Regarding Franko...
- Thread starter Titanpoint
- Start date
-
- Tags
- franko
Soubrette said:
I agree gentlehorse
I always like to read BillyJoe and Frank discussing things
And in case any body has you on ignore I've quoted you in full
Sou [/B]
Full quote.
Just in case that anybody has Soubrette on ignore as well
Franko is in ordinary type
BillyJoe is in bold type
------------------------------------------------------------
Well if that is True, then explain why we understand “more” complex Cars so much better than “less” complex TLOP?
We don't.
To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP
Why can you make a Car easier than you can make TLOP?
It took 3 – 4 billion years of evolution to “make” a CAR.
TLOP is still a mystery we have not yet solved.
The illusion of free will is just as real as the illusion of alien abductions.
Free will is an illusion.
Alien abductions are a delusion.
Illusions are real – everyone sees the square in the “Color-bleeding Illusion”
Delusions are false – one person sees an alien where everyone else sees a blank wall.
So A-Theists who believe in “free will” are about as logical as people who believe they have been anal probed and implanted by extraterrestrials.
It’s a question of whether you think free will is an illusion or a delusion.
What do you think, Franko?
Does pretty well everyone have the illusion of free will or is it the case that only a few people have the delusion of free will?
Exactly! Kind of like how YOU once believed that when you died you would go to Heaven and be with God.
I’m still not disagreeing with you on this.
The “illusion of God” and the “illusion of Afterlife” are real.
But there is no evidence that “God” and “Afterlife” are real.
I became a Fatalist some time between the Age of 18 and 20. Prior to that I guess I believed in “free will”, it has been so long now, that I am not certain what I really believed before that, or if I gave the matter much thought at all?
Good Franko. So then you did have the “Illusion of free will”
But I’m still after blood…..
Don’t you even now have the “illusion of free will” even though you now know there is no such thing as “free will” or do you really go through life thinking at every moment “I am following a predetermined path”, “I am not making any decisions, I am merely following my fate”?
But I guess it is analogous to being a Christian in ones youth, and becoming an Atheist later in life.
The existence of “God” and “Afterlife” do not enter into the equation for me. At no time do I entertain thoughts such as “Will God will punish me for that”, “Will God be pleased with me for having done this”, “Am I going to end up in Hell for this” or “Will this good deed help get me into Heaven when I die”
So are you saying that, in the same way, “free will” does not enter into the equation for you?
Let me give you some advice on this, if I may be so bold.
It is very difficult to believe in Fate, and remain a materialist, and maintain your sanity at the same time….
So it’s a choice between Fate-and-Sanity and Materialism-and-Insanity?
…..The belief in Fate by necessity implies a “higher power” controlling Destiny…..
How does FATE imply a belief in a higher power?
How is Fate not consistent with Materialism?
…..But since Fate is the reality – since it is True – then like all True things, it conveys a great benefit to the believer. It would be very difficult for me to explain this benefit, it is something that one must experience for themselves to truly comprehend…..
But couldn’t you at least try?
I need a really good reason to give up on Materialism (assuming that you can explain how Fate is not consistent with Materialism) in order to experience the presumed benefits of FATE.
…..Think about it. People were once very upset by the notion of evolution, or a round Earth, but certainly no one who believes in these things today would say that we are worse off for knowing the Truth. To suggest that the Truth is ever non-beneficial is absurd.
In this context and for me personally I would agree with you.
However, I do not think it is true in other contexts (ie the man who died suddenly of a heart attack never knowing that he had had a terminal disease for the last three years of his life) and for other people (a person who is convinced in the belief of an Afterlife who is suddenly shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken).
Actually Billyjoe, I have never taught any children (especially my own) WHAT to think, I only teach them HOW to think. When you teach (tell) someone WHAT to think you have only served to rob them, and yourself, of Individuality.
I am glad to hear that, Franko.
In my own case, two out of my four children were teenagers before they discovered what my thoughts were on these questions. My eleven year old only recently asked me for the first time what a sceptic is.
I think it is important to teach them HOW to think and just as important to avoid telling them WHAT to think. What I want most of all for my children is that they live happy and satisfying lives.
But tell me, Franko, did your children really never believe in “free will” or live their lives as if they had “free will”?
Admittedly there are a lot of layers to the process of building a Car, but regardless of the number of layers, there are even more involved in building you.
But first homo sapiens must be “built” before homo sapiens can “build” a Car.
The artifacts of homo sapiens branch out from homo sapiens on the evolutionary tree.
Why is our (human) technology fundamentally different then TLOP’s? Today we make better cars and toasters then we did 50 years ago. Similarly TLOP makes better Animals and planets then it did 50 million years ago.
Homo sapiens has not evolved to any significant extent during the last hundred years.
The artifacts of homo sapiens, on the other hand, have evolved to very significant extent during the last hundred years.
Billyjoe I can’t believe that YOU are serious [that a watch could not form randomly]....
Theoretically, TLOP could throw up a watch randomly but it would take an almost infinite amount of time.
By comparison, the time taken for TLOP to “make” a watch by first making homo sapiens who would then complete the process of making the watch would be a mere instant.
...I understand how a WATCH is made FAR better then I understand how YOU are made. Why is it so hard for you to see that it would be easier for TLOP to make a watch, then it would for TLOP to make you?
Because TLOP would have to "make" us (homo sapiens) first
Obviously a watch is less complex then you are. Why do you believe that more complex you can be randomly formed, but not less complex watch cannot be randomly formed?
I still think, Franko, that you must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of that watch. The existence of the watch implies all that complexity.
[BillyJoe said: Simplicity produces complexity]
Actually the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says otherwise.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies only to a closed system.
The Earth is not a closed system.
Energy from the sun allows simplicity to produce complexity.
For the Earth-Sun system the 2nd Law still applies – the increase in entropy of the Sun is greater than the decrease in entropy of the Earth so that overall, for the Earth-Sun system, entropy increases in agreement with the 2nd Law.
Except, possibly where life is involved, but Life can’t save you here, because you claim TLOP is not Alive.
Entropy can decrease locally even in the absence of life (as long as entropy increases or remains the same in the closed system which contains this locale).
Complex molecules can form from simple molecules provided there is an external source of energy.
Using the Initial state and the Laws of Physics as the base, if YOU were God, Your mind (your consciousness) would be the initial state, and your words and actions would be TLOP.
So, GOD = Initial State + TLOP.
To me, this means that GOD is a mere label for an unresolved mystery.
It is kind of like this post. I don’t see you physically manifest when I perceive it. I only perceive your words (your TLOP your energy/information transmitted). So I perceive TLOB (The Laws of BillyJoe), but I don’t perceive the Initial State (Billyjoe yourself).
But, then, just as BillyJoe requires further explanation, GOD requires further explanation.
Let me ask you this. I can make a spear by taking a straight stick and sharpen the end with a rock. Does this mean that the pointy stick is more complex, more evolved, and more conscious then I am?
Certainly “more evolved” because, for spears to “evolve”, homo sapiens would need to evolve first.
The spear is part of the evolutionary tree that branches off from homo sapiens.
The thing I think you are forgetting in your equation is that in all likelihood TLOP hasn’t “died” in over 12.7 Billion years. In that much time you learn a thing or to. You can get to be rather complex, especially when you are immersed in an environment where you are receiving a constant and steady stream of new information.
Nothing really dies.
Everything builds on everything that has come before.
So everything that comes after contains what has come before.
Simplicity produces complexity.
When you combine Godel with Thomas Bayes……
Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem – that for any axiomatic self-consistent system there are truths that cannot be proven within the system.
Bayes? The only thing I know about Bayes is Bayes Rule and it has been demonstrated to be nonsense.
….essentially you arrive at the conclusion, that previous systems in the past (the Abyss and back) would be simpler, and operate at lower energies. Systems in the future (i.e. the Metaverse and up) would be more complex systems, and run at higher Energies.
Yes, so Simplicity -> Complexity
Homo sapiens more complex than TLOP and the artifacts of homo sapiens more complex than homo sapiens.
What is the use in claiming that everything began with the Big Bang, and that nothing comes before when this is obviously NOT THE CASE? I mean, seriously Billyjoe, something had to be happening before the Big Bang, otherwise … why did the Big Bang even occur?
Hawking attempted to show how the Big Bang could have been the first cause uncaused (which is what is being claimed for God). The analogy he used, if I remember, is the surface of a sphere which has no beginning. However, when I first read his explanation, it sounded like some sort of a trick. But I’m not sure what physicists in general think of his demonstration.
In any case….
If something was happening before the Big Bang, then something must have been happening before that and something else before that and something else before that…etc…etc…etc…
Sooner or later we have to face the following (?apparent) paradox:
At some time in the past there must have been NOTHING and now there is SOMETHING...
...but how can SOMETHING arise from NOTHING?
This is the unsolved mystery which Hawking was attempting to resolve.
[BillyJoe: Don’t you feel the need to explain God]
But I do explain God. She is the Logical Goddess. She is the source of Logic, the frame of reference for you and me and everyone. Aside from Your own mind, Her’s the one mind that you understand best of all. In fact, you understand Her mind so well, that you are hardly able to distinguish it from yourself any more. You have come to believe that it is simply an extension of yourself. Perceiving Fate is the first step in separating yourself, and re-establishing your unique Individuality.
This sounds to me like a subjective interpretation rather than an objective explanation
That theory [Energy = positive energy (Mass) + negative energy (Gravity) = zero]
runs in to serious problems though when anti-matter enters into the equation.
Perhaps it works like this…..
Matter is positive energy so Anti-matter must be negative energy and its associated Anti-gravity must be positive energy.
Matter (positive energy) + Gravity (negative energy) = zero
Anti-matter (negative energy) + Anti-gravity (positive energy) = zero
Energy = Matter (positive energy) + Anti-matter (negative energy) + Gravity (negative energy) + Anti-gravity (positive energy) = zero.
…..but I had better leave this to the physicists.
Well, that’s what I mean. There is NO evidence of machines making minds – unless you beg the question of materialism – in which case machines make minds…..
Or, more correctly, according to Materialism, minds are machines.
So it’s machines -> machines -> machines -> etc
…..But that one single hypothetical example aside, all of the other observed evidence says that the opposite is True, and that it is always Minds which make Machines
In other words, if TLOP is conscious, then there would be NO examples (even hypothetical) of Machines making Minds. Not One. But so long as you make TLOP non-conscious this creates a contradiction, there are no tangible examples of what you are claiming.
You are talking about the human mind making its technological machines.
But what about the evolutionary process producing homo sapiens from single-celled oragmisms? Setting aside abiogenesis for the moment, we have a gradual increase in the quality of mind…..
Prokaryotes (single-celled organisms) -> Eukaryotes (single-celled organisms containing organelles) -> multicelled organisms (insects -> reptiles -> birds -> mammals including homo sapiens)
That is to say, lesser minds gave rise to greater minds through the evolutionary process.
So, even though we haven’t as yet shown non-mind -> mind, we have shown lesser mind -> greater mind.
Isn’t it therefore logical that TLOP are even less mind? Perhaps even non-mind?
There is a reason that the LD say they are “True-Materialists”, while the Atheists are referred to as “Pseudo-materialists”. That fact is that your mind is a machine – more of an algorithm actually then a “machine”. But your consciousness is not made out of what the pseudo-materialist would call “matter” – not in reality. Your consciousness is made of “True-matter” it is an entirely different stuff, nothing like what the pseudo-materialist imagine “matter” to be. This is exactly why LD has more explanatory power then Atheism/Pseudo-materialism.
So you are saying that, according to LD, mind is brain (or machine or matter or algorithm) but consciousness is not brain. You are saying that consciousness is “True-matter”???
But to have explanatory power, LD must explain what “True Matter” is.
[BJ; Are you saying that FATE can trap you and drive you insane?
Are you saying that GOD can trap you and drive you insane?]
