if you refrain from focusing on it not being possible.
Ta. Da.
Morpheus said,
Free your mind and the rest will follow
Or was that someone else .....
HollyDove said: I have a hundred matrix screens lit up with choices of response. all showing different faces of mine. Where's Neo? All I want is to share some cookies with him.
I'm going for some chicken soup. Bye all.
To Magnetron. No, the concept of roleplaying does not escape me in the slightest.
So let us consider this idea.
If you are a single being engaged in this virtual reality game then we are back to solipsism and you are debating with yourself. If there are a multitude of beings immersed in this game then we are back to the other inescapable problem. In such a game you would be constrained and limited by the actions of others. You could not change your virtual reality as you wished. Whether it is real or virtual the world/game that we are immersed in is lawful and consequential, and you cannot escape the consequences. You cannot deny physical laws or the structure of the virtual game. In fact you accept this yourself, saying that the character ‘can not’ exit due to ‘biological limitations’. If you can create your own reality then abolish death and play fast and loose with whatever ‘limitations’ you wish.
Of course it may be asking too much for you to provide any evidence for the claims that we exist in another ‘plane’ and are merely playing some bizarre and rather sick game (consider the nature of this world), nor the reason for it. It certainly provides ‘a concept that would allow numerous personal realities to exist within the same dimension’, as, by the way, does a simple acceptance of the physical world by itself, but does not permit the creative freedom that you assert. To ‘see’ centaurs where others can’t, is possible, but to manipulate the reality around you, when everyone else is creating their own reality, and for it to be consistent, coherent and lawful, looks to be impossible. Unless you can give some account of how it could possibly work. A virtual reality scenario does not, by itself, provide such an explanation. And William of Ockham will be revolving in his grave.
See, the difficulty for you is that it looks impossible.
The only way it will appear possible is if you refrain from focusing on it not being possible.
Ta. Da.
Morpheus said,
Free your mind and the rest will follow
Or was that someone else .....
HollyDove said: I have a hundred matrix screens lit up with choices of response. all showing different faces of mine. Where's Neo? All I want is to share some cookies with him.
I'm going for some chicken soup. Bye all.
So the argument is to be totally based on a suspension of disbelief and a deliberate avoidance of the evidence and force of argument. When I say that it looks impossible, I am perhaps being overly prudent, simply because I take it as axiomatic that we can never be absolutely certain, at least in theory, about anything. I cannot be certain, beyond any possible doubt, that the earth is indeed a spherical rocky planet orbiting a star. I may be dreaming, or the infamous brain in a vat. No matter how incredibly implausible this may be, I cannot prove that I am not. But if someone tells me the earth is flat I think that some positive evidence is required and some sort of answer be made to the obvious objections.
Harpalycus said:So the argument is to be totally based on a suspension of disbelief and a deliberate avoidance of the evidence and force of argument. When I say that it looks impossible, I am perhaps being overly prudent, simply because I take it as axiomatic that we can never be absolutely certain, at least in theory, about anything. I cannot be certain, beyond any possible doubt, that the earth is indeed a spherical rocky planet orbiting a star. I may be dreaming, or the infamous brain in a vat. No matter how incredibly implausible this may be, I cannot prove that I am not. But if someone tells me the earth is flat I think that some positive evidence is required and some sort of answer be made to the obvious objections.
Proof can be rationalized away as easily as someone else's eyewitness account of a Centaur or conversation with Jesus or lost time having occurred when abducted by aliens or etc etc ad infinitum.
Evidence is something you have to experience first hand for yourself.
My first conscious experiment was a success. However, it was something most noobs wouldn't dare attempt and for safety concerns, shouldn't. It involved healing myself from an injury as opposed to getting surgery.
Over the course of 5 years, I had dislocated my shoulder over 150 times due to a Jackass style stunt. I could hardly use my left arm in any form of activity without it re-occuring. Step out of the shower and reach for a towel ... dislocation. Reach over to a sofa end table to pick up a pencil ... dislocation. Swimming under water ... dislocation. Sneeze ... dislocation. It happened once while I was twenty feet up on a ladder stocking store shelves. Not good. Not good. Definitely not safe.
I was constantly on guard, protecting my left shoulder, preventing myself from using it. And it never failed; whenever I let my guard down ..... POP!
Although it doesn't really go POP. It always made a wrenching, yucky crunching sound. My shoulder socket was so worn out that every time it happened, I simply put it back in myself rather than make a trip to the ER each time.
