The Back Room

[Nero]

Hmmm...

 

Discussion: 'Does Original Thought Exist?'

Proposal: 'No, everything is copied from something else.'

Counter-Proposal: 'What about Mercy, it doesn't occur naturally, so someone must have invented it.'

How does mercy, justice, and freedom not occure naturally?

 

Freedom is everywhere in nature. A wolf is free...it can roams the plains all it wishes as long as it gets enough food to feed itself. You can argue that that's not freedom...but c'mon, if that's the case then freedom does not exist at all.

 

Mercy is a bit of a harder one, but it could be argued that when predators stalk a herd they don't take down the strongest and most supple animal from it, but the weak and infirm. However misguided, it could easily be seen as a mercy to kill those creatures swiftly rather than just let thim wither away from disease or malnushiment (I know they go after the weakest/smallest for fear of injury, but if we're looking at this whole situation from an impassionate technical standpoint then killing the weak and infirm is technically a splash of mercy in the wild)

 

Justice is ost likely an entirely human concept, which brings us back to my original point, in that an 'original idea' does not exist anymore. If you were to explain to me justice right now...it wouldn't be an original idea, because somebody had already thought of it. Obviously it's this whole discussion is pointless as is the whole idea of the impossibility of an original idea, since anything you explain as an original idea can simply be countered with 'and most likely somebody already though of that', and so it ultimately falls into the category of 'what is the meaning of life?' which as most likely you have already asked yourself that question, you've already discovered that you will never discover the answer, and so it is a pointless conumdrum do bother yourself with.

 

*hits gavel* (not gavrill)

 

post rife with mis-spellings. I don't give a [bleep]. Gonna go down another brew and pass out.

[The_Mather1]

"Nothing is true, everything is permitted." The Assassin's Creed has never had a better context.

 

The world has no truths and lies, only facts. That which may appears to be a lie is only a fact elsewhere.

There are no rules, only that which we can't do. Law, order, crime and chaos are all human-made definitions and only apply in the eyes of men.

Freedom and imprisonement does not exist. No matter how free you seem, you are still bound by physics. No matter how trapped you are, your mind is still free to wander.

Life and death are ilusions. The human body is but a mere wessel for our minds, if it ceases to function and decays, our minds will neither change or dissapear. As the human mind is but a collection of energy, physics will not allow it to disapear. It can however be diluted and absorbed by nature, it does not change. The same however may not be said about our conciousness.

[archimage_a]

*hits gavel*

 

Yup, I can agree with that. Original ideas exist, but they are rare, and you can never be sure they are actually original...

 

 

 

 

 

 

The world has no truths and lies, only facts. That which may appears to be a lie is only a fact elsewhere.

So...A lie is basically an incorrect fact...

The more you know.

There are no rules, only that which we can't do. Law, order, crime and chaos are all human-made definitions and only apply in the eyes of men.

Order exists...everything has a cause and effect...tis the basis of physics...which most of the succesful animals, plants and single cell lifeforms have grasped.

 

Also this undercuts the actual meaning of the 'Nothing is true, everything is permitted' idea.*

 

Freedom and imprisonement does not exist. No matter how free you seem, you are still bound by physics. No matter how trapped you are, your mind is still free to wander.

God/Science Abuse and Mind Control kinda counter those points...as does brain damage and such.

Also contradicts your previous statement, that there are no rules...since physics are a set of rules.

 

Life and death are ilusions. The human body is but a mere wessel for our minds, if it ceases to function and decays, our minds will neither change or dissapear. As the human mind is but a collection of energy, physics will not allow it to disapear. It can however be diluted and absorbed by nature, it does not change. The same however may not be said about our conciousness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiable

Positing something that cannot be shown to be wrong doesn't