GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I wouldn't have watched the video this time because I was sick of the little brown alien looking "angel" in most of Arcane's videos. (SO0o... thx enorbet... ) Still tho cutting Pi off doesn't work it's infinity stop trying to solve "everything!"
Dimitri: If Atlas holds up the world, what holds up Atlas?
Tasso: Atlas stands on the back of a turtle.
Dimitri: But what does the turtle stand on?
Tasso: Another turtle.
Dimitri: And what does that turtle stand on?
Tasso: My dear Dimitri, it’s turtles all the way down!
This bit of ancient Greek dialogue perfectly illustrates the
philosophical notion of infinite regress, a concept that comes
up when we ask if there is a First Cause—of life, of the uni-
verse, of time and space, and most significantly, of a Cre-
ator. Something must have created the Creator, so the causal
buck—or turtle—cannot stop with him. Or with the Creator
behind him. Or the one behind him. It’s Creators all the way
down—or up, if that seems like the right direction for chasing
down Creators.
If you find that infinite regress is getting you no*** -
where fast, you might consider the doctrine of creatio ex
nihilo—creation out of nothing—or, as John Lennon
put it in a slightly different context, “Before Elvis, there
was nothing.”
I'd like to post the whole book but that would provide many problems just like
god\s\'s\' \$...*(period)
K.O.... just one more but this is it:
Quote:
But let’s lend an ear to old Tasso again. As well as being
illuminating, his rejoinder—“It’s turtles all the way down!”—
definitely has the ring of a punch line. Ba-da-bing!
That’s no surprise to us. The construction and payoff of
jokes and the construction and payoff of philosophical con-
cepts are made out of the same stuff. They tease the mind in
similar ways. That’s because philosophy and jokes proceed
from the same impulse: to confound our sense of the way
things are, to flip our worlds upside down, and to ferret out
hidden, often uncomfortable, truths about life. What the phi-
losopher calls an insight, the gagster calls a zinger.
...
We could go on and on—and in fact we will, from Agnos-
ticism to Zen, from Hermeneutics to Eternity. We will show
how philosophical concepts can be illuminated by jokes and
how many jokes are loaded with fascinating philosophical
content. Wait a second, are those two notions the same? Can
we get back to you on that?
...
Questions beget questions, and those questions beget another
whole generation of questions. It’s questions all the way down.
...
“Ah, yes, the secret of life,” the guru says. “The secret of life is
a teacup.”
“A teacup? I came all the way up here to find the meaning of
life, and you tell me it’s a teacup!”
The guru shrugs. “So maybe it isn’t a teacup.”
This guru is acknowledging that formulating the telos of
life is a slippery business. Furthermore, it’s not everybody’s
cup of tea.
Last edited by jamison20000e; 12-06-2014 at 11:00 AM.
Dimitri: If Atlas holds up the world, what holds up Atlas?
Tasso: Atlas stands on the back of a turtle.
Dimitri: But what does the turtle stand on?
Tasso: Another turtle.
Dimitri: And what does that turtle stand on?
Tasso: My dear Dimitri, it’s turtles all the way down!
I like turtles, especially when they relate to interesting problems:
Apparently Aristotle himself was thinking about some kind of disguised (and finite) turtle stack, supported by a super-everything turtle (of course he gave it a different name, i.e. "unmoved mover"). This reminds me of the alleged "necessary being", which is discussed (among many other interesting things) in this article:
The "necessary being" problem was also discussed in 1948 by Bertrand Russell and Frederick Copleston, in a famous radio broadcast (BBC) whose transcription is available here:
Wow! Arcane I am truly impressed. That is perhaps the first video link you have posted that smacks of real logic and had me howling in laughter on the floor while doing it. "The Mind's Arse" just bowled me over XD. Frankly since you have referred to so-called "Ancient Knowledge" and "Sacred" items, I really didn't at all expect this from you and it is a most welcome evolution.... that is, unless you actually buy into that Jordan charlatan. To be honest, I rather thought from past posts he was more "up your alley".
Why so surprised? If you have paid more attention then you would see that i am not against or for(about) some origin theory in this except truth! Original science was without BIAS but today it is dogmatic. But you really need reality check if you think we know everything - we just know more than yesterday. Just trying to help this debate rolling forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamison20000e
I wouldn't have watched the video this time because I was sick of the little brown alien looking "angel" in most of Arcane's videos.{...}
You mean Jeffrey from DM2525 videos? He is white but "art of trolling" works both ways.