The problem is … eventually you will be forced to face them. The fact that you are here in this Universe is the ONLY thing preventing you from fully considering them now. In my assessment it is better to deal with these issues on your own terms, at the time of your choosing, then to wait for them to come for you when you are not mentally prepared.
So you are saying here that FATE and GOD can trap you and drive you insane if you are not prepared for them?
… Imagine that you are playing Dungeons and Dragons, and the coolest, prettiest, smartest, most gorgeous woman you have ever laid eyes on is the Dungeonmistress.
That’s the Logical Goddess.
The Logical Goddess, then, is a label for the logical reasoning that leads you to your conclusion about the nature of reality?
Your conclusions about the nature of reality are based on pure logic?
No empirical evidence required?
Well Santa is easy … My parents eventually confessed they were behind that scam. But I didn’t hold it against them. They were always pulling practical jokes on us kids when we were little. They still do!
And they might still be kidding you about Santa….
They were kidding you before that he was real, they could be kidding you now that he is false.
So why do you believe Santa is false?
As for the Faeries … I’d say Unknown. I’m not even sure what you mean by “Faeries”. For example, Gay men are sometimes called “Faeries”. And I am pretty sure that Gay men exist in reality.
Fokloric faeries (the other type is spelled without the ‘e’
)
But does unknown mean 50% chance of being real and 50% chance of being false.
For me, considering the dearth of evidence for the existence of faeries, I would say that the chances of them being real are such that I will not be taking them into account.
Well lets use Faeries instead of Santa, but using the general definition of Faeries, I would say that my Agnosticism on Faeries doesn’t really come up much, and when it does, I don’t see how me claiming there are NO faeries when I really have No idea if there are faeries is a superior or more beneficial way to act?
Franko, to repeat again, I do not say “There are no faeries.”
I say “There is no evidence that faeries exist, so I do not take them into account.”
To put it another way: In living my life I take into account only those things for which there is evidence.
What evidence? Are you claiming it is impossible that you will be run over by a bus later today (Goddess forbid!)?
No. Just very unlikely.
I don’t see the difference. If there is no evidence for God, Atheist believe NO GOD.
Consider, for the sake of argument, that the following statement is true…..
“There is no evidence that God exists.”
Now, consider the following two statements about belief…..
(1) I believe that God does not exist.
(2) I do not hold the belief that God exists.
Do you accept that there is a difference between (1) and (2)?
I go with (2)
Similarly if there is NO evidence you will be alive next week, NO ALIVE NEXT WEEK.
There is lots of evidence that I will be alive next week……
I am relatively young. A person of my age has a life expectancy way in excess of one week. I am fit. I am healthy. There is longevity in my family. I have no psychological or emotional problems that would result in suicide within the next week.
Really the only reason I will not be alive next week is just plain bad luck and, even then, the odds are heavily loaded in my favour. There is virtually no chance I will win lotto next week and there is almost no chance or very little chance that I will die next week.
Conclusion:
There is lots of evidence that I will be alive next week therefore I believe I will be alive next week.
Really? Do you think so? You shouldn’t be embarrassed.
That is what being a Fatalist is all about BJ. To a Fatalist it is an Honor, of sorts, to concede a mistake. The only dishonor is in not conceding to it, and instead making that same mistake over and over and over again. To a Fatalist, mistakes in your past are unavoidable (a source of humor perhaps, but never regret), it is repeating those mistakes in the present when you should know better that is the true sin (source of embarrassment).
You are, of course, right Franko.
I was under the illusion that I had free will.
BillyJoe is in bold type
------------------------------------------------------------
Well if that is True, then explain why we understand “more” complex Cars so much better than “less” complex TLOP?
We don't.
To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP
Why can you make a Car easier than you can make TLOP?
It took 3 – 4 billion years of evolution to “make” a CAR.
TLOP is still a mystery we have not yet solved.
The illusion of free will is just as real as the illusion of alien abductions.
Free will is an illusion.
Alien abductions are a delusion.
Illusions are real – everyone sees the square in the “Color-bleeding Illusion”
Delusions are false – one person sees an alien where everyone else sees a blank wall.
So A-Theists who believe in “free will” are about as logical as people who believe they have been anal probed and implanted by extraterrestrials.
It’s a question of whether you think free will is an illusion or a delusion.
What do you think, Franko?
Does pretty well everyone have the illusion of free will or is it the case that only a few people have the delusion of free will?
Exactly! Kind of like how YOU once believed that when you died you would go to Heaven and be with God.
I’m still not disagreeing with you on this.
The “illusion of God” and the “illusion of Afterlife” are real.
But there is no evidence that “God” and “Afterlife” are real.
I became a Fatalist some time between the Age of 18 and 20. Prior to that I guess I believed in “free will”, it has been so long now, that I am not certain what I really believed before that, or if I gave the matter much thought at all?
Good Franko. So then you did have the “Illusion of free will”
But I’m still after blood…..
Don’t you even now have the “illusion of free will” even though you now know there is no such thing as “free will” or do you really go through life thinking at every moment “I am following a predetermined path”, “I am not making any decisions, I am merely following my fate”?
But I guess it is analogous to being a Christian in ones youth, and becoming an Atheist later in life.
The existence of “God” and “Afterlife” do not enter into the equation for me. At no time do I entertain thoughts such as “Will God will punish me for that”, “Will God be pleased with me for having done this”, “Am I going to end up in Hell for this” or “Will this good deed help get me into Heaven when I die”
So are you saying that, in the same way, “free will” does not enter into the equation for you?
Let me give you some advice on this, if I may be so bold.
It is very difficult to believe in Fate, and remain a materialist, and maintain your sanity at the same time….
So it’s a choice between Fate-and-Sanity and Materialism-and-Insanity?
…..The belief in Fate by necessity implies a “higher power” controlling Destiny…..
How does FATE imply a belief in a higher power?
How is Fate not consistent with Materialism?
…..But since Fate is the reality – since it is True – then like all True things, it conveys a great benefit to the believer. It would be very difficult for me to explain this benefit, it is something that one must experience for themselves to truly comprehend…..
But couldn’t you at least try?
I need a really good reason to give up on Materialism (assuming that you can explain how Fate is not consistent with Materialism) in order to experience the presumed benefits of FATE.
…..Think about it. People were once very upset by the notion of evolution, or a round Earth, but certainly no one who believes in these things today would say that we are worse off for knowing the Truth. To suggest that the Truth is ever non-beneficial is absurd.
In this context and for me personally I would agree with you.
However, I do not think it is true in other contexts (ie the man who died suddenly of a heart attack never knowing that he had had a terminal disease for the last three years of his life) and for other people (a person who is convinced in the belief of an Afterlife who is suddenly shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken).
Actually Billyjoe, I have never taught any children (especially my own) WHAT to think, I only teach them HOW to think. When you teach (tell) someone WHAT to think you have only served to rob them, and yourself, of Individuality.
I am glad to hear that, Franko.
In my own case, two out of my four children were teenagers before they discovered what my thoughts were on these questions. My eleven year old only recently asked me for the first time what a sceptic is.
I think it is important to teach them HOW to think and just as important to avoid telling them WHAT to think. What I want most of all for my children is that they live happy and satisfying lives.
But tell me, Franko, did your children really never believe in “free will” or live their lives as if they had “free will”?
Admittedly there are a lot of layers to the process of building a Car, but regardless of the number of layers, there are even more involved in building you.
But first homo sapiens must be “built” before homo sapiens can “build” a Car.
The artifacts of homo sapiens branch out from homo sapiens on the evolutionary tree.
Why is our (human) technology fundamentally different then TLOP’s? Today we make better cars and toasters then we did 50 years ago. Similarly TLOP makes better Animals and planets then it did 50 million years ago.
Homo sapiens has not evolved to any significant extent during the last hundred years.
The artifacts of homo sapiens, on the other hand, have evolved to very significant extent during the last hundred years.
Billyjoe I can’t believe that YOU are serious [that a watch could not form randomly]....
Theoretically, TLOP could throw up a watch randomly but it would take an almost infinite amount of time.
By comparison, the time taken for TLOP to “make” a watch by first making homo sapiens who would then complete the process of making the watch would be a mere instant.
...I understand how a WATCH is made FAR better then I understand how YOU are made. Why is it so hard for you to see that it would be easier for TLOP to make a watch, then it would for TLOP to make you?
Because TLOP would have to "make" us (homo sapiens) first
Obviously a watch is less complex then you are. Why do you believe that more complex you can be randomly formed, but not less complex watch cannot be randomly formed?
I still think, Franko, that you must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of that watch. The existence of the watch implies all that complexity.
[BillyJoe said: Simplicity produces complexity]
Actually the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says otherwise.
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies only to a closed system.
The Earth is not a closed system.
Energy from the sun allows simplicity to produce complexity.
For the Earth-Sun system the 2nd Law still applies – the increase in entropy of the Sun is greater than the decrease in entropy of the Earth so that overall, for the Earth-Sun system, entropy increases in agreement with the 2nd Law.
Except, possibly where life is involved, but Life can’t save you here, because you claim TLOP is not Alive.
Entropy can decrease locally even in the absence of life (as long as entropy increases or remains the same in the closed system which contains this locale).
Complex molecules can form from simple molecules provided there is an external source of energy.
Using the Initial state and the Laws of Physics as the base, if YOU were God, Your mind (your consciousness) would be the initial state, and your words and actions would be TLOP.
So, GOD = Initial State + TLOP.
To me, this means that GOD is a mere label for an unresolved mystery.
It is kind of like this post. I don’t see you physically manifest when I perceive it. I only perceive your words (your TLOP your energy/information transmitted). So I perceive TLOB (The Laws of BillyJoe), but I don’t perceive the Initial State (Billyjoe yourself).
But, then, just as BillyJoe requires further explanation, GOD requires further explanation.
Let me ask you this. I can make a spear by taking a straight stick and sharpen the end with a rock. Does this mean that the pointy stick is more complex, more evolved, and more conscious then I am?
Certainly “more evolved” because, for spears to “evolve”, homo sapiens would need to evolve first.
The spear is part of the evolutionary tree that branches off from homo sapiens.
The thing I think you are forgetting in your equation is that in all likelihood TLOP hasn’t “died” in over 12.7 Billion years. In that much time you learn a thing or to. You can get to be rather complex, especially when you are immersed in an environment where you are receiving a constant and steady stream of new information.
Nothing really dies.
Everything builds on everything that has come before.
So everything that comes after contains what has come before.
Simplicity produces complexity.
When you combine Godel with Thomas Bayes……
Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem – that for any axiomatic self-consistent system there are truths that cannot be proven within the system.
Bayes? The only thing I know about Bayes is Bayes Rule and it has been demonstrated to be nonsense.
….essentially you arrive at the conclusion, that previous systems in the past (the Abyss and back) would be simpler, and operate at lower energies. Systems in the future (i.e. the Metaverse and up) would be more complex systems, and run at higher Energies.
Yes, so Simplicity -> Complexity
Homo sapiens more complex than TLOP and the artifacts of homo sapiens more complex than homo sapiens.
What is the use in claiming that everything began with the Big Bang, and that nothing comes before when this is obviously NOT THE CASE? I mean, seriously Billyjoe, something had to be happening before the Big Bang, otherwise … why did the Big Bang even occur?
Hawking attempted to show how the Big Bang could have been the first cause uncaused (which is what is being claimed for God). The analogy he used, if I remember, is the surface of a sphere which has no beginning. However, when I first read his explanation, it sounded like some sort of a trick. But I’m not sure what physicists in general think of his demonstration.
In any case….
If something was happening before the Big Bang, then something must have been happening before that and something else before that and something else before that…etc…etc…etc…
Sooner or later we have to face the following (?apparent) paradox:
At some time in the past there must have been NOTHING and now there is SOMETHING...
...but how can SOMETHING arise from NOTHING?
This is the unsolved mystery which Hawking was attempting to resolve.
