unreality

what creationist is doing this?

I'm afraid I didn't really clarify my point. I think you mistook me for saying that we should ignore certain evidences. Well like I said earlier, it's important to look at everything you see and hear and learn because that's our only true input. We have to make sure we are getting as much information from the outside world as we can (or are physically/mentally able haha). My real point was that, say everyone has powerful spiritual experiences that essentially were the deciding factor in the person's religious choices from that point forward. If no rational reasoning went into analyzing that experience other than blindly justifying it as opposed to thinking deeply about it, then it can be said to be 100% intuition-based, and therefore I exaggerated by saying "not worth discussing" because there was no reason involved in the making of the decision and therefore no point to an argument between two people whose intuitions differed. nor did I mean to actually not discuss it; I would discuss it anyway even if it's pointless since I'm more of a "journey" then a "destination" guy

I agree 100% about the power of intuition. Our conscious mind is only the tip of the iceberg... but like you said, it can be misleading in the face of questions that haven't been ruminating in the genetic cloud of human collective unconscious for thousands of years, things like when to run from tigers. But like you also side, that doesn't mean we should completely ignore what our intuition tells us... just that we should incorporate it justly. Even if we went entirely by intuition, some people might feel intrinsically that god exists, others won't, and almost everyone will have a different intuition on it. That's how it is in real life... and so if intuition is all we have then nothing is to be gained from even discussing it... but we have another tool, the logical or at least the quasirational thought processes of our conscious mind. We can't influence our natural intuition but we can at least analyze it and ask why. If we feel the need for a god, we can ask ourselves "does that mean there IS a god or do I just want comfort?" (just a random example, I don't know). What I'm saying is that for tough questions like the existence of a deity or any other powerful spiritual or moral dilemma, we cannot limit ourselves to one faculty of the mind or the other: we need to take into consideration both logic/conscious thought/rationality with emotion/subconscious mind/intuition/instinct

Semper, we are more alike than you think. I just had to make sure that you weren't one of those that advocates open-mindedness then talks how all other religions are false. I respect you for your respect of ALL religions, and I agree with you that religion - even faith - is a human construction built on a more fundamental principle. Also pastafarianism is one big joke, I hope you realize that. The unreasonableness of it is the whole point. The creator of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, however fun it has become, intended it to be a parable to christians... that is, showing christians how ridiculous Christianity looks from the outside. "Is it rational and reasonable to accept emotions or feelings as evidence for God's existence?" This comes back to the logic vs. emotion thing Octopuppy has been previously discussing. I just rewatched Star Trek (the new one; great movie!) the other day and Spock's father tells him "to put logic aside and do what's right" and it's basically about how logic is not complete for their existence. You may expect me to dislike this message as octopuppy does but I think that in some sense it's right... logic and rational thinking is only one aspect of our overall mental experience and we can't ignore the other aspects that compose the mind. Octopuppy wouldn't be here without his innate desire to learn and know and change, something that's not always logical. Don't get me wrong - I like logic and think too many people are too illogical. But I also think it's foolish to base your life entirely on logic because even though we have a logical model of our universe (not sure if we do entirely yet, but even if we do), we cannot always create an isomorphism from that to our real world perceived by our senses and thoughts and emotions in what we presume is our brain. In a nutshell... of the aspects of our existence that make our mind, logic is important but not the only pillar of life. But do I think that an emotional experience can justify a decision that greatly affects all the other "pillars" of the mind? I don't know. But here's my opinion: a true religious experience should be so powerful and mind-altering that it doesn't need to be backed up with reason or rationality. If it's doubted whether or not it's rational to base your religious stance based on the experience, then it wasn't such an experience... And if it was true but not so powerful, then obviously weight was given to the logical and choice-based aspect of your brain, so you should evaluate it realistically

I voted for "the Scandal" because our politicians already are scandals. I don't care if your grandmother who bakes you cookies every sunday is running for office, if she can't lead then she shouldn't be elected. And i don't care if the candidate is a drug dealing sociopath that his own personal reasons for fixing the country - as long as in the end it will indeed be fixed long-term, then get him in. I don't care that Bill Clinton slept with some woman, I care that he boosted the economy

some great nudibranch pictures: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Chromodoris_annae.JPG http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_qafXMXqEGFI/RtsGgwKMT8I/AAAAAAAAAGM/BFUrSWMH7rY/s400/nudibranch%2BHypselodoris_bullocki.JPG http://nlp.stanford.edu/~wcmac/p/i/nudibranch.jpg http://birdhouse.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/nudibranch.jpg http://www.potjes.net/underwater_photo/IMG_1668_magnificent_chromodoris_nudibranch_p_72.jpg they're just so cool looking...