I had no health insurance, so ER trips were out of the question anyway. And the surgery to fix it was quoted at several thousand dollars.
So, I convinced myself there was nothing wrong with my shoulder and began using it accordingly, as if it had never been injured.
It has been dislocation free for 18 years now.
Kids, please don't try this at home.
Proof can be rationalized away as easily as someone else's eyewitness account of a Centaur or conversation with Jesus or lost time having occurred when abducted by aliens or etc etc ad infinitum.
Evidence is something you have to experience first hand for yourself.
My first conscious experiment was a success. However, it was something most noobs wouldn't dare attempt and for safety concerns, shouldn't. It involved healing myself from an injury as opposed to getting surgery.
Over the course of 5 years, I had dislocated my shoulder over 150 times due to a Jackass style stunt. I could hardly use my left arm in any form of activity without it re-occuring. Step out of the shower and reach for a towel ... dislocation. Reach over to a sofa end table to pick up a pencil ... dislocation. Swimming under water ... dislocation. Sneeze ... dislocation. It happened once while I was twenty feet up on a ladder stocking store shelves. Not good. Not good. Definitely not safe.
I was constantly on guard, protecting my left shoulder, preventing myself from using it. And it never failed; whenever I let my guard down ..... POP!
Although it doesn't really go POP. It always made a wrenching, yucky crunching sound. My shoulder socket was so worn out that every time it happened, I simply put it back in myself rather than make a trip to the ER each time.
I had no health insurance, so ER trips were out of the question anyway. And the surgery to fix it was quoted at several thousand dollars.
So, I convinced myself there was nothing wrong with my shoulder and began using it accordingly, as if it had never been injured.
It has been dislocation free for 18 years now.
Kids, please don't try this at home.
I am happy that your shoulder is better, but the plural of anecdote is not data. For an injury to mend itself is not unknown. Nor, with all due respect, because it is the human condition common to us all, are exaggeration and confabulation unknown. As Anatole France said, when he visited Lourdes and saw the masses of crutches left behind by the cured faithful, 'What, no wooden legs?'
Evidence is not something that one has to experience first hand. My cousin is in hospital on morphine and hallucinating. Her experience of seeing a small dog on my shoulder is not evidence for its existence. I would venture to guess that you have no first hand knowledge of Mongolia. I certainly haven't. But there is clear evidence that it exists.
It is easy to say that evidence (I avoid the word proof) can be rationalised away but not so easy to do. Perhaps you would care to rationalise away the arguments I have given above, that are, I believe, perfectly sound. The primary meaning of the word rationalise is 'use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgements,' and that I am happy with.
Evidence is not something that one has to experience first hand. My cousin is in hospital on morphine and hallucinating. Her experience of seeing a small dog on my shoulder is not evidence for its existence. I would venture to guess that you have no first hand knowledge of Mongolia. I certainly haven't. But there is clear evidence that it exists.
It is easy to say that evidence (I avoid the word proof) can be rationalised away but not so easy to do. Perhaps you would care to rationalise away the arguments I have given above, that are, I believe, perfectly sound. The primary meaning of the word rationalise is 'use or exercise the mind or one's power of reason in order to make inferences, decisions, or arrive at a solution or judgements,' and that I am happy with.
Harpalycus said:I am happy that your shoulder is better, but the plural of anecdote is not data. For an injury to mend itself is not unknown. Nor, with all due respect, because it is the human condition common to us all, are exaggeration and confabulation unknown.
Boy, I sure called that one.
Magnetron said:
Proof can be rationalized away as easily as someone else's eyewitness account of a Centaur or conversation with Jesus or lost time having occurred when abducted by aliens or etc etc ad infinitum.
Evidence is something you have to experience first hand for yourself.
Boy, I sure called that one.
Magnetron said:
Proof can be rationalized away as easily as someone else's eyewitness account of a Centaur or conversation with Jesus or lost time having occurred when abducted by aliens or etc etc ad infinitum.
Evidence is something you have to experience first hand for yourself.