[BillyJoe: Don’t you feel the need to explain God]
But I do explain God. She is the Logical Goddess. She is the source of Logic, the frame of reference for you and me and everyone. Aside from Your own mind, Her’s the one mind that you understand best of all. In fact, you understand Her mind so well, that you are hardly able to distinguish it from yourself any more. You have come to believe that it is simply an extension of yourself. Perceiving Fate is the first step in separating yourself, and re-establishing your unique Individuality.
This sounds to me like a subjective interpretation rather than an objective explanation
That theory [Energy = positive energy (Mass) + negative energy (Gravity) = zero]
runs in to serious problems though when anti-matter enters into the equation.
Perhaps it works like this…..
Matter is positive energy so Anti-matter must be negative energy and its associated Anti-gravity must be positive energy.
Matter (positive energy) + Gravity (negative energy) = zero
Anti-matter (negative energy) + Anti-gravity (positive energy) = zero
Energy = Matter (positive energy) + Anti-matter (negative energy) + Gravity (negative energy) + Anti-gravity (positive energy) = zero.
…..but I had better leave this to the physicists.
Well, that’s what I mean. There is NO evidence of machines making minds – unless you beg the question of materialism – in which case machines make minds…..
Or, more correctly, according to Materialism, minds are machines.
So it’s machines -> machines -> machines -> etc
…..But that one single hypothetical example aside, all of the other observed evidence says that the opposite is True, and that it is always Minds which make Machines
In other words, if TLOP is conscious, then there would be NO examples (even hypothetical) of Machines making Minds. Not One. But so long as you make TLOP non-conscious this creates a contradiction, there are no tangible examples of what you are claiming.
You are talking about the human mind making its technological machines.
But what about the evolutionary process producing homo sapiens from single-celled oragmisms? Setting aside abiogenesis for the moment, we have a gradual increase in the quality of mind…..
Prokaryotes (single-celled organisms) -> Eukaryotes (single-celled organisms containing organelles) -> multicelled organisms (insects -> reptiles -> birds -> mammals including homo sapiens)
That is to say, lesser minds gave rise to greater minds through the evolutionary process.
So, even though we haven’t as yet shown non-mind -> mind, we have shown lesser mind -> greater mind.
Isn’t it therefore logical that TLOP are even less mind? Perhaps even non-mind?
There is a reason that the LD say they are “True-Materialists”, while the Atheists are referred to as “Pseudo-materialists”. That fact is that your mind is a machine – more of an algorithm actually then a “machine”. But your consciousness is not made out of what the pseudo-materialist would call “matter” – not in reality. Your consciousness is made of “True-matter” it is an entirely different stuff, nothing like what the pseudo-materialist imagine “matter” to be. This is exactly why LD has more explanatory power then Atheism/Pseudo-materialism.
So you are saying that, according to LD, mind is brain (or machine or matter or algorithm) but consciousness is not brain. You are saying that consciousness is “True-matter”???
But to have explanatory power, LD must explain what “True Matter” is.
[BJ; Are you saying that FATE can trap you and drive you insane?
Are you saying that GOD can trap you and drive you insane?]
The problem is … eventually you will be forced to face them. The fact that you are here in this Universe is the ONLY thing preventing you from fully considering them now. In my assessment it is better to deal with these issues on your own terms, at the time of your choosing, then to wait for them to come for you when you are not mentally prepared.
So you are saying here that FATE and GOD can trap you and drive you insane if you are not prepared for them?
… Imagine that you are playing Dungeons and Dragons, and the coolest, prettiest, smartest, most gorgeous woman you have ever laid eyes on is the Dungeonmistress.
That’s the Logical Goddess.
The Logical Goddess, then, is a label for the logical reasoning that leads you to your conclusion about the nature of reality?
Your conclusions about the nature of reality are based on pure logic?
No empirical evidence required?
Well Santa is easy … My parents eventually confessed they were behind that scam. But I didn’t hold it against them. They were always pulling practical jokes on us kids when we were little. They still do!
And they might still be kidding you about Santa….
They were kidding you before that he was real, they could be kidding you now that he is false.
So why do you believe Santa is false?
As for the Faeries … I’d say Unknown. I’m not even sure what you mean by “Faeries”. For example, Gay men are sometimes called “Faeries”. And I am pretty sure that Gay men exist in reality.
Fokloric faeries (the other type is spelled without the ‘e’
)But does unknown mean 50% chance of being real and 50% chance of being false.
For me, considering the dearth of evidence for the existence of faeries, I would say that the chances of them being real are such that I will not be taking them into account.
Well lets use Faeries instead of Santa, but using the general definition of Faeries, I would say that my Agnosticism on Faeries doesn’t really come up much, and when it does, I don’t see how me claiming there are NO faeries when I really have No idea if there are faeries is a superior or more beneficial way to act?
Franko, to repeat again, I do not say “There are no faeries.”
I say “There is no evidence that faeries exist, so I do not take them into account.”
To put it another way: In living my life I take into account only those things for which there is evidence.
What evidence? Are you claiming it is impossible that you will be run over by a bus later today (Goddess forbid!)?
No. Just very unlikely.
I don’t see the difference. If there is no evidence for God, Atheist believe NO GOD.
Consider, for the sake of argument, that the following statement is true…..
“There is no evidence that God exists.”
Now, consider the following two statements about belief…..
(1) I believe that God does not exist.
(2) I do not hold the belief that God exists.
Do you accept that there is a difference between (1) and (2)?
I go with (2)
Similarly if there is NO evidence you will be alive next week, NO ALIVE NEXT WEEK.
There is lots of evidence that I will be alive next week……
I am relatively young. A person of my age has a life expectancy way in excess of one week. I am fit. I am healthy. There is longevity in my family. I have no psychological or emotional problems that would result in suicide within the next week.
Really the only reason I will not be alive next week is just plain bad luck and, even then, the odds are heavily loaded in my favour. There is virtually no chance I will win lotto next week and there is almost no chance or very little chance that I will die next week.
Conclusion:
There is lots of evidence that I will be alive next week therefore I believe I will be alive next week.
Really? Do you think so? You shouldn’t be embarrassed.
That is what being a Fatalist is all about BJ. To a Fatalist it is an Honor, of sorts, to concede a mistake. The only dishonor is in not conceding to it, and instead making that same mistake over and over and over again. To a Fatalist, mistakes in your past are unavoidable (a source of humor perhaps, but never regret), it is repeating those mistakes in the present when you should know better that is the true sin (source of embarrassment).
You are, of course, right Franko.
I was under the illusion that I had free will.
Billyjoe,
… sorry about that … I was distracted momentarily …
Wait a minute … it looks like you are pulling the switcheroo. YOU control CAR, but TLOP controls YOU. You understand CAR much better then you understand TLOP.
Come on Billyjoe! … you are playing word games.
It might take ME 3 – 4 billion years to make a “Billyjoe”, but I bet I could make a Car in a LOT less time. What makes you think that it is any different for TLOP?
I can build a house by stacking rocks on top of each other. Are you telling me that stacked stones require more technology then making Me does?
Just like everyone sees God, or afterlife, or “free will”, or the hidden image in those crazy hologram posters?
One man’s reality is another man’s illusions.
I am not going to comment, my Friend, but I assure you … I do not experience this “illusion of free will” you claim “everyone” experiences, and I am by no means the only one who does not experience it.
That depends on if you have a proper comprehension of Logic, in other words, it depends upon your perspective (whether there is evidence).
Slow down their “Killer”, like I said, before I became a Fatalist, I don’t know that I gave the idea of “free will” much thought. I was programming computers from an even younger age, and I always had a hunch that reality/minds were at least as logical as computers …
It is very difficult to explain in this forum …
I would say … that I go through life knowing that a great destiny lies before me. As I perceive that Destiny it manifests in reality.
Yes. But I am not really sure what you mean when you ask?
When you make a decision, aren’t you aware that you decision is simply based on your experiences in the past, and those experiences where based on even earlier experiences, which were based on even earlier experiences … and so on … all the way back to long before you were even born.
Where are you getting this idea that there is a YOU controlling things?
What’s the “You” anyway? You’re just a collection of Atoms, I thought?
I know it probably sounds more than a little crazy to you my Friend, but in the end your one Free Will choice is going to either put you in Heaven, or leave you trapped in the isolation of Solipsism, for the rest of this Eternity.
Fate requires a higher power, the higher power is the thing doing the controlling – TLOP in our case. But Fate can be consistent with either Atheism/Materialism, or Logical deism/Materialism. In the former the source of control (Fate) is non-conscious, like a machine; in the latter the source of control is a consciousness, more evolved, but fundamentally no different then yours or mine.
Here’s the thing … if a consciousness controls your mind, then you are a consciousness; but if a machine controls your consciousness then in reality you are a machine. Of course if you are conscious then you get to decide what is a machine, and not a machine. Either way, it doesn’t change what you … or She is, in reality.
You could be a Fatalist as a Materialist, try living your life for a few days knowing that you control none of your actions in reality, and are instead controlled by an uncaring, unthinking, and unknowing “invisible sky-machine” (i.e. non-conscious TLOP)?
When you realize that this “invisible sky machine” seems to be going out of Her way to look out for your benefit, She doesn’t seem so “machine-like.
Look carefully at what you are doing. You are simply assuming that dying is bad, when actually you have no idea if it is bad in reality. If it is somehow True that you go to a better place when you die, this individual might have been delighted to know his end was near??? Perhaps it would have given him an opportunity to bring closure to his affairs here, and prepare himself?
What if death is actually like an all-expense paid trip to Disney World?
Once again you are begging the question. Suppose the afterlife is far better than existence here? You might anticipate it like you anticipate an upcoming vacation trip, or moving to a New and Bigger House?
Hehe .. I am the same way. It’s not like I am whipping out the textbook, and saying “Tonight’s metaphysical topic will be …”. Kids ask about stuff when they get around to it. My children are younger than yours. I find that they ask a lot of innocent sounding questions that are actually very deep philosophically.
I couldn’t agree more.
In all honesty Billyjoe, it has only strengthen and confirmed my belief in Fate. You assume that children have an intrinsic sense of “free will”. The fact is, that the opposite is True. Children are born as Fatalist, you have to implant a notion of “free will” in their heads.
You are simply assuming that to be the case. The fact of the matter is, it would be much easier for you and me to build a functioning “Car”, then it would for us to build a functioning “homo sapien”.
Sure we have. For one thing … we make much better toasters.
Why is one suddenly not a product of TLOP? All evolution works up the tree …
TLOP ---- > YOU ---- > TOASTER
If the Toaster improves it means that you were in some way improved, which implies that TLOP was in some way improved.
How do you come to this conclusion? As I keep saying if you and I can make a watch easier then a homo sapien, by what logic do you claim this is not the case for TLOP?
How can TLOP make us directly, but not form watches directly?
Is a watch more complicated then the Earth? TLOP made the Earth – right?
Why?
If at the moment of the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP got together and decided that they wanted a Universe which resulted in Watches, and Toasters, surely they could have contrived to have these things produced more directly? Why include homo sapiens at all, unless there was some necessity for TLOP and the Initial State to include homo sapiens?
Billyjoe … that is exactly what I am thinking about. You must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of YOU. The existence of YOU implies all that complexity (TLOP/God).
Yes, but unless me and Godel are correct, the Universe is a closed system -- isn’t it?
According to the Atheist/Materialist, the Laws of Thermodynamics are inviolate when it comes to empirical observation. NEVER has there been a recorded and verified violation of these Laws. They are the hardest science that Science has.
Yet in order for the Big Bang to work, essentially you have to throw Thermodynamics out the window. The Big Bang is making a huge doo-doo on Both the Conservation of Energy, and Entropy.
Right, but how did all of this Energy just magically appear? It doesn’t make any sense, at least not according to Atheism/Materialism. Switch your premise, and have Consciousness make matter, and this “conundrum” vanishes like magic.
To wit …
What I am saying Billyjoe, that left to its own devices a Matter-System is destroyed by Entropy, while Conscious-System can resist, or even overcome the forces of Entropy. As Matter the universe has no way to form. As a consciousness, it was only a matter of Time.
