 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 11:02:27 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> I don't know that it does - is there evidence/proof to suggest that it
>>>> does?
>>> Do you know who Abraham Lincoln was? George Washington? Adolph Hitler?
>>> Julius Ceaser?
>>
>> What's that got to do with souls?
>
> I'll let you think about it first, for a while. Ask yourself what a
> soul is, and what makes a difference between a live and a dead person.
I just wondered if you wanted to continue this. So, having thought
about how to try to put it in words...
A chicken doesn't have a model of the universe in its head. You put a
three-foot fence between a chicken and food, and it'll walk around the
fence. You put a nine-foot fence between a chicken and food, it'll walk
a little ways, see its getting farther away, and come back to the middle
without getting to the food.
Remember eating breakfast this morning. Think about it. Visualize it.
Where's the camera? Behind your eyes? Or can you see yourself?
You have in your head a model of the universe. Imagine yourself in your
bedroom, all the doors closed in the house, all the lights out. How
would you go to the kitchen? Get up, open the door, turn on the hall
light, maybe go down stairs, around that corner, turn on the kitchen
light, pull out the chair, sit down. Yet you didn't actually have to do
that to know that's what you have to do.
You have a model of the universe in your head, and in that model, you
have a model of yourself. That is your soul. It's what makes you
self-aware, and it's what makes you know the difference between good and
evil.
You're self-aware because you can run simulations on yourself to
determine what would happen were you to do something. You don't need to
step off the edge to know you'd bounce painfully on the way down.
You know good from evil because, being able to simulate yourself, you
can determine likely outcomes. You also know good from evil because you
have models of other people in your head, too. You know your mom would
be insulted if you call her a bitch. You know, were you young enough,
that she would punish you for doing so. You probably even know what sort
of punishment, and you *probably* even understand *why* she would do so.
You have a bit of your Mom's soul in your head. Put there by love,
unless you had an exceptionally unhappy childhood, in which case it was
put there by fear and hatred. Bits of your Mom's soul will continue to
live in your head after she is gone.
You know you're not your Mom because the model predicting what your Mom
would do is flawed much more than the model predicting what you would do.
When you can model all the important aspects of someone in your head,
that person is on the way to achieving immortality, or perhaps
reincarnation might be a better word. Many attempt to model their
behavior on what they think Confucius would do. Since he was clear and
explicit and intentionally trying to tell people what he thought and how
he thought they should behave, many succeed to a greater or lesser
extent. But Confucius lives on.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/12/12 18:31:
> Mike Raiford <mra### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
>> If someone is doing something they
>> genuinely think is helpful to others, how is it determined that it's a
>> ticket to heaven or hell?
>
> It's determined by who you ask help to. Offering a chicken to Satan for him to
> "help" me is not helpful at all
>
>> For some reason I all the sudden have the urge to play the song "Highway
>> to hell" ... ;)
>
> just play "Stairway to Heaven" backwards...
>
>
Just play an "Ave Maria", any one, backward... Now, go on and play ANY gregorian
chants backward. If you can, dig out any old 75RPM record, done by machanical
recording, and play them backward. ALL would produce some sounds thah CAN be
interpreted as "Satanic messaged"!
The explanation: When you heard some giberish, and you can't class it as
"music", your brain just can't accept it as just gibberish and tend to organise
those sounds as actual words.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
'The Computer made me do it.'
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:38:14 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> And lo on Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:57:16 -0000, nemesis
>>> The eye of a needle was how a narrow passageway was known at those
>>> times.
>
>> I think you'll find that's a retrospective explantion. Firstly if it
>> was an actual place it would have one name
>
> I think you misread, Phil. Nemesis was saying "the eye of a needle" was
> slang for "alleyway." Not that it was a specific alleyway.
Well the commonplace misconception was that it was a specific alleyway,
but you're correct Nemesis wasn't specific in those terms.
> The explanation *I* heard was that the original text said "camel-hair
> rope" rather than just "camel", but I have no idea where I heard that.
A possible mistranslation kamilos (camel) 'should' have been kamelos
(rope) then add in all the retrospective about how it was a camel-hair
rope blah blah; none of which explains why camel got substitued for
elephant later unless the Jews themselves didn't understand the derivation.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/12/13 04:08:
> And lo on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:34:54 -0000, nemesis
> <nam### [at] gmailcom> did spake, saying:
>
>> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>> So either God's a 'Worship Me or I'll beat you up' bully or a 'I'll help
>>> the tribe who showers Me with the most faith' mercenary (or both)?
>>
>> Faith, love, respect and fear are to be expected from those who devote
>> their lifes to God's will.
>
> Except I'd put faith and love, and respect and fear in two entirely
> seperate categories otherwise we end up with the conclusions that...
>
Respect and fear realy don't deserve to be grouped. Apparent respect comming
from fear is no respect at all, as it soon become obvious as soon as the fear
aspect fades, apparent respect mutate into hate. True respect comes from
understanding. True respect breed more respect, and reduce fear.
Respect can be paired with love, as both can grow without the presence of the
other, and both can lead to the other.
So, you can have "faith", love and respect on one side, and fear and hate on the
other side.
A very simple principle:
Do unto others as you'd like other to do unto you.
It can replace any religion, and a great many laws. It can be used as a
reference to diferensate between "good" and "evil". ANYBODY who, at least try
to, live by that principle won't wilingly commit any crime.
