oldtimer Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 If you can't get past reductio ad absurdum, then intelligence is questionable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebuy Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 If the world is a Computer Simulation--someone miscoded my body. That can't be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 If all things are possible, there are no absolutes. If there are no absolutes, there is no right or wrong. If there are no absolutes, there is no good or evil. Imagine your universe is imagined all you want, but be careful what you imagine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 I think the trouble right now is the word "imagined." I don't think the word is useful here. Energy vibration is not imagined. Your senses detect various kinds of energy, our MIND then abstracts all of that into a theory that those energies are objects that would exist if the energy is gone. Since we all are the same kind of energy, there is no other kind of being too explain it to us. E.g. we are self referential. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) Anthropocentric.. Aren't we so special. Edited February 6, 2016 by oldtimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 Suppose there is a human cohort that is deaf, dumb, blind and they can only communicate through touch and smell. What kind of reality would they theorize? It would be a smaller universe, right? Objects of any kind are for all intents empty space. What makes them appear solid is the odd way our sight works. That's nothing but an energy reading device. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Thanks Plato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofers and Tweeters Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 I think the trouble right now is the word "imagined." I don't think the word is useful here. Energy vibration is not imagined. Your senses detect various kinds of energy, our MIND then abstracts all of that into a theory that those energies are objects that would exist if the energy is gone. Since we all are the same kind of energy, there is no other kind of being too explain it to us. E.g. we are self referential. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Really? And this thread is about what - facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 I think the trouble right now is the word "imagined." I don't think the word is useful here. Energy vibration is not imagined. Your senses detect various kinds of energy, our MIND then abstracts all of that into a theory that those energies are objects that would exist if the energy is gone. Since we all are the same kind of energy, there is no other kind of being too explain it to us. E.g. we are self referential. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Really? And this thread is about what - facts? I dreamed a dream of lies. And that guy who used to hammer on the scientific method was there, but he was somehow changed as if he was near death and was suddenly trying to justify his existence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Anthropocentric.. Aren't we so special. Still no comment on the Cosmological Anthropic Principles...even though they keep coming up. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 It's basically tree falling in the woods stuff. To me it's arrogant to say nothing happens unless we get to see it (hear it, measure it, etc). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woofers and Tweeters Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 It's basically tree falling in the woods stuff. To me it's arrogant to say nothing happens unless we get to see it (hear it, measure it, etc). Do you really believe that the billions of years before and the billions of years after humans actually existed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) Suppose there is a human cohort that is deaf, dumb, blind and they can only communicate through touch and smell. What kind of reality would they theorize? It would be a smaller universe, right? Objects of any kind are for all intents empty space. What makes them appear solid is the odd way our sight works. That's nothing but an energy reading device. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Like Tommy, the Pin Ball Wizard, who plays by sense of smell? WMcD Edited February 6, 2016 by WMcD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 It's basically tree falling in the woods stuff. To me it's arrogant to say nothing happens unless we get to see it (hear it, measure it, etc). Do you really believe that the billions of years before and the billions of years after humans actually existed? You'll have to ask the bear that was shitting in the woods when the tree fell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) To me it's arrogant to say nothing happens unless we get to see it (hear it, measure it, etc). Don't think the principle is based on arrogance nor do I believe those who posited or tested it used emotion in their deliberations. Dave Edited February 6, 2016 by Mallette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Yeah I know Dave. But don't you think there might be a Pogo principle involved? That it's our problem and not the universes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 Thanks Plato.Right! That's the model. Shadows on the cave wall.Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 I think the trouble right now is the word "imagined." I don't think the word is useful here. Energy vibration is not imagined. Your senses detect various kinds of energy, our MIND then abstracts all of that into a theory that those energies are objects that would exist if the energy is gone. Since we all are the same kind of energy, there is no other kind of being too explain it to us. E.g. we are self referential. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Really? And this thread is about what - facts? No, it's about philosophy, epistemology and metaphysics. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 Anthropocentric.. Aren't we so special. Still no comment on the Cosmological Anthropic Principles...even though they keep coming up. Dave Right. This is antithetical to that.Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 6, 2016 Author Share Posted February 6, 2016 During a dream, you can not detect that you are dreaming. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts