Stormig Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Here we go again. I'll stop here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Perfectness kill identity and probably self-awarness(didn't medited on that one long enough). BTW Gevo, I don't think you got Sips answer substance. Let me phrase it a simpler way, if abstract thinking is not the result of an evolved brain, how come a cow(that the brain is not as evolved as ours) is dumber than us? Look around you, we have a huge brain, an evolved one, and we are capable of abstract thinking, there is a clear correlation between our brain and the level of abstract thinking we are capable of. That you believe in god or not,'or that a god exist or not, doesn't change this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Perfectness kill identity and probably self-awarness(didn't medited on that one long enough). style_images/master/snapback.png god is imperfect, and Neutrod(the god of the multiverse, more power than your god that is the god of just one universe ) is neutral Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest abcdefghijkl Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 god is imperfect, and Neutrod(the god of the multiverse, more power than your god that is the god of just one universe ) is neutral style_images/master/snapback.png A "one" God, singular, existing alone, like the Judaic or Christian God, must be, by definition, perfect. Multiple gods, like those of the classical Greeks, were imperfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nakharar Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 god is imperfect, and Neutrod(the god of the multiverse, more power than your god that is the god of just one universe ) is neutral style_images/master/snapback.png Say wha'? Why can't we all coexist? I have nothing against polytheism and haven't heared a single good reason arguing against it. You have been reading too many Japanese animes I suppose. Give me the twelve Olympian gods any time you care to mention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Now you are telling me those beliefs influence what I experience and feel ... style_images/master/snapback.png That's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Bark Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 A "one" God, singular, existing alone, like the Judaic or Christian God, must be, by definition, perfect. Multiple gods, like those of the classical Greeks, were imperfect. style_images/master/snapback.png I don't have a vested interest in the answer, but why should the monotheistic god be perfect? Can't an otherwise imperfect being create something really neat? And what is so "good" about "perfection" anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Say wha'? Why can't we all coexist? I have nothing against polytheism and haven't heared a single good reason arguing against it. You have been reading too many Japanese animes I suppose. Give me the twelve Olympian gods any time you care to mention. style_images/master/snapback.png There are many possibilities of gods, in any flavours, and Neutrod is the product of every universes that are his neurons. So yes! Neutrod is much much more powerfull than God, Allah and Yaveh... Neutrod can beat them anytime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 I don't have a vested interest in the answer, but why should the monotheistic god be perfect? Can't an otherwise imperfect being create something really neat? And what is so "good" about "perfection" anyway? Amen to that. The creationist position would be so much stronger if they didn't keep on insisting on this perfect God that created everything including time .... The second "time" enters into the picture, it becomes rather rediculous that it took the creator time to do things (as in seven days or whatever) and that it's creations are improving over time. But it would all make a lot more sense if the creator was itself bound by the rules of time and space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 (edited) Now you are telling me those beliefs influence what I experience and feel ...You know how I know this to be true? When I see ordinary humans doing extraordinary things (that defy laws of the established sciences). To me, that just says the laws of established science are imperfect and need work. For example, that's how we moved from Newtonian physics to quantum mechanics ... because people observed tiny particles doing "extraordinary" things (accordoing to the laws at the time) as in seemingly going from one point in space to another point in space without having traveled anywhere in between!!! But now many of those extraordinary things are not that extraordinary anymore and have ordinary explanations. Whether those explanations are good enough or not, only time will tell. Edited November 12, 2004 by Seapahn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 OK let me ask it this way. What is perfect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 A "one" God, singular, existing alone, like the Judaic or Christian God, must be, by definition, perfect. Multiple gods, like those of the classical Greeks, were imperfect. style_images/master/snapback.png In the idea of Holy Trinity there is the Holy Spirit, the Father and the Son where the Son goes though the process of perfection although he is not perfect at the start. The process itself may be the important message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 (edited) OK let me ask it this way. What is perfect? style_images/master/snapback.png Perfect is that which is better than anything else in the "entity" space (i.e. the optimum among all entities according to whatever goodness criteria you pick to quantify things). Typically, if you don't put constraints on your criteria for measuring "goodness", perfection won't exist (or it will not be achievable). Edited November 12, 2004 by Seapahn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Perfect is that which is better than anything else in the "entity" space (i.e. the optimum among all entities according to whatever goodness criteria you pick to quantify things). Typically, if you don't put constraints on your criteria for measuring "goodness", perfection won't exist (or it will not be achievable). style_images/master/snapback.png So perfection is subjective, depending on what criteria of goodness one chooses? In that case there is no point arguing because something is perfect for me and imperfect for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 I don't have a vested interest in the answer, but why should the monotheistic god be perfect? Can't an otherwise imperfect being create something really neat? And what is so "good" about "perfection" anyway? style_images/master/snapback.png God can be imperfect, sure, but then he looses his God-ness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 OK let me ask it this way. What is perfect? style_images/master/snapback.png perfect can only be described with things that it is not.. and the list is near infinitely long.. so im not gonna bother Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Bark Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 God can be imperfect, sure, but then he looses his God-ness style_images/master/snapback.png Why? I can set up a computer simulation of little critters running around, interacting, and doing things. To them, I am the creator, and an omnipotent being. But I am not "perfect", and don't need to be. In fact, if I were "perfect", I would have to be without life or a drive to do anything since I could not improve upon my perfection (what a selfish, vain concept). Furthermore, if the simulation is any good, and is interesting at all, it would not be predictable. I would be running the simulation because I wanted to learn something from the model I constructed. Omnipotence, being all-knowing, and being perfect are three entirely separate concepts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 TB, what do you say we assemble a hyeforum team and try for the DARPA grand challenge? (note: at the time, the darpa website seems down so try again if it doesn't work). I'm sure we can find a way to split the $2 million somehow Considering last year most of them didn't even make it out of the parking lot, I'm sure our chances aren't too bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 Well, since their website is down, for those who don't know ... the Darpa challenge is essentially to produce a completely autonomous vehicle that given a route, would be able to traverse about 200 miles in the mojave desert on it's own. It will obviously have to negotiate some not so trivial obstacles and inhospitable terrain. But the prize is about $2 million dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Bark Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 (edited) TB, what do you say we assemble a hyeforum team and try for the DARPA grand challenge? (note: at the time, the darpa website seems down so try again if it doesn't work). I'm sure we can find a way to split the $2 million somehow Considering last year most of them didn't even make it out of the parking lot, I'm sure our chances aren't too bad. style_images/master/snapback.png Don't think the thought hadn't occurred to me. Seems so doable (but apparently not). But, considering that the whole thing (I think) is for the advancement of robotic warfare (where presumably only one side will be human), I can't say I would be motivated for such an enterprise. Would you? And of course there is the fact that posting futile posts on HyeForum takes up the few disposable minutes I have on a given day, I'll let some militaristically-motivated nerd run away with it. Now what about the Massively Armenian Computing idea I tossed in a while ago? Any takers? Edited November 13, 2004 by Twilight Bark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted November 14, 2004 Report Share Posted November 14, 2004 Why? I can set up a computer simulation of little critters running around, interacting, and doing things. To them, I am the creator, and an omnipotent being. But I am not "perfect", and don't need to be. In fact, if I were "perfect", I would have to be without life or a drive to do anything since I could not improve upon my perfection (what a selfish, vain concept). Furthermore, if the simulation is any good, and is interesting at all, it would not be predictable. I would be running the simulation because I wanted to learn something from the model I constructed. Omnipotence, being all-knowing, and being perfect are three entirely separate concepts. style_images/master/snapback.png Anoushik is an atheist, but she is right about that one thing about God.. he cant be anything that is not perfect.. If he is not perfect, then he is not Devine.. then might as well cal him another god.. but he is perfect, or else this world would not have such laws, rules of life.. etc.. everythign he made is perfect, because he madeit and called it good.. and then went on.. he made nothign that is not to balance everythign else.. and thus h is God, not a god.. and he is devinley perfect, and he he omnipotent, omnipresent.. etc.. Which God do you refer to when you say "he doesnt have to be perfect" TB>>>?? it is not the God of the Bible.. because of what the Bible says about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Bark Posted November 14, 2004 Report Share Posted November 14, 2004 Anoushik is an atheist, but she is right about that one thing about God.. he cant be anything that is not perfect.. If he is not perfect, then he is not Devine.. then might as well cal him another god.. but he is perfect, or else this world would not have such laws, rules of life.. etc.. everythign he made is perfect, because he madeit and called it good.. and then went on.. he made nothign that is not to balance everythign else.. and thus h is God, not a god.. and he is devinley perfect, and he he omnipotent, omnipresent.. etc.. Which God do you refer to when you say "he doesnt have to be perfect" TB>>>?? it is not the God of the Bible.. because of what the Bible says about him. style_images/master/snapback.png I asked "Why?", and not "What do you believe in?". You have not explained anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siamanto Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 (edited) I will first address the easier Engineering Issues, before contemplating the more difficult and fundamental aspects of the question! Why would god create 1000 different 4-appendaged animals (4 legs/hands) with 2 eyes and 2 ears and one mouth with teeth and similar organs that all seem to share common roots? style_images/master/snapback.png That is called "code reuse!" It is conform to the JSR 129644340 Standard - "Common Objects For Four legged Animals." I found that a $30 pair of sony ear-plug type headphones and an mp3 player can do wonders in that department! Which reminds me that I wish God had put in mp3 playback capabilities in our brains with several memory interfaces like compactlfash, SD card, and sony stick. style_images/master/snapback.png Your God seems to be a Hacker! My God is an Architect! Anything but IP shall be considered as a genetic shortcoming and/or an implementation defect! No other interfaces are specified in the Design Document! PS. Talking about OO Design, Philosophy and God, have you read the Monadology of Leibniz? http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/tex...monadology.html Edited November 15, 2004 by Siamanto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anoushik Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 Why? Because then He wouldn't be any different from us; it would be pointless to distinguish God from the rest of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted November 15, 2004 Report Share Posted November 15, 2004 Anoushik, what do you think of this: We, the human beings are the imperfect part of the God. Otherwise he is perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.