Consciousness evolves over time, matter does not. Matter just sits there.
When you get the idea in your head that it is a consciousness, similar to yours, as opposed to an incomprehensible energy-matter force, then it goes a long way to resolving the mystery. … At least a good piece of it.
I don’t mean to belabor the point, but repetition does work …
How can I make a more complex spear so simply, but I cannot make the less “evolved” homo sapien?
Say you are on that old game show the Price is Right, there are 3 doors, 1 has a fabulous prize, the other 2 have goofy gag gifts. What are your odds of guessing the door with the Good-Prize?
I bet you are thinking it’s 1 in 3 – aren’t you?
Bayes has a magic trick. He’s gonna dopuble your odds of winning -- get them up to 2 in 3 – guaranteed.
No, no, no … you are mixing apples and oranges now.
Universes are generated by consciousnesses . The more evolved the consciousness generating the Universe, the more evolved the Universe. In other words, simple universe runs at low Energy, simple consciousnesses. Complex, more evolved universe -- high energy, complex more evolved consciousnesses. Like Mandelbrot, turtles all the way up, and all the way down …
Did you see my thread on Nothing?
First of all it seems rather axiomatic that Nothing can’t really exist … ?
At least not without a magical explanation beyond any potential for human comprehension.
I was getting on this topic there. Hawking has got himself a crystal spheres of a Theory compared to what I got. All I need to build the Omniverse is Time. That’s all that any of it is made of … even you and me …
Crystal spheres weren’t the answer 400 years ago, and they still aren’t the answer.
Now see, if you were a Fatalist like me, then this would make much more sense …
Why is it that you need to experience the “illusion of free will” to feel human (conscious), and to be able to deal with reality, yet in this regard you so easily accept the idea that you are simply a deterministic machine?
In other words, if you find “consciousness” and easier frame of reference then “machine” (which I would think most people would find natural) then why is it machines -> machines -> machines -> etc … instead of consciousness -- > consciousness -- > consciousness -- > etc. ?
But how is that Parsimonious? Why postulate a hither-to-unseen, or unknown non-entity which is “Non-conscious”, when you know that you could just insert a consciousness and be done?
In other words, if you don’t need the “matter”, then why include it in the theory?
Essentially (and this is the abbreviated version) … You are a self aware meme. You are a meme, that is locked in an axiomatic potentially-infinite H-Mobius loop. You perceive reality, because you perceive Time. You are an individual Graviton, unique in all the Omniverse.
There are several ways to think of it. But regardless, you can reduce you existence as an entity to a particle. This particle is your Graviton (the True-Matter part), the shell. Inside is your Soul (your MPB algorithm and database).
As a Graviton you have two abilities: Perception and Expression. Perception is your ability to receive data, and Expression is you ability to transmit data. All of the data that you ever receive originates with another Graviton. When you think you are alone, or you are simply perceiving nature – the world – this universe – that is simply you receiving information from the DM (or LG) – another Graviton.
There are only two parts to reality – Gravitons, and the information/energy (in the form of memes) that they transmit back and fourth to each other.
I’m say that Fate is more complicated then just saying that everything is predetermined.
Empirical evidence is logical evidence. Pure logic from a pure source.
That sounds like Agnosticism, which, if it is … is exactly what I’d say, so we are in agreement on this one?
How is saying that you don’t believe that God Exist, any different then saying that NO GOD EXIST? I don’t see the difference?
Do you hold the belief that God exists?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
How about this to illustrate the point …
Do you hold the belief that (N x Z) + (Y x Z) = Q (based on no other info)?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
On this point:
1) for every reason you have that you will still exist, I can think of several why you will not (disease, accidents, natural disasters, crime, etc.)
2) You have no control over what happens. Its all be preordained by TLOP. You are powerless against the laws of physics.
3) What if you were 89 years old? Should you start assuming that the odds are you will be dead next week? When do you start the clock?
Fact is, it never hurts to assume the best outcome.
(Upchunk, Fool, Whodidi, Evildave, Diogenes, Impytimpy, sock-puppet)
… sorry about that … I was distracted momentarily …
Wait a minute … it looks like you are pulling the switcheroo. YOU control CAR, but TLOP controls YOU. You understand CAR much better then you understand TLOP.
Come on Billyjoe! … you are playing word games.
It might take ME 3 – 4 billion years to make a “Billyjoe”, but I bet I could make a Car in a LOT less time. What makes you think that it is any different for TLOP?
I can build a house by stacking rocks on top of each other. Are you telling me that stacked stones require more technology then making Me does?
Just like everyone sees God, or afterlife, or “free will”, or the hidden image in those crazy hologram posters?
One man’s reality is another man’s illusions.
I am not going to comment, my Friend, but I assure you … I do not experience this “illusion of free will” you claim “everyone” experiences, and I am by no means the only one who does not experience it.
That depends on if you have a proper comprehension of Logic, in other words, it depends upon your perspective (whether there is evidence).
Slow down their “Killer”, like I said, before I became a Fatalist, I don’t know that I gave the idea of “free will” much thought. I was programming computers from an even younger age, and I always had a hunch that reality/minds were at least as logical as computers …
It is very difficult to explain in this forum …
I would say … that I go through life knowing that a great destiny lies before me. As I perceive that Destiny it manifests in reality.
Yes. But I am not really sure what you mean when you ask?
When you make a decision, aren’t you aware that you decision is simply based on your experiences in the past, and those experiences where based on even earlier experiences, which were based on even earlier experiences … and so on … all the way back to long before you were even born.
Where are you getting this idea that there is a YOU controlling things?
What’s the “You” anyway? You’re just a collection of Atoms, I thought?
I know it probably sounds more than a little crazy to you my Friend, but in the end your one Free Will choice is going to either put you in Heaven, or leave you trapped in the isolation of Solipsism, for the rest of this Eternity.
Fate requires a higher power, the higher power is the thing doing the controlling – TLOP in our case. But Fate can be consistent with either Atheism/Materialism, or Logical deism/Materialism. In the former the source of control (Fate) is non-conscious, like a machine; in the latter the source of control is a consciousness, more evolved, but fundamentally no different then yours or mine.
Here’s the thing … if a consciousness controls your mind, then you are a consciousness; but if a machine controls your consciousness then in reality you are a machine. Of course if you are conscious then you get to decide what is a machine, and not a machine. Either way, it doesn’t change what you … or She is, in reality.
You could be a Fatalist as a Materialist, try living your life for a few days knowing that you control none of your actions in reality, and are instead controlled by an uncaring, unthinking, and unknowing “invisible sky-machine” (i.e. non-conscious TLOP)?
When you realize that this “invisible sky machine” seems to be going out of Her way to look out for your benefit, She doesn’t seem so “machine-like.
Look carefully at what you are doing. You are simply assuming that dying is bad, when actually you have no idea if it is bad in reality. If it is somehow True that you go to a better place when you die, this individual might have been delighted to know his end was near??? Perhaps it would have given him an opportunity to bring closure to his affairs here, and prepare himself?
What if death is actually like an all-expense paid trip to Disney World?
Once again you are begging the question. Suppose the afterlife is far better than existence here? You might anticipate it like you anticipate an upcoming vacation trip, or moving to a New and Bigger House?
Hehe .. I am the same way. It’s not like I am whipping out the textbook, and saying “Tonight’s metaphysical topic will be …”. Kids ask about stuff when they get around to it. My children are younger than yours. I find that they ask a lot of innocent sounding questions that are actually very deep philosophically.
I couldn’t agree more.
In all honesty Billyjoe, it has only strengthen and confirmed my belief in Fate. You assume that children have an intrinsic sense of “free will”. The fact is, that the opposite is True. Children are born as Fatalist, you have to implant a notion of “free will” in their heads.
You are simply assuming that to be the case. The fact of the matter is, it would be much easier for you and me to build a functioning “Car”, then it would for us to build a functioning “homo sapien”.
Sure we have. For one thing … we make much better toasters.
Why is one suddenly not a product of TLOP? All evolution works up the tree …
TLOP ---- > YOU ---- > TOASTER
If the Toaster improves it means that you were in some way improved, which implies that TLOP was in some way improved.
How do you come to this conclusion? As I keep saying if you and I can make a watch easier then a homo sapien, by what logic do you claim this is not the case for TLOP?
How can TLOP make us directly, but not form watches directly?
Is a watch more complicated then the Earth? TLOP made the Earth – right?
Why?
If at the moment of the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP got together and decided that they wanted a Universe which resulted in Watches, and Toasters, surely they could have contrived to have these things produced more directly? Why include homo sapiens at all, unless there was some necessity for TLOP and the Initial State to include homo sapiens?
Billyjoe … that is exactly what I am thinking about. You must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of YOU. The existence of YOU implies all that complexity (TLOP/God).
Yes, but unless me and Godel are correct, the Universe is a closed system -- isn’t it?
According to the Atheist/Materialist, the Laws of Thermodynamics are inviolate when it comes to empirical observation. NEVER has there been a recorded and verified violation of these Laws. They are the hardest science that Science has.
Yet in order for the Big Bang to work, essentially you have to throw Thermodynamics out the window. The Big Bang is making a huge doo-doo on Both the Conservation of Energy, and Entropy.
Right, but how did all of this Energy just magically appear? It doesn’t make any sense, at least not according to Atheism/Materialism. Switch your premise, and have Consciousness make matter, and this “conundrum” vanishes like magic.
To wit …
What I am saying Billyjoe, that left to its own devices a Matter-System is destroyed by Entropy, while Conscious-System can resist, or even overcome the forces of Entropy. As Matter the universe has no way to form. As a consciousness, it was only a matter of Time.
Consciousness evolves over time, matter does not. Matter just sits there.
When you get the idea in your head that it is a consciousness, similar to yours, as opposed to an incomprehensible energy-matter force, then it goes a long way to resolving the mystery. … At least a good piece of it.
I don’t mean to belabor the point, but repetition does work …
How can I make a more complex spear so simply, but I cannot make the less “evolved” homo sapien?
Say you are on that old game show the Price is Right, there are 3 doors, 1 has a fabulous prize, the other 2 have goofy gag gifts. What are your odds of guessing the door with the Good-Prize?
I bet you are thinking it’s 1 in 3 – aren’t you?
Bayes has a magic trick. He’s gonna dopuble your odds of winning -- get them up to 2 in 3 – guaranteed.
No, no, no … you are mixing apples and oranges now.
Universes are generated by consciousnesses . The more evolved the consciousness generating the Universe, the more evolved the Universe. In other words, simple universe runs at low Energy, simple consciousnesses. Complex, more evolved universe -- high energy, complex more evolved consciousnesses. Like Mandelbrot, turtles all the way up, and all the way down …
Did you see my thread on Nothing?
First of all it seems rather axiomatic that Nothing can’t really exist … ?
At least not without a magical explanation beyond any potential for human comprehension.
I was getting on this topic there. Hawking has got himself a crystal spheres of a Theory compared to what I got. All I need to build the Omniverse is Time. That’s all that any of it is made of … even you and me …
Crystal spheres weren’t the answer 400 years ago, and they still aren’t the answer.
Now see, if you were a Fatalist like me, then this would make much more sense …
Why is it that you need to experience the “illusion of free will” to feel human (conscious), and to be able to deal with reality, yet in this regard you so easily accept the idea that you are simply a deterministic machine?
In other words, if you find “consciousness” and easier frame of reference then “machine” (which I would think most people would find natural) then why is it machines -> machines -> machines -> etc … instead of consciousness -- > consciousness -- > consciousness -- > etc. ?
But how is that Parsimonious? Why postulate a hither-to-unseen, or unknown non-entity which is “Non-conscious”, when you know that you could just insert a consciousness and be done?
In other words, if you don’t need the “matter”, then why include it in the theory?
Essentially (and this is the abbreviated version) … You are a self aware meme. You are a meme, that is locked in an axiomatic potentially-infinite H-Mobius loop. You perceive reality, because you perceive Time. You are an individual Graviton, unique in all the Omniverse.