the nudibranch, perhaps. Or maybe computer virii. Or as-of-yet unknown extraterrestrial species. or the jackass penguin

read the book Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson. I have a feeling you'd find it very interesting As for consistency of experience, Semper Rideo - well, one of the greatest roadblocks to all religious arguments is the difference in religion around the world. If there really was this self-consistent spiritual knowledge among those with open minds, then why are there so many vastly different religions around the world? What exactly kind of religious person are you - Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc? Do you think that other religions are false? Also, say you know that God exists, and you know that you know... now how does that extend to the religion that you subscribe to? ie, what made you choose one or the other, or were you born into one? Why is one better than another? Not necessarily attacking your beliefs, I'm just trying to understand your beliefs and where you're heading with this train of thought

You treat emotion, feelings and logical thoughts as distinct functions of the brain, but are you sure they are not all the same thing in different form? As you say we have little control over our subconscious mind but how much control do you think you have over your conscious mind? And I mean that even inside the limits of determinism, that is - ie, how much control over your conscious mind does the workings of your conscious mind have? I don't know. We still know so little about the human mind and how it works. I think this article could have an interesting effect on our conversation but i've only just started reading it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

yeah the general point I was going for was that bliss is good short-term but not long-term, and there needs to be a balance. So pure bliss and ignorance is not okay. Those robots that octopuppy described wouldn't truly be "artificial intelligence" without the struggles, ups and downs, etc. They don't have emotions unless they have all emotions, or at least basic and counter-emotions. They don't have bliss unless they can understand that they are blissful. Right now our machines are essentially totally ignorant, so you could argue totally blissful. Give it 'points' to be happy about and just rack up the points? Done. I would never want to be in a vegetative state of pure bliss, just like I'd never really want to go to heaven if I happened to believe in such a thing. I like Earth. I like the experiences and the interesting things and living with all its problems and joys and emotions and thoughts. I wouldn't feel good "bringing the happiness" to the world with those robots, I would feel guilty for denying them their right as sentient beings to fully experience the world rather than one pre-ordained eternal emotion, no matter how good it feels.

We've all heard the phrase "ignorance is bliss". It's true, there's no denying that. When you learn about something gruesome you wish you hadn't just learned that, etc. Some bad piece of knowledge or expectation can ruin your day. The term 'white lie' refers to a lie to keep someone happy. Hear me out: when I say bliss I'm not implying that ignorance is better overall. Bliss isn't a deep lifelong happiness but rather temporary reprieve. Think of a sexual orgasm... at the peak your mind is completely blank - completely ignorant but completely blissful. Okay, that's all background: recently I was raking leaves and a revelation sort of hit me in the form of a phrase that could go something like this: Ignorance is bliss, but knowledge is power. Would you rather be happy, blissful, doing what you're told, believing what you've heard, working to create a little life for yourself inside the system ... or would you rather be knowledgeable and powerful, not necessarily powerful over others but over yourself and your mind and body and thoughts and path in life, making a splash in the system, breaking free of bounds. I think knowledge is power, and by that I mean deeper control over yourself and long-term contentment. I think ignorance is bliss, and by that I mean simply pure happiness in the moment. I also think that both are important for a healthy life: it's about balance. What do you think? Which of the two people outlined in bold would you rather be?

Believe in the teachings of a religion, you are blindly committing yourself to some unseen truth in which you place your absolute faith and trust. It must feel good, of course. And if that blanket that supports your life ever gets pulled away, it's devastating. So those who are religious get instant hope, life happiness, contentness, etc. Those of us who are atheists have to search, maybe our whole lifetimes, for this oneness with the universe, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I believe I am far along this mental path myself, but what do I know. Back to what you were saying, I disagree fundamentally. At some point you have to believe in something. This may seem strange coming from me, but it's true. Look at your post: "I personally think that any assertion lacks validity unless it can be derived from verifiable evidence by sound reasoning." can you back that up? No. Or you can do it with a meta-level of reasoning, but then that needs backing up. In other words, somewhere down the line you have faith in something, and if it's Reason, then you adhere to that, etc. Godel's Incompleteness Theorem, in a way, says it's impossible to prove reason with reason. You would need an infinite number of levels of reason. In your case, reason seems to allow you to make sense of what you know of the world, and that's probably the same with me and Izzy too. We choose reason as the foundation for this low-level faith because it is supported by what we see in the real world. Often we try to bridge what we can build from the ground up logically with what we see in the world around us... I don't think anyone has quite yet entirely bridged this, just as nobody has proved or disproved the existence of a god... maybe it's impossible. What I'm saying is that maybe those who are religious use a higher more "ignorant" (in terms of it being less reasonable, less thought out, what have you) platform to base their worldviews off of. They have faith in this and so build on top of this up to the world, and for them they choose this because it's supported by what they see in the world, just like you choose reason because it supports what YOU see in the world. I'm positive that you think more about what you see in the world and maybe you've chosen your platform on which to build your life wiser than they have, as long as you can reach and surpass the level of actual existence... that is, as long as you can connect your logical philosophy with what you see and know in the world around you. In the end we only have our sensory input and mental feelings and emotions to tell us anything about the world, that is the only true input we have. It just so happens that sensory data gives a consistent universe with a place just for us... I think that everyone finds their place in that universe in a different way. For me, everything is a balance: tradition vs progress, logic vs emotion, rationality vs spontaneity, living life knowledgeable or living life excitably. These things are not always mutually exclusive of course, but everything is a balance... great topic, octopuppy! this reminds me of something that came to me recently... i'll post a topic on it haha