Last edited by Arcane; 12-13-2014 at 07:09 AM.
Reason: link
Copleston: Well, my position is the affirmative position that such a being actually exists, and that His existence can be proved philosophically.
Like the spaghetti monster...
Quote:
would you agree that if God does not exist, human beings and human history can have no other purpose than the purpose they choose to give themselves, which -- in practice -- is likely to mean the purpose which those impose who have the power to impose it?
"those impose who have the power to impose it" a women gives birth to a baby and puts in a dumpster, the baby dies, women gives birth but puts her baby in private and homeschooling it thrives; we (swaggering and obtuse) the only gods! http://godisimaginary.com/
Gods or clods?
gospel\gossip
Arcane this (eccd74 not white ) is the little alien\angel looking thingy I was referring to http://youtu.be/m3vktorWOno?list=UUL...shgq8TqwIjMdCQ ...
Does it sound racist if I say that black guy or those green grapes or is that just the way some of us hear it?
ping Arcane - My apologies I rather gathered you were into mysticism and maybe even occasionally mumbled "forgotten, hidden ancient knowledge..... ummm probably stowed away by Illuminati".
One correction if I may. Individual scientists can be dogmatic, but Science is a process and a tool for exploration and self-correction and by definition cannot be dogmatic.
self-correction and by definition cannot be dogmatic.
Unless your paycheck needs your chosen discipline conclusions for you to survive in comfort.
Then all bets are off.
The Sphinx in Egypt comes to mind on how divided people get on whether to dig under it or not.
Then there are interpretations on what carvings mean. Like
Then anyone else trying to self correct gets ridiculed or censored or held back.
So I guess a lot of things come into play when it comes to people in general.
Whether religion or science.
Archaeology is a Science? No?
I wanna Time Machine!
When do I want? It doesn't Matter!
It sure would settle a lot of questions in this thread though.
Everyone in a complex system has a slightly different interpretation. The more interpretations we gather, the easier it becomes to gain a sense of the whole.
--Margaret J. Wheatley
Ten people Ten ways to decipher (100%+\- brain power that way ) so if you can ask the creator\s, then if need be the follower\s,,, if that's not possible? Don't read too much into it. Then maybe except that infinite regressions or something from nothing maybe crazy.
Could you believe in god\s, an everything creator or spirits separately or do they all tie together?
For example could someone guess there is a start to it all
Ten people Ten ways to decipher (100%+\- brain power that way ) so if you can ask the creator\s, then if need be the follower\s,,, if that's not possible? Don't read too much into it. Then maybe except that infinite regressions or something from nothing maybe crazy.
Could you believe in god\s, an everything creator or spirits separately or do they all tie together?
For example could someone guess there is a start to it all
but not buy into ghosts or conversely vampires?
I am a christian and I don't believe in vampires as portrayed in the movies. I do believe that there is a scientific answer to things like vampires and werewolves because science can explain everything. In the case of vampires, for instance, I think that they were originally simple cannibals in their time but that superstitious people turned the into a thing of myth and legend. Werewolves, similarity were merely large wolves that preyed on humans from time to time; just like vamps, the people of the time turned them into something they weren't. I'm not saying the people of that time period were less intelligent than we are; rather they lived in a darker world that led them to see things they didn't understand in a darker light. These are just my thoughts, and I will freely admit they may be flawed.
Individual scientists can be dogmatic, but Science is a process and a tool for exploration and self-correction and by definition cannot be dogmatic.
Unless your paycheck needs your chosen discipline conclusions for you to survive in comfort. Then all bets are off.
That's true, rokytnji, this probably happens. However, I wouldn't call this an attitude to self-correction, but to self-corruption (pun intended) which has not much to do with science and genuine scientific research.
To the current unconscious mind unprovable is *fun, religion (like "undead") is vague; it's not right it's not even wrongperiod
--/Videos/Phyc/Introduction to psychology @ Yale University/3. Freud.wmv
:editS
Last edited by jamison20000e; 12-14-2014 at 02:07 AM.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.