 |
| |
|
|
Enigma_Nova
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Natalinasmpf
Nothing is objective, everything is subjective. |
In your subjective opinion, of course. 
The way I see it, believing in subjectivity works for some people, and believing in objectivity works for others.
I apply the two beliefs where I think they work best.
I figure that beliefs are tools and utilities rather than truths or constants.
You believe something because it fits in with what you understand, and it helps with what you (both consciously and unconsciously) want.
As understandings and desires change with new beliefs, the system reformulates itself.
If you disagree, either this contradicts another belief you have, or it doesn't suit your tastes. Either way, you prove my point. 
Our core beliefs tend to reinforce themselves...
These circular arguments are our personality.
From here, we get subjective processing of information - even if the information is from an objective source.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Enigma_Nova
|
|
quote:
Whoha
The problem with having all of us being inside a computer is that the simulation is pretty much perfect. Where are all the errors that would happen in such a system? |
Found them!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Nabvrimn
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by binTravkin
Piece of code:
======
$string = your sentence above;
$res = check_possibility($string);
echo 'Possibility: ' . $res;
======
Output:
-----------------
Possibility: 0 |
Sory, but that's a Turing Unsolvable problem you're talking about there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
Exactly! Its all subjective!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
then God doesn't really exist |
Not necessarily.
Maybe its even recurring. You are a brain in a tank, which the tank is actually a simulation of another simulation of another....
Then the final layer, God exists. But all the previous layers, although self-aware, do not have souls, or isn't recorded in the book of life.
quote:
Life has no other purpose but to be living... |
That without a proper higher virtue seems meaningless.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Quezacotl06
|
|
We should not be trying to find a society that is Utopia (perfect society), because perfection does not exist, it is a concept wrapped around your personal fancies, just multiplied thousands fold. The 7 have different versions of Utopia, because they have different visions of what a society is.
Lal--Society exists to build better lives that have meaning on either a personal, national, or idealistic level. Yang-- Society is a self-justifying system, whos functions and needs are to be fulfilled by the building blocks (people). Any action against the whole is an action against all other equals (people), and is unethical.
Morgan--Society is the product of individual cooperation, and exists as a forum of voluntary exchange between those who choose to participate in it.
You guys get the picture. From each of those definitions, their Utopia seems perfectly rational. But is the definition right?
And as for the commie, calling morgan as a society of whores and mercenaries is a punishment to the underprivleged, those who have never experienced the joy of commerce, and the rewards of wealth. Besides, I wonder if you would even be allowed to exchange ideas as we do here if tin-pot dictatorships like Yang's get their way.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-08-2004 02:18
|