What I like about it, is that it's a positive principle.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
People who go to conferences are the ones who shouldn’t.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:42:12 -0000, Alain
<ele### [at] netscapenet> did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/12/13 04:08:
>> And lo on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:34:54 -0000, nemesis
>> <nam### [at] gmailcom> did spake, saying:
>>
>>> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>>> So either God's a 'Worship Me or I'll beat you up' bully or a 'I'll
>>>> help
>>>> the tribe who showers Me with the most faith' mercenary (or both)?
>>>
>>> Faith, love, respect and fear are to be expected from those who devote
>>> their lifes to God's will.
>> Except I'd put faith and love, and respect and fear in two entirely
>> seperate categories otherwise we end up with the conclusions that...
>>
> Respect and fear realy don't deserve to be grouped. Apparent respect
> comming from fear is no respect at all, as it soon become obvious as
> soon as the fear aspect fades, apparent respect mutate into hate. True
> respect comes from understanding. True respect breed more respect, and
> reduce fear.
> Respect can be paired with love, as both can grow without the presence
> of the other, and both can lead to the other.
> So, you can have "faith", love and respect on one side, and fear and
> hate on the other side.
I failed to explain well. Faith and love are intangibles "Why do you love
X?", "Why do you have faith in Y?" they're both something you can't really
answer - you just do. Fear and respect have answers "I respect X because
he's proven himself" "I fear Y because I've seen what he can do". You
don't just fear or respect someone or something (experiments with spider
pictures notwithstanding).
> A very simple principle:
> Do unto others as you'd like other to do unto you.
> It can replace any religion, and a great many laws. It can be used as a
> reference to diferensate between "good" and "evil".
Um I'm a sado-masochist (no I'm not really) who gets off on pain therefore
I should go around hurting people because that's what I'd want them to do
to me?
> ANYBODY who, at least try to, live by that principle won't wilingly
> commit any crime.
> What I like about it, is that it's a positive principle.
So I shouldn't steal from a store because I wouldn't like the store
stealing from me... except the store isn't a person (except perhaps
legally) so why should I care?
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
> Only if you presume the very old religion that started out claiming that
> Satan was God's helper, then later blamed everything on him and made up
> a silly, and over time increasingly complicated and bloody explanation,
> for what he did and where he was sent, instead of the Satanists, who
> would argue that Satan was the one that **never** deceived anyone, and
> thus its your God that is evil.
fucked up world!
best wishes...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford <mra### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Y'know in modern times if someone were within an inch of sacrificing
> their child and claimed God told them to do it, they'd be placed in a
> mental health facility quicker than you could blink.
Is this the same modern times which overload children and teens with all kinds
of demonic imagery in disguise of good entertainment? And then eventually
makes teens shoot people in schools or malls just like they do in the
videogames?
Why aren't all this people in a mental health facility? oh, it would make
economy come to a halt...
> Makes me think perhaps the Bible is full of crazies. :)
ever thought that maybe it passed through Abraham's, Moses's or others heads
that they were insane? Yet, they persisted on their faith. I guess the
Message was far more convincing than that of your average psychopath's
delirium...
I'm leaving this thread, won't be reading any more messages from it. Every
Christian have a limit of tolerance for twisted logic shouts and verborragic
blasphemies against God...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> And lo on Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:56:32 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
> did spake, saying:
>
>> Phil Cook wrote:
>>> Therefore there is no Hell.
>>
>> Yep. And all the carvings on the cathedral where Jesus is guesturing
>> to Satan (who surprisingly looks *just* like Loki, Pan, and Bacchus)
>> to drag the unbelievers off in chains to hell? That's just decoration.
>
> Who are you going to believe - God or a bunch of artists? ;-)
Sharks and dolphins look surprisingly similar, too. Doesn't make them
particularly closely related.
--
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4760c463$1@news.povray.org>, dne### [at] sanrrcom says...
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
> > Just wondering.
>
> I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with nudity, considering being
> embarrassed of being nude is what got Adam and Eve ratted out in the
> first place.
>
Well, no. It was one of the silly excuses they used for what sort of
"wrong stuff" they suddenly realized after. Later on you have the son of
a woman that got raped, as a result of her rapist seeing her bathing,
ruling a great nation of believers, while the rapist gets killed in some
huge war or something. I.e., she didn't do anything wrong, and was
rewarded, he got an early grave. Even later, and at least one Christian
nudist group uses this as justification for their life style, God
ordered one of his various prophets to go naked before the people to
preach, and was told, when the prophet whined about if it was
appropriate, "As long as its done in humility, its not a sin."
Mind you, I personally think that the whole idea of nudity being wrong
is about "shame", not humility, in the first place. If you are not aware
that its wrong, you have no reason to either flaunt it, or be shamed by
it, so can only be humble. Its when some moron starts telling you that
a) you need to dress, because people just don't do that sort of thing,
and b) some naughty bits shouldn't ever be seen by the other sex, that
you get **both** the idea that there is something to flaunt and show
off, as well as the idea that there is some shame in others seeing it,
or you letting them see it.
But yeah, its probably the single oldest (if you presume it was written
in *any* sort of chronological order to the rest) bullshit sin on a long
list of ones, for which the supposed solutions to the supposed problems
only either make the problem worse, or in this case, might *actually* be
responsible for creating most of them in the first place.
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> I'm leaving this thread, won't be reading any more messages from it. Every
> Christian have a limit of tolerance for twisted logic shouts and verborragic
> blasphemies against God...
Wow. Worshiping a God that can't even protect your faith from a
discussion. Or, apparently, from his own evil creations.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