There are several ways to think of it. But regardless, you can reduce you existence as an entity to a particle. This particle is your Graviton (the True-Matter part), the shell. Inside is your Soul (your MPB algorithm and database).
As a Graviton you have two abilities: Perception and Expression. Perception is your ability to receive data, and Expression is you ability to transmit data. All of the data that you ever receive originates with another Graviton. When you think you are alone, or you are simply perceiving nature – the world – this universe – that is simply you receiving information from the DM (or LG) – another Graviton.
There are only two parts to reality – Gravitons, and the information/energy (in the form of memes) that they transmit back and fourth to each other.
I’m say that Fate is more complicated then just saying that everything is predetermined.
Empirical evidence is logical evidence. Pure logic from a pure source.
That sounds like Agnosticism, which, if it is … is exactly what I’d say, so we are in agreement on this one?
How is saying that you don’t believe that God Exist, any different then saying that NO GOD EXIST? I don’t see the difference?
Do you hold the belief that God exists?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
How about this to illustrate the point …
Do you hold the belief that (N x Z) + (Y x Z) = Q (based on no other info)?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
On this point:
1) for every reason you have that you will still exist, I can think of several why you will not (disease, accidents, natural disasters, crime, etc.)
2) You have no control over what happens. Its all be preordained by TLOP. You are powerless against the laws of physics.
3) What if you were 89 years old? Should you start assuming that the odds are you will be dead next week? When do you start the clock?
Fact is, it never hurts to assume the best outcome.
(Upchunk, Fool, Whodidi, Evildave, Diogenes, Impytimpy, sock-puppet)
Franko in ordinary type
BillyJoe in bold type
-----------------------------------------------------------
[BJ: To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP]
Wait a minute … it looks like you are pulling the switcheroo. YOU control CAR, but TLOP controls YOU. You understand CAR much better then you understand TLOP.
I can only repeat….. To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP
It might take ME 3 – 4 billion years to make a “Billyjoe”, but I bet I could make a Car in a LOT less time. What makes you think that it is any different for TLOP?
It takes 3-4 billion years to “make” homo sapiens.
A CAR can be “made” only after homo sapiens is “made”.
Therefore a CAR takes longer to be “made” than homo sapiens.
I can build a house by stacking rocks on top of each other. Are you telling me that stacked stones require more technology then making Me does?
It requires the “technology” involved in “making” of homo sapiens of which you are a member.
Just like everyone sees God, or afterlife, or “free will”, or the hidden image in those crazy hologram posters?
One man’s reality is another man’s illusions.
Holograms (?magic eye pictures) are real. It’s just that some unfortunate individuals are unable to perform the feat with their eyes which reveals the reality.
The “Color-bleeding” square is an illusion. Its not actually out there in the external world but there is definitely a representation of it in our brains which is why we all see it .
Free Will is an illusion because we all seem to have it (or to have had it at some stage of our lives )
God and Afterlife are probably delusions because there is no proof for either.
I am not going to comment, my Friend, but I assure you … I do not experience this “illusion of free will” you claim “everyone” experiences, and I am by no means the only one who does not experience it.
Okay.
Would you say then that you feel yourself following a predetermined path?
That depends on if you have a proper comprehension of Logic, in other words, it depends upon your perspective (whether there is evidence [for God and Afterlife]).
What is your perpective on Logic?
[BJ: do you really go through life thinking at every moment “I am following a predetermined path”, “I am not making any decisions, I am merely following my fate”? ]
F: I would say … that I go through life knowing that a great destiny lies before me. As I perceive that Destiny it manifests in reality.
How do you know that?
Do you mean that your knowing causes it to be real?
When you make a decision, aren’t you aware that you decision is simply based on your experiences in the past, and those experiences where based on even earlier experiences, which were based on even earlier experiences … and so on … all the way back to long before you were even born.
No. It’s only on reflection that I realize that its all physics and chemistry.
When I’m actually doing it, it seems like free will
Where are you getting this idea that there is a YOU controlling things?
No. It only seems that way.
What’s the “You” anyway? You’re just a collection of Atoms, I thought?
Yes, but a molecule is more than the sum of its atoms, an organelle more than the sum of its molecules, a cell more than the sum of its organelles, an organ more than the sum of its cells and a body are more than the sum of your organs.
Similarly “You” are more than the sum of the brains molecules.
[BJ: So it’s a choice between Fate-and-Sanity and Materialism-and-Insanity?]
F: I know it probably sounds more than a little crazy to you my Friend, but in the end your one Free Will choice is going to either put you in Heaven, or leave you trapped in the isolation of Solipsism, for the rest of this Eternity.
But…..there is no such thing as Free Will.
I thought we agreed?
Fate requires a higher power, the higher power is the thing doing the controlling – TLOP in our case…..
So the Goddess you talk about is merely TLOP?
……But Fate can be consistent with either Atheism/Materialism, or Logical deism/Materialism. In the former the source of control (Fate) is non-conscious, like a machine; in the latter the source of control is a consciousness, more evolved, but fundamentally no different then yours or mine…..
I like the former (non-conscious machine) and you like the latter (primordial consciousness)
But I would call it Materialism v Logical Deism.
Here’s the thing … if a consciousness controls your mind, then you are a consciousness…..
A pocket of consciousness within a Universal Consciousness?
…..but if a machine controls your consciousness then in reality you are a machine…..
But, if the shoe fits….and doesn’t it as far as we (objectively) know?
….Of course if you are conscious then you get to decide what is a machine, and not a machine. Either way, it doesn’t change what you … or She is, in reality.
What’s the use of a conscious decision that doesn’t reflect reality?
You could be a Fatalist as a Materialist, try living your life for a few days knowing that you control none of your actions in reality, and are instead controlled by an uncaring, unthinking, and unknowing “invisible sky-machine” (i.e. non-conscious TLOP)?
When you realize that this “invisible sky machine” seems to be going out of Her way to look out for your benefit, She doesn’t seem so “machine-like.
I am one in trillions.
The rest either didn’t come up when the dice were thrown or were thrown out afterwards.
In other words its all chance mutation and natural selection.
That’s why She SEEMS to be going out of Her way to look out for my benefit whereas She is ACTUALLY a machine.
Look carefully at what you are doing. You are simply assuming that dying is bad, when actually you have no idea if it is bad in reality. If it is somehow True that you go to a better place when you die, this individual might have been delighted to know his end was near??? ….
I don’t know many people who want to die – even those who believe in God and Afterlife.
…..Perhaps it would have given him an opportunity to bring closure to his affairs here, and prepare himself?
It was not my choice. His daughter made this decision.
But when my father’s best mate became terminally ill with lung cancer, he suffered more from panic attacks at the thought of his oncoming breathlessness and final demise than he ever did from the illness itself.
What if death is actually like an all-expense paid trip to Disney World?
Yeah….what if?
But, fantasy aside, what do we really know about life after death?
[BJ: a person who is convinced in the belief of an Afterlife who is suddenly shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken [is an example of where truth may not be beneficial]]
Once again you are begging the question. Suppose the afterlife is far better than existence here? You might anticipate it like you anticipate an upcoming vacation trip, or moving to a New and Bigger House?
Then would it be benficial for a person who believed in this fantasy to be shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken?
You assume that children have an intrinsic sense of “free will”. The fact is, that the opposite is True. Children are born as Fatalist, you have to implant a notion of “free will” in their heads.
Are you saying that children feel as if they are following a predetermined path rather than that they have a will of their own? I wonder what others think?
….it would be much easier for you and me to build a functioning “Car”, then it would for us to build a functioning “homo sapien”.
Yes.
And both require that homo sapiens is “made” first.
[BJ: Homo sapiens has not evolved to any significant extent during the last hundred years.]
F: Sure we have. For one thing … we make much better toasters.
That is not evolution. That is an expansion in the knowledge base of the species homo sapiens which has enabled toasters to evolve.
As far as I know, there are no important genetic differences between homo sapiens of today and a hundred years ago.
[If at the moment of the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP got together and decided that they wanted a Universe which resulted in Watches, and Toasters, surely they could have contrived to have these things produced more directly? Why include homo sapiens at all, unless there was some necessity for TLOP and the Initial State to include homo sapiens?
Well that is assuming the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP were able to get together to decide anything. That is part of your theory but not mine. In your theory it’s Big Things -> little things. In my theory it’s little things -> Big Things
Billyjoe … that is exactly what I am thinking about. You must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of YOU. The existence of YOU implies all that complexity (TLOP/God).
You are misunderstanding my reply.
I am saying that the watch implies all the complexity that has gone before and, therefore the watch is more complex because of the fact that it includes all the complexity that has gone before plus the extra complexity of producing the watch.
Homo sapiens implies the complexity of TLOP (not much) plus all the complexity generated by the evolution of the universe (a fair bit) plus the complexity generated by the evolution of homo sapiens from its much simpler precursors (a heap).
Complexity progressively increases form left to right.
On the other hand you are saying that TLOP contains all the complexity of which homo sapiens and watches are much simpler expressions.
….in order for the Big Bang to work, essentially you have to throw Thermodynamics out the window. The Big Bang is making a huge doo-doo on Both the Conservation of Energy, and Entropy.
Energy is a zero sum. (Energy = Mass + Gravity)
Entropy only increases overall in the closed system but this does not mean that there cannot be pockets of decreased entropy within this closed system (as, in fact, there are). As long as overall it increases
…but where did all this energy come from?
Energy is a zero sum (Energy = Mass + Gravity = 0)
Energy separates into mass and gravity but the total energy remains zero.
To wit …
What I am saying Billyjoe, that left to its own devices a Matter-System is destroyed by Entropy, while Conscious-System can resist, or even overcome the forces of Entropy. As Matter the universe has no way to form. As a consciousness, it was only a matter of Time.
Consciousness evolves over time, matter does not. Matter just sits there.
Entropy always increases globally.
Entopy can decrease locally.
This means that Mass + Gravity (that has separated out from Energy which always totals zero) can evolve locally so that Simplicity -> Complexity.
When you get the idea in your head that it is a consciousness, similar to yours, as opposed to an incomprehensible energy-matter force, then it goes a long way to resolving the mystery. … At least a good piece of it.
But where does this Complex Consciousness arise that’s generating all these lesser consciousnesses such as homo sapiens and watches?
Is it just a given? A self evident truth?
I don’t mean to belabor the point, but repetition does work …
How can I make a more complex spear so simply, but I cannot make the less “evolved” homo sapien?
Because a homo sapien “made” by a homo sapien is more evolved. More complex.
Tell me Franko what you think……
Is it harder to “make” a homo sapien or a homo sapien made by a homo sapien?
[BJ: Bayes? The only thing I know about Bayes is Bayes Rule and it has been demonstrated to be nonsense.]
Say you are on that old game show the Price is Right, there are 3 doors, 1 has a fabulous prize, the other 2 have goofy gag gifts. What are your odds of guessing the door with the Good-Prize?
I bet you are thinking it’s 1 in 3 – aren’t you?
Bayes has a magic trick. He’s gonna dopuble your odds of winning -- get them up to 2 in 3 – guaranteed.
Yes I’ve heard that one.
(Discussed at length by myself and others in the puzzles section many moons ago).
But I was mistaken about Bayes. I was thinking about a particular misapplication of Bayes Rule. You know the one about how it predicts “Doom Soon”.
Universes are generated by consciousnesses . The more evolved the consciousness generating the Universe, the more evolved the Universe. In other words, simple universe runs at low Energy, simple consciousnesses. Complex, more evolved universe -- high energy, complex more evolved consciousnesses. Like Mandelbrot, turtles all the way up, and all the way down …
And what generates consciousness then?
“Turtles all the way up and all the way down”???
No beginning and no end???
This is easy to say, Franko, but saying it doesn’t make it right.
There is no explanatory power here. You just hook into the infinite causal chain and don’t worry too much about where it leads to the left and the right.
Did you see my thread on Nothing?
Actually I have now.