yeah haha, go clozo! and the wiki is nice! I think this is the link Gmaster is referring to: http://mafiaonlinegame.wikia.com/wiki/Host_Notes Pretty soon I'll probably be able to transfer the Mafia Guide from bbcode to wikicode if desired

hooray! Good job to us goodies

the day ends in about an hour and a half, by the way. Don't cut it too close, eh?

CP, Clozo and I would like to point out that "goodies losing" is not synonymous with "Phantom winning", in fact if you go that route it will backfire and you will end up in 3rd place. Vote with us against Framm 18 and secure, at the lowest, 2nd place, and at the highest, if you are cunning, top place. At this point it's out of our hands and in yours, CP, and depending on your choice now and another one soon, you can choose between 3rd, 2nd and 1st place. So choose to vote against Framm before he offs his last threat (you, because if you vote with him against us, the goodies will be essentially fallen already). So we need to lynch Framm today because otherwise he will win

good luck Grayven!

upon further thought, the Power Ranger is more dangerous because (1) kills nightly and the Phantom maybe kills only every other but we dont know the full extent of her abilities (spy/kill alternator perhaps?) and (2) the Phantom is known to us and an easy lynch whereas the PR still glides by under the radar. For that reason I think we should go after the PR too, or maybe exclusively, today. So between Framm 18 and Clozo, we have (a) the last goodie [other than me], and (b) the Power Ranger. Which of those two would vote for CP and which of those two would vote for the opposite? * in one way of looking at it, the PR would want to glide by still, voting off the easy kill Phantom and leaving themselves with two powerless goodies; in another way of looking at it, the PR may be trying to cast suspicion on the other possible PR by voting for them the first is more likely... 1. DarthNoob - Hannah Montana - Dead by popular demand 2. Framm 18 - voting for Crazypainter 3. Marth/DudleyDude - Phantomized 4. Clozo - voting for Framm 18 5. musicluvr95 - double killed by Werewolf/Baddies 6. tellis150 - followed the trail of candy and sawed in half by the Baddies 7. LIS - suffocated thanks to the Baddies 8. Crazypainter 9. Unreality - voting for Framm 18 10. Brandonb - stabbed by the Phantom 11. Sayalzah - Batman - electrocuted by Frankie edit ~ roster touch-up

going for the confirmed role as well 1. DarthNoob - Hannah Montana - Dead by popular demand 2. Framm 18-Voting for Crazypainter 3. Marth/DudleyDude - Phantomized 4. Clozo - voting for Framm 18 5. musicluvr95 - double killed by Werewolf/Baddies 6. tellis150 - followed the trail of candy and sawed in half by the Baddies 7. LIS - suffocated thanks to the Baddies 8. Crazypainter 9. Unreality-Voting for Crazypainter 10. Brandonb - stabbed by the Phantom. 11. Sayalzah - Batman- electrocuted by Frankie. I made a crucial mistake last night and it's time to repent that

this is my last checkin for about 20 hours . And Bb, if you are still around, why should the Witch, if they are still alive per se, listen to you?

from about three and a half hours from now til tomorrow around 1 or 2 pm, I'll be gone, just to let everyone know

time's up, I assume? and a tie vote at that...

I'm a goodie and how you/framm react to the trap I set is very revealing. You have 30 minutes edit: we should tie it up today; there's too much confusion. Just remove your vote

I'm fairly certain that the real phantom is dead, from both roster analysis and behavior after I "outed" myself. The remaining baddie, the Power Ranger, is either Brandonb or Clozo. It could also be Framm 18 but I think that's less likely. Take what you will but what was clearly a trap has been used by Bb to get the votes of, surprise surprise, Clozo and Framm 18, against me. Someone(s) have some 'splaining to do...