Congratulations on your perspicacity. But not so impressive if you are creating the reality. I can try a little prediction too. That you will not respond to the arguments I have given. You certainly have not attempted to do this so far.
http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html
This theory is gaining traction again in the world of science. It was published earlier this year. If it turns out to be true it will cause mass hysteria, and probably mass suicide. so if true, is it worth knowing ?
that's to say, will it do any actual good to humanity if everyone became aware of it. I don't think so. I think the world as we know it will degenerate into something and nothing at all.
self awareness is ok for some people who can handle it, but look at the way people handle religion on a mass scale.
fuck.that.shit
This theory is gaining traction again in the world of science. It was published earlier this year. If it turns out to be true it will cause mass hysteria, and probably mass suicide. so if true, is it worth knowing ?
that's to say, will it do any actual good to humanity if everyone became aware of it. I don't think so. I think the world as we know it will degenerate into something and nothing at all.
self awareness is ok for some people who can handle it, but look at the way people handle religion on a mass scale.
fuck.that.shit
If this highly debatable and purely hypothetical idea was found to be the case then I do not see why mass hysteria should ensue. It would show that our three dimensional world is an illusion created from a two dimensional set of information. It would not affect the empirical nature of our world any more than the multiple dimensions of string theory. To us, objects would remain solid objects set in a three dimensional space. In just the way that Berkeley's ideal world would be indistinguishable from a material world.
no no no, you're thinking like a robot, good fellow
think like a human. if this ...theory turns out to be true do you actually believe that there will be no chaos ?
look, with respect. this is science, most theories started off as hypothetical, there is obviously something in it for scientists to pursue answers.
think like a human. if this ...theory turns out to be true do you actually believe that there will be no chaos ?
look, with respect. this is science, most theories started off as hypothetical, there is obviously something in it for scientists to pursue answers.
Harpalycus said:Congratulations on your perspicacity. But not so impressive if you are creating the reality. I can try a little prediction too. That you will not respond to the arguments I have given. You certainly have not attempted to do this so far.
You really don't grasp that your arguments are aimed at someone who is not interested in trying to convince anyone that what he said was true.
I only said what I've said thus far to clarify what I believe.
You really don't grasp that your arguments are aimed at someone who is not interested in trying to convince anyone that what he said was true.
I only said what I've said thus far to clarify what I believe.
lepperochan said:http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html
This theory is gaining traction again in the world of science. It was published earlier this year. If it turns out to be true it will cause mass hysteria, and probably mass suicide. so if true, is it worth knowing ?
that's to say, will it do any actual good to humanity if everyone became aware of it. I don't think so. I think the world as we know it will degenerate into something and nothing at all.
self awareness is ok for some people who can handle it, but look at the way people handle religion on a mass scale.
fuck.that.shit
The Holographic Universe was a decent read.
It's admirable that physicists and computer geeks are spending bazillions of dollars testing this theory, but that makes about as much sense as trying to hack apart a video game from the inside of the video game with the banana peels you're supposed to be throwing under Donkey Kong's feet.
This theory is gaining traction again in the world of science. It was published earlier this year. If it turns out to be true it will cause mass hysteria, and probably mass suicide. so if true, is it worth knowing ?
that's to say, will it do any actual good to humanity if everyone became aware of it. I don't think so. I think the world as we know it will degenerate into something and nothing at all.
self awareness is ok for some people who can handle it, but look at the way people handle religion on a mass scale.
fuck.that.shit
The Holographic Universe was a decent read.
It's admirable that physicists and computer geeks are spending bazillions of dollars testing this theory, but that makes about as much sense as trying to hack apart a video game from the inside of the video game with the banana peels you're supposed to be throwing under Donkey Kong's feet.
I like the video game theory. that we are all part of a game. the scene, the background is a hollagram. that might explain why we can all see ( for the most part) the same things.
it doesn’t really explain our conciousness as such, so perhaps we are an experiment. some alien kid or kids threw together a science project.
point is, anyone can come up with a theory and anyone could be right ..everyone could be right ..no one could be right
we might not have the brainpower to comprehend. in light of that, science may not have the imagination to even start asking the right questions and as such could be the very thing that is leading us around in circles :)’
no one really knows about anything to do with where the universe came from. only that it is here.
it doesn’t really explain our conciousness as such, so perhaps we are an experiment. some alien kid or kids threw together a science project.
point is, anyone can come up with a theory and anyone could be right ..everyone could be right ..no one could be right
we might not have the brainpower to comprehend. in light of that, science may not have the imagination to even start asking the right questions and as such could be the very thing that is leading us around in circles :)’
no one really knows about anything to do with where the universe came from. only that it is here.