First of all it seems rather axiomatic that Nothing can’t really exist … ?
Not unless you can explain how something can arise from nothing.
As I said, Hawking has attempted to do this. I am not sure whether physicists in general agree that he has done this successfully.
Not knowing how, though, doesn’t mean it there isn’t a way to do it.
At least not without a magical explanation beyond any potential for human comprehension.
I was getting on this topic there. Hawking has got himself a crystal spheres of a Theory compared to what I got. All I need to build the Omniverse is Time. That’s all that any of it is made of … even you and me …
And where does time come from?
But perhaps we can leave this to that thread.
[BJ: So it’s machines -> machines -> machines -> etc]
F: Now see, if you were a Fatalist like me, then this would make much more sense …
Why is it that you need to experience the “illusion of free will” to feel human (conscious), and to be able to deal with reality, yet in this regard you so easily accept the idea that you are simply a deterministic machine?
In other words, if you find “consciousness” an easier frame of reference then “machine” (which I would think most people would find natural) then why is it machines -> machines -> machines -> etc … instead of consciousness -- > consciousness -- > consciousness -- > etc. ?
Why is it easier to think in terms of a programming language (composed of meaningful symbols) than a machine language (composed of meaningless zeros and ones)?
But when the program runs it’s the machine language that’s producing all the output.
Why postulate a hither-to-unseen, or unknown non-entity which is “Non-conscious”, when you know that you could just insert a consciousness and be done?
In other words, if you don’t need the “matter”, then why include it in the theory?
Because with Mass comes Gravity and Mass + Gravity = zero.
We’re getting closer to getting something from nothing.
But where does consciousness come from if it came before matter (remembering that I am not impressed by the turtles argument – unless you can flesh it out a bit for me)
Essentially (and this is the abbreviated version) … You are a self aware meme. You are a meme, that is locked in an axiomatic potentially-infinite H-Mobius loop. You perceive reality, because you perceive Time. You are an individual Graviton, unique in all the Omniverse.
But what does all this mean?
There are several ways to think of it. But regardless, you can reduce you existence as an entity to a particle. This particle is your Graviton (the True-Matter part), the shell. Inside is your Soul (your MPB algorithm and database).
And what does this mean??
As a Graviton you have two abilities: Perception and Expression. Perception is your ability to receive data, and Expression is you ability to transmit data. All of the data that you ever receive originates with another Graviton. When you think you are alone, or you are simply perceiving nature – the world – this universe – that is simply you receiving information from the DM (or LG) – another Graviton.
Sounds like a nice theory, Franko, but….
There are only two parts to reality – Gravitons, and the information/energy (in the form of memes) that they transmit back and fourth to each other.
…..why should I believe this rather than some other persons intuitions about reality.
I’m say that Fate is more complicated then just saying that everything is predetermined.
So Fate is NOT predestination?
[BJ: Your conclusions about the nature of reality are based on pure logic?
No empirical evidence required?]
Empirical evidence is logical evidence. Pure logic from a pure source.
I thought empirical evidence is performing experiments to see if your intuitions are born out by the facts.
Pure logic from a pure source?
And the pure source – what is that? – your logical Goddess? – where does She come from?
How is saying that you don’t believe that God Exist, any different then saying that NO GOD EXIST? I don’t see the difference?
I said “I do not hold the belief that God exists” is different from “I believe that God does not exist.”
Can you not see the difference?
Do you hold the belief that God exists?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
No. There is no evidence that God exist so why should I believe that God exists?
There is no evidence for God so I don’t take Him into account.
As for ….
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
How about….
4) A complete lack of information – therefore why should I take it into account?
How about this to illustrate the point …
Do you hold the belief that (N x Z) + (Y x Z) = Q (based on no other info)?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
4) A complete lack of information – therefore why should I take it into account?
Give me the values of N, Z, Y and Q and I’ll bother myself about it.
1) for every reason you have that you will still exist, I can think of several why you will not (disease, accidents, natural disasters, crime, etc.)
But what are the probabilities?
2) You have no control over what happens. Its all be preordained by TLOP. You are powerless against the laws of physics.
TLOP enable me to compute the probabilities.
3) What if you were 89 years old? Should you start assuming that the odds are you will be dead next week? When do you start the clock?
The odds would shorten but I would still be more likely to be alive next week.
If I was going into heart failure following a heart attack, I would think the probability of me dying in thenext week would shorten dramatically.
Fact is, it never hurts to assume the best outcome.
I tend to expect the worst and hope for the best.
That way you tend to be more prepared when the tide turns.
BillyJoe
BillyJoe in bold type
-----------------------------------------------------------
[BJ: To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP]
Wait a minute … it looks like you are pulling the switcheroo. YOU control CAR, but TLOP controls YOU. You understand CAR much better then you understand TLOP.
I can only repeat….. To understand CAR, we first have to understand TLOP
It might take ME 3 – 4 billion years to make a “Billyjoe”, but I bet I could make a Car in a LOT less time. What makes you think that it is any different for TLOP?
It takes 3-4 billion years to “make” homo sapiens.
A CAR can be “made” only after homo sapiens is “made”.
Therefore a CAR takes longer to be “made” than homo sapiens.
I can build a house by stacking rocks on top of each other. Are you telling me that stacked stones require more technology then making Me does?
It requires the “technology” involved in “making” of homo sapiens of which you are a member.
Just like everyone sees God, or afterlife, or “free will”, or the hidden image in those crazy hologram posters?
One man’s reality is another man’s illusions.
Holograms (?magic eye pictures) are real. It’s just that some unfortunate individuals are unable to perform the feat with their eyes which reveals the reality.
The “Color-bleeding” square is an illusion. Its not actually out there in the external world but there is definitely a representation of it in our brains which is why we all see it .
Free Will is an illusion because we all seem to have it (or to have had it at some stage of our lives
)God and Afterlife are probably delusions because there is no proof for either.
I am not going to comment, my Friend, but I assure you … I do not experience this “illusion of free will” you claim “everyone” experiences, and I am by no means the only one who does not experience it.
Okay.
Would you say then that you feel yourself following a predetermined path?
That depends on if you have a proper comprehension of Logic, in other words, it depends upon your perspective (whether there is evidence [for God and Afterlife]).
What is your perpective on Logic?
[BJ: do you really go through life thinking at every moment “I am following a predetermined path”, “I am not making any decisions, I am merely following my fate”? ]
F: I would say … that I go through life knowing that a great destiny lies before me. As I perceive that Destiny it manifests in reality.
How do you know that?
Do you mean that your knowing causes it to be real?
When you make a decision, aren’t you aware that you decision is simply based on your experiences in the past, and those experiences where based on even earlier experiences, which were based on even earlier experiences … and so on … all the way back to long before you were even born.
No. It’s only on reflection that I realize that its all physics and chemistry.
When I’m actually doing it, it seems like free will
Where are you getting this idea that there is a YOU controlling things?
No. It only seems that way.
What’s the “You” anyway? You’re just a collection of Atoms, I thought?
Yes, but a molecule is more than the sum of its atoms, an organelle more than the sum of its molecules, a cell more than the sum of its organelles, an organ more than the sum of its cells and a body are more than the sum of your organs.
Similarly “You” are more than the sum of the brains molecules.
[BJ: So it’s a choice between Fate-and-Sanity and Materialism-and-Insanity?]
F: I know it probably sounds more than a little crazy to you my Friend, but in the end your one Free Will choice is going to either put you in Heaven, or leave you trapped in the isolation of Solipsism, for the rest of this Eternity.
But…..there is no such thing as Free Will.
I thought we agreed?
Fate requires a higher power, the higher power is the thing doing the controlling – TLOP in our case…..
So the Goddess you talk about is merely TLOP?
……But Fate can be consistent with either Atheism/Materialism, or Logical deism/Materialism. In the former the source of control (Fate) is non-conscious, like a machine; in the latter the source of control is a consciousness, more evolved, but fundamentally no different then yours or mine…..
I like the former (non-conscious machine) and you like the latter (primordial consciousness)
But I would call it Materialism v Logical Deism.
Here’s the thing … if a consciousness controls your mind, then you are a consciousness…..
A pocket of consciousness within a Universal Consciousness?
…..but if a machine controls your consciousness then in reality you are a machine…..
But, if the shoe fits….and doesn’t it as far as we (objectively) know?
….Of course if you are conscious then you get to decide what is a machine, and not a machine. Either way, it doesn’t change what you … or She is, in reality.
What’s the use of a conscious decision that doesn’t reflect reality?
You could be a Fatalist as a Materialist, try living your life for a few days knowing that you control none of your actions in reality, and are instead controlled by an uncaring, unthinking, and unknowing “invisible sky-machine” (i.e. non-conscious TLOP)?
When you realize that this “invisible sky machine” seems to be going out of Her way to look out for your benefit, She doesn’t seem so “machine-like.
I am one in trillions.
The rest either didn’t come up when the dice were thrown or were thrown out afterwards.
In other words its all chance mutation and natural selection.
That’s why She SEEMS to be going out of Her way to look out for my benefit whereas She is ACTUALLY a machine.
Look carefully at what you are doing. You are simply assuming that dying is bad, when actually you have no idea if it is bad in reality. If it is somehow True that you go to a better place when you die, this individual might have been delighted to know his end was near??? ….
I don’t know many people who want to die – even those who believe in God and Afterlife.
…..Perhaps it would have given him an opportunity to bring closure to his affairs here, and prepare himself?
It was not my choice. His daughter made this decision.
But when my father’s best mate became terminally ill with lung cancer, he suffered more from panic attacks at the thought of his oncoming breathlessness and final demise than he ever did from the illness itself.
What if death is actually like an all-expense paid trip to Disney World?
Yeah….what if?
But, fantasy aside, what do we really know about life after death?
[BJ: a person who is convinced in the belief of an Afterlife who is suddenly shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken [is an example of where truth may not be beneficial]]
Once again you are begging the question. Suppose the afterlife is far better than existence here? You might anticipate it like you anticipate an upcoming vacation trip, or moving to a New and Bigger House?
Then would it be benficial for a person who believed in this fantasy to be shown incontrovertable proof that his belief was mistaken?
You assume that children have an intrinsic sense of “free will”. The fact is, that the opposite is True. Children are born as Fatalist, you have to implant a notion of “free will” in their heads.
Are you saying that children feel as if they are following a predetermined path rather than that they have a will of their own? I wonder what others think?
….it would be much easier for you and me to build a functioning “Car”, then it would for us to build a functioning “homo sapien”.
Yes.
And both require that homo sapiens is “made” first.
[BJ: Homo sapiens has not evolved to any significant extent during the last hundred years.]
F: Sure we have. For one thing … we make much better toasters.
That is not evolution. That is an expansion in the knowledge base of the species homo sapiens which has enabled toasters to evolve.
As far as I know, there are no important genetic differences between homo sapiens of today and a hundred years ago.
[If at the moment of the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP got together and decided that they wanted a Universe which resulted in Watches, and Toasters, surely they could have contrived to have these things produced more directly? Why include homo sapiens at all, unless there was some necessity for TLOP and the Initial State to include homo sapiens?
Well that is assuming the Big Bang, the Initial State and TLOP were able to get together to decide anything. That is part of your theory but not mine. In your theory it’s Big Things -> little things. In my theory it’s little things -> Big Things
Billyjoe … that is exactly what I am thinking about. You must think about all the complexity that must necessarily go before the appearance of YOU. The existence of YOU implies all that complexity (TLOP/God).
You are misunderstanding my reply.
I am saying that the watch implies all the complexity that has gone before and, therefore the watch is more complex because of the fact that it includes all the complexity that has gone before plus the extra complexity of producing the watch.
Homo sapiens implies the complexity of TLOP (not much) plus all the complexity generated by the evolution of the universe (a fair bit) plus the complexity generated by the evolution of homo sapiens from its much simpler precursors (a heap).
Complexity progressively increases form left to right.
On the other hand you are saying that TLOP contains all the complexity of which homo sapiens and watches are much simpler expressions.
….in order for the Big Bang to work, essentially you have to throw Thermodynamics out the window. The Big Bang is making a huge doo-doo on Both the Conservation of Energy, and Entropy.
Energy is a zero sum. (Energy = Mass + Gravity)
Entropy only increases overall in the closed system but this does not mean that there cannot be pockets of decreased entropy within this closed system (as, in fact, there are). As long as overall it increases
…but where did all this energy come from?
Energy is a zero sum (Energy = Mass + Gravity = 0)
Energy separates into mass and gravity but the total energy remains zero.
To wit …
What I am saying Billyjoe, that left to its own devices a Matter-System is destroyed by Entropy, while Conscious-System can resist, or even overcome the forces of Entropy. As Matter the universe has no way to form. As a consciousness, it was only a matter of Time.
Consciousness evolves over time, matter does not. Matter just sits there.
Entropy always increases globally.
Entopy can decrease locally.
This means that Mass + Gravity (that has separated out from Energy which always totals zero) can evolve locally so that Simplicity -> Complexity.
When you get the idea in your head that it is a consciousness, similar to yours, as opposed to an incomprehensible energy-matter force, then it goes a long way to resolving the mystery. … At least a good piece of it.
But where does this Complex Consciousness arise that’s generating all these lesser consciousnesses such as homo sapiens and watches?
Is it just a given? A self evident truth?
I don’t mean to belabor the point, but repetition does work …
How can I make a more complex spear so simply, but I cannot make the less “evolved” homo sapien?
Because a homo sapien “made” by a homo sapien is more evolved. More complex.
Tell me Franko what you think……
Is it harder to “make” a homo sapien or a homo sapien made by a homo sapien?
[BJ: Bayes? The only thing I know about Bayes is Bayes Rule and it has been demonstrated to be nonsense.]
Say you are on that old game show the Price is Right, there are 3 doors, 1 has a fabulous prize, the other 2 have goofy gag gifts. What are your odds of guessing the door with the Good-Prize?
I bet you are thinking it’s 1 in 3 – aren’t you?
Bayes has a magic trick. He’s gonna dopuble your odds of winning -- get them up to 2 in 3 – guaranteed.
Yes I’ve heard that one.
(Discussed at length by myself and others in the puzzles section many moons ago).
But I was mistaken about Bayes. I was thinking about a particular misapplication of Bayes Rule. You know the one about how it predicts “Doom Soon”.
Universes are generated by consciousnesses . The more evolved the consciousness generating the Universe, the more evolved the Universe. In other words, simple universe runs at low Energy, simple consciousnesses. Complex, more evolved universe -- high energy, complex more evolved consciousnesses. Like Mandelbrot, turtles all the way up, and all the way down …
And what generates consciousness then?
“Turtles all the way up and all the way down”???
No beginning and no end???
This is easy to say, Franko, but saying it doesn’t make it right.
There is no explanatory power here. You just hook into the infinite causal chain and don’t worry too much about where it leads to the left and the right.
Did you see my thread on Nothing?
Actually I have now.
First of all it seems rather axiomatic that Nothing can’t really exist … ?
Not unless you can explain how something can arise from nothing.
As I said, Hawking has attempted to do this. I am not sure whether physicists in general agree that he has done this successfully.
Not knowing how, though, doesn’t mean it there isn’t a way to do it.
At least not without a magical explanation beyond any potential for human comprehension.
I was getting on this topic there. Hawking has got himself a crystal spheres of a Theory compared to what I got. All I need to build the Omniverse is Time. That’s all that any of it is made of … even you and me …
And where does time come from?
But perhaps we can leave this to that thread.
[BJ: So it’s machines -> machines -> machines -> etc]
F: Now see, if you were a Fatalist like me, then this would make much more sense …
Why is it that you need to experience the “illusion of free will” to feel human (conscious), and to be able to deal with reality, yet in this regard you so easily accept the idea that you are simply a deterministic machine?
In other words, if you find “consciousness” an easier frame of reference then “machine” (which I would think most people would find natural) then why is it machines -> machines -> machines -> etc … instead of consciousness -- > consciousness -- > consciousness -- > etc. ?
Why is it easier to think in terms of a programming language (composed of meaningful symbols) than a machine language (composed of meaningless zeros and ones)?
But when the program runs it’s the machine language that’s producing all the output.
Why postulate a hither-to-unseen, or unknown non-entity which is “Non-conscious”, when you know that you could just insert a consciousness and be done?
In other words, if you don’t need the “matter”, then why include it in the theory?
Because with Mass comes Gravity and Mass + Gravity = zero.
We’re getting closer to getting something from nothing.
But where does consciousness come from if it came before matter (remembering that I am not impressed by the turtles argument – unless you can flesh it out a bit for me)
Essentially (and this is the abbreviated version) … You are a self aware meme. You are a meme, that is locked in an axiomatic potentially-infinite H-Mobius loop. You perceive reality, because you perceive Time. You are an individual Graviton, unique in all the Omniverse.
But what does all this mean?
There are several ways to think of it. But regardless, you can reduce you existence as an entity to a particle. This particle is your Graviton (the True-Matter part), the shell. Inside is your Soul (your MPB algorithm and database).
And what does this mean??
As a Graviton you have two abilities: Perception and Expression. Perception is your ability to receive data, and Expression is you ability to transmit data. All of the data that you ever receive originates with another Graviton. When you think you are alone, or you are simply perceiving nature – the world – this universe – that is simply you receiving information from the DM (or LG) – another Graviton.
Sounds like a nice theory, Franko, but….
There are only two parts to reality – Gravitons, and the information/energy (in the form of memes) that they transmit back and fourth to each other.
…..why should I believe this rather than some other persons intuitions about reality.
I’m say that Fate is more complicated then just saying that everything is predetermined.
So Fate is NOT predestination?
[BJ: Your conclusions about the nature of reality are based on pure logic?
No empirical evidence required?]
Empirical evidence is logical evidence. Pure logic from a pure source.
I thought empirical evidence is performing experiments to see if your intuitions are born out by the facts.
Pure logic from a pure source?
And the pure source – what is that? – your logical Goddess? – where does She come from?
How is saying that you don’t believe that God Exist, any different then saying that NO GOD EXIST? I don’t see the difference?
I said “I do not hold the belief that God exists” is different from “I believe that God does not exist.”
Can you not see the difference?
Do you hold the belief that God exists?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
No. There is no evidence that God exist so why should I believe that God exists?
There is no evidence for God so I don’t take Him into account.
As for ….
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
How about….
4) A complete lack of information – therefore why should I take it into account?
How about this to illustrate the point …
Do you hold the belief that (N x Z) + (Y x Z) = Q (based on no other info)?
1) Yes - TRUE (Theism/Deism)
2) No - FALSE (Atheism)
3) Not Enough Information - UNKNOWN (Agnosticism)
4) A complete lack of information – therefore why should I take it into account?
Give me the values of N, Z, Y and Q and I’ll bother myself about it.
1) for every reason you have that you will still exist, I can think of several why you will not (disease, accidents, natural disasters, crime, etc.)
But what are the probabilities?
2) You have no control over what happens. Its all be preordained by TLOP. You are powerless against the laws of physics.
TLOP enable me to compute the probabilities.
3) What if you were 89 years old? Should you start assuming that the odds are you will be dead next week? When do you start the clock?
The odds would shorten but I would still be more likely to be alive next week.
If I was going into heart failure following a heart attack, I would think the probability of me dying in thenext week would shorten dramatically.
Fact is, it never hurts to assume the best outcome.
I tend to expect the worst and hope for the best.
That way you tend to be more prepared when the tide turns.
BillyJoe
Billyjoe:
That’s simply not True. There are plenty of 16 year old kids who can control a CAR, but they don’t know squat about controlling TLOP.
TLOP controls YOU controls CAR
Says who? What makes you so certain that only humans build CARS?
Is a CAR more or less complex than the MOON? TLOP made the MOON didn’t it? Are you telling me that TLOP can build the MOON, but NOT build a CAR?
Really, I still bet I can make a CAR quicker than you can make a Human.
You are trying to change the test. You are saying that to make a CAR you have to actually make two things – a human, and a car. Well if that is the case, then don’t you first have to make TLOP before you can make a Human? If a human is harder to make than a car, then doesn’t that imply that TLOP is harder to make than a human?
No it doesn’t. Sometimes rocks are stacked naturally by TLOP. How can we tell which stacked stones are the more complex and evolved human-stacked variety, and which types are the less complex and evolved Tlop-stacked variety? If you are claiming that there is a difference in complexity, then we should be able to observe this difference.
There is plenty of proof for God and afterlife, but not while you are deluded with crazy notions of “free will”.
Yes.
The biggest immediate difference I notice, is that I do not declare something UNKNOWN to be FALSE automatically.
(N x P) + R = Z
With no other information I would claim that this equation is UNKNOWN. An A-Theists would say that based on no evidence it is FALSE. This is ludicrous in my way of thinking, I do not consider it logical at all.
1) I know it, because I know that the Truth is always beneficial for Me.
2) My perception is what ultimately causes it to manifest. Without perception, nothing exist.
Don’t take this the wrong way my friend, but A-Theism diminishes your perception of Time.
Is the Moon more than the sum of its atoms and molecules? In a way yes, but that doesn’t mean the Moon has “free will”. It also doesn’t mean that the Moon isn’t doing what it is commanded to do by TLOP, just like you. Your “orbit” is just slightly harder to perceive.
You get One True Free Will choice … essentially, is it better to exist, or not exist? All of your other “decisions” are a reaffirmation of this choice in one form or another.
Tlop is like your words in these posts. In other words, any way that you communicate with me is ultimately you transmitting a meme to me. Tlop is the mechanism that the LG uses to transmit Her memes to you.
Let me put it another way:
BillyJoe is To Initial State (Goddess) what Billyjoe’s words are to To the Laws of Physics (TLOP).
The LG is the “Physics” in TLOP. Just like any of your communications follow the protocol of TLOB (The Laws of Billyjoe).
Right … more or less …
According to Atheism/Pseudo-Materialism, “God” (Source of Tlop) is an incomprehensible invisible mystery non-conscious, sorta, kinda, “machine-like” thingy-ma-bob.
According to Logical deism/Materialism, “God” (source of Tlop) is just another Graviton, like You or Me.
Yeah … that sounds right.
Well why do you think the A-Theists have invented “free will”? It’s because they don’t like the idea of being machines. Machines obey Fate, they are controlled by their program.
But my point is that suppose you found out that you were a robot? Would it really change anything? Would it make you less human, less conscious?
But if it makes your algorithm function more efficiently, then it does effect reality.
That’s just question begging on your part. Did the Ocean need a human to build it first? How about the grand canyon? Is the ocean more or less complex than a Car? Less? Why because a human didn’t make the ocean? That’s circular logic.
Without making reference to humans, provide a definition of complexity that explains why a CAR is more complex than the Moon (or the Ocean, or the Grand Canyon)?
Like I said, we know more about TOASTERS, which means that TLOP knows more about TOASTERS, why do you claim that TOASTERS have gained information (evolved), we have gained information (evolved), but TLOP has NOR gained information (evolved). Why the contradiction?
Yes, but aren’t there important “genetic” differences between TOASTERS of today, and a hundred years ago?
Well if TLOP and the Initial state didn’t determine the current state of the Universe (Reality), then what did? Was it magic?
In my theory a simple, low energy system evolves into a complex, high energy system over Time.
In your system it would seem that a simple, high energy system develops into a simpler, lower energy system over Time.
After all, TLOP makes more things than humans which make more things than toasters.
Once again, I can break rocks by smashing them on the ground. TLOP can similarly break rocks. Why are the rocks that I smash more complex then the ones TLOP smashes according to you?
Billyjoe, is a watch more complex, or less complex than a solar system? Our solar system is certainly a much more accurate time keeper then a watch, so how can you claim that the watch is more complex than a solar system? Doesn’t Tlop already make much more complex watches then we humans do?
And Tlop does not encompass that entire set?
I don’t see how you can make that statement. You are trying to claim that the subset is greater then the whole set.
Maybe, but Entropy is increasing over Time for the universe as a whole (at least according to the A-Theist). How did the Entropy of all the energy start off so low? Why doesn’t energy just appear all the time if it is so simple?
Why haven’t there been any more “Bangs” since the big one?
Exactly! So how did all of this USEABLE energy just magically appear out of the void one day 12.7 billion years ago? Like I said, for the A-Theists magical religion to be true, you have to take a poop on your most solid Science – Thermodynamics.
Of course if you listen to Godel and Einstein instead …
No one has ever gotten that “theory” to work, and no one ever will (well … other than in their own mind I mean …)
Well I agree, but that is my point, if Entropy ALWAYS increases globally, then how do you account for the MASSIVE contradiction of ENTROPY decreasing globally at the moment of the Big Bang?
The answer is simple, but it would be a long conversation. Suffice to say, this isn’t the only universe to exist, or the only one that will exist. Just as we evolve, so do universes, and so does reality itself.
The LG is the product of such evolution, but she is “New”, like us. She is a product of the original primordial consciousness that the LD call the Progenitor Solipsist (PS). This entity was the first consciousness (although he was very unlike us). Eventually, this entity split himself, and when he did, evolution as we know it began. We are all his descendants … he is our ancestor.
But the PS, like ourselves, is made out of True-Matter. Essentially he is made out of self-aware Time. But like I said … that is a long conversation.
… and speaking of which, I am out of time. I’ll have to get to the rest of your post a little later.
Best regards …
That’s simply not True. There are plenty of 16 year old kids who can control a CAR, but they don’t know squat about controlling TLOP.
TLOP controls YOU controls CAR
Says who? What makes you so certain that only humans build CARS?
Is a CAR more or less complex than the MOON? TLOP made the MOON didn’t it? Are you telling me that TLOP can build the MOON, but NOT build a CAR?
Really, I still bet I can make a CAR quicker than you can make a Human.
You are trying to change the test. You are saying that to make a CAR you have to actually make two things – a human, and a car. Well if that is the case, then don’t you first have to make TLOP before you can make a Human? If a human is harder to make than a car, then doesn’t that imply that TLOP is harder to make than a human?
No it doesn’t. Sometimes rocks are stacked naturally by TLOP. How can we tell which stacked stones are the more complex and evolved human-stacked variety, and which types are the less complex and evolved Tlop-stacked variety? If you are claiming that there is a difference in complexity, then we should be able to observe this difference.
There is plenty of proof for God and afterlife, but not while you are deluded with crazy notions of “free will”.
Yes.
The biggest immediate difference I notice, is that I do not declare something UNKNOWN to be FALSE automatically.
(N x P) + R = Z
With no other information I would claim that this equation is UNKNOWN. An A-Theists would say that based on no evidence it is FALSE. This is ludicrous in my way of thinking, I do not consider it logical at all.
1) I know it, because I know that the Truth is always beneficial for Me.
2) My perception is what ultimately causes it to manifest. Without perception, nothing exist.
Don’t take this the wrong way my friend, but A-Theism diminishes your perception of Time.
Is the Moon more than the sum of its atoms and molecules? In a way yes, but that doesn’t mean the Moon has “free will”. It also doesn’t mean that the Moon isn’t doing what it is commanded to do by TLOP, just like you. Your “orbit” is just slightly harder to perceive.
You get One True Free Will choice … essentially, is it better to exist, or not exist? All of your other “decisions” are a reaffirmation of this choice in one form or another.
Tlop is like your words in these posts. In other words, any way that you communicate with me is ultimately you transmitting a meme to me. Tlop is the mechanism that the LG uses to transmit Her memes to you.
Let me put it another way:
BillyJoe is To Initial State (Goddess) what Billyjoe’s words are to To the Laws of Physics (TLOP).
The LG is the “Physics” in TLOP. Just like any of your communications follow the protocol of TLOB (The Laws of Billyjoe).
Right … more or less …
According to Atheism/Pseudo-Materialism, “God” (Source of Tlop) is an incomprehensible invisible mystery non-conscious, sorta, kinda, “machine-like” thingy-ma-bob.
According to Logical deism/Materialism, “God” (source of Tlop) is just another Graviton, like You or Me.
Yeah … that sounds right.
Well why do you think the A-Theists have invented “free will”? It’s because they don’t like the idea of being machines. Machines obey Fate, they are controlled by their program.
But my point is that suppose you found out that you were a robot? Would it really change anything? Would it make you less human, less conscious?
But if it makes your algorithm function more efficiently, then it does effect reality.
That’s just question begging on your part. Did the Ocean need a human to build it first? How about the grand canyon? Is the ocean more or less complex than a Car? Less? Why because a human didn’t make the ocean? That’s circular logic.
Without making reference to humans, provide a definition of complexity that explains why a CAR is more complex than the Moon (or the Ocean, or the Grand Canyon)?
Like I said, we know more about TOASTERS, which means that TLOP knows more about TOASTERS, why do you claim that TOASTERS have gained information (evolved), we have gained information (evolved), but TLOP has NOR gained information (evolved). Why the contradiction?
Yes, but aren’t there important “genetic” differences between TOASTERS of today, and a hundred years ago?
Well if TLOP and the Initial state didn’t determine the current state of the Universe (Reality), then what did? Was it magic?
In my theory a simple, low energy system evolves into a complex, high energy system over Time.
In your system it would seem that a simple, high energy system develops into a simpler, lower energy system over Time.
After all, TLOP makes more things than humans which make more things than toasters.
Once again, I can break rocks by smashing them on the ground. TLOP can similarly break rocks. Why are the rocks that I smash more complex then the ones TLOP smashes according to you?
Billyjoe, is a watch more complex, or less complex than a solar system? Our solar system is certainly a much more accurate time keeper then a watch, so how can you claim that the watch is more complex than a solar system? Doesn’t Tlop already make much more complex watches then we humans do?
And Tlop does not encompass that entire set?
I don’t see how you can make that statement. You are trying to claim that the subset is greater then the whole set.
Maybe, but Entropy is increasing over Time for the universe as a whole (at least according to the A-Theist). How did the Entropy of all the energy start off so low? Why doesn’t energy just appear all the time if it is so simple?
Why haven’t there been any more “Bangs” since the big one?
Exactly! So how did all of this USEABLE energy just magically appear out of the void one day 12.7 billion years ago? Like I said, for the A-Theists magical religion to be true, you have to take a poop on your most solid Science – Thermodynamics.
Of course if you listen to Godel and Einstein instead …
No one has ever gotten that “theory” to work, and no one ever will (well … other than in their own mind I mean …)
Well I agree, but that is my point, if Entropy ALWAYS increases globally, then how do you account for the MASSIVE contradiction of ENTROPY decreasing globally at the moment of the Big Bang?
The answer is simple, but it would be a long conversation. Suffice to say, this isn’t the only universe to exist, or the only one that will exist. Just as we evolve, so do universes, and so does reality itself.
The LG is the product of such evolution, but she is “New”, like us. She is a product of the original primordial consciousness that the LD call the Progenitor Solipsist (PS). This entity was the first consciousness (although he was very unlike us). Eventually, this entity split himself, and when he did, evolution as we know it began. We are all his descendants … he is our ancestor.
But the PS, like ourselves, is made out of True-Matter. Essentially he is made out of self-aware Time. But like I said … that is a long conversation.
… and speaking of which, I am out of time. I’ll have to get to the rest of your post a little later.
Best regards …
CWL
Funkateer
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2002
- Messages
- 1,401
Franko said:
Well then Franko, are you saying that the Progenitor Solipsist just "magically appeared"?
Wouldn't a more parsimonious theory be that "the laws of physics" just magically appeared? Why add (i) a Logical Goddess and (ii) a Progenitor Solipsist?
Why don't you worship the Progenitor Solipsist as he/she/it is clearly superior to the Logical Goddess?
CWL,
Well then CWL, are you saying that the ENTIRE UNIVERSE just "magically appeared" (in the Big Bang)?
honestly CWL I can make a rudimentary consciousness appear A LOT easier than you can make an Entire Universe appear …
Wouldn't a more parsimonious theory be that "consciousness" just naturally appeared? Why add (i) an Entire Energy Filled Universe and (ii) a complete set of Laws (TLOP)?
Why don't you worship a piece of Toast (or a Taco) according to Tricky (and the A-Theists) clearly it is superior/more complex to YOU?
Well then CWL, are you saying that the ENTIRE UNIVERSE just "magically appeared" (in the Big Bang)?
honestly CWL I can make a rudimentary consciousness appear A LOT easier than you can make an Entire Universe appear …
Wouldn't a more parsimonious theory be that "consciousness" just naturally appeared? Why add (i) an Entire Energy Filled Universe and (ii) a complete set of Laws (TLOP)?
Why don't you worship a piece of Toast (or a Taco) according to Tricky (and the A-Theists) clearly it is superior/more complex to YOU?
Guest
Unregistered
G
Sorry if I missed this, but how exactly did you make a rudimentary consiousness appear again?
Franko said:
Hold up...so it was the atheists that invented free will? Why is it that the people I see most often playing the free will card are in fact christians? Is there a single atheist here that has actually said they believed in free will...every time I see you bring it up I see someone informing you once again that they never said they believed it in the first place.
Besides this, I would like to comment on your butchery of what the laws of physics actually are. Your first problem is that you don't seem to actually understand them very well at all (especially quantum mechanics and general relativity). Your second problem is that somewhere along the line you got caught up in a bunch of psuedoscientific crap. You keep talking about memes and gravitons...[Inigo Montoya]you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means[/Inigo Montoya]. This is just one of the words for which you use a definition that I've never seen a single other person actually use. Your third problem is that you needlessly anthropomorphize the laws of physics. Here's a hint...there is a big difference between a consciousness controlling something, and a set of rules dictating action. The laws of physics are just a set of rules, there is nothing to indicate that the sum collection of those rules is somehow conscious.
Probably because energy didn't "just appear" (strawman).
There quite possibly have been. What you fail to take into account is that since the big bang originated from absolute vacuum, and no absolute vacuum exists in our universe (because our universe by definition is a hypervolume of spacetime), a big bang type event could not possibly take place IN our universe. Outside our universe is another story...but just try observing something outside our universe...not so easy.
Once again, a quantum fluctuation in the ground state of absolute vacuum. It does not violate thermodynamics at all.
Blatant appeal to authority...authority that is well over a half a century old as well...why don't you join us in this millenium?
It works just fine mathematically, and it happens to conform to what we know of the topology of our universe. What the hell else are you looking for from theoretical physics?
Quite easily...it didn't decrease at the moment of the big bang. There was no entropy before the big bang, it went from undefined to an actual value. That is not a decrease.
Riiiiiiiight...so what exactly is "True-Matter"? What is your evidence that it even exists? I've asked something similar in your nothing thread but have not gotten a reply...what about the nature of time suggests that it would necessarily produce a consciousness or that time itself is in fact self-aware? Could you possibly anthropomorphize just a tad more?
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
So it started with a rudimetary consciousness and became an entire universe? So NOW you are saying that something complicated came from something simple??
Rudimentary consciousness -> Universe -> TLOP -> You -> Toaster
Ehhh? Are you sure you wanna do that?
Again, the energy filled universe and TLOP did appear somewhere along the line. So what made them? The rudimentary consciousness? Magic?
Methinks you are contradicting yourself.
Hans
Guest
Unregistered
G
Sorry, did I do something wrong, I have been trying to follow along the way, but I can't see where it is more likely, or even more possible that a rudimentary consiousness spontaneously appeared than the the universe diverged from a non-consious event.
edited for tags
Why do people who believe in "free will" need to pray so much?
Prayer is what you do when you don't have "free will".
The Christians (as well as other Theists) obey God's will, not some illusionary "free will" that you A-Theists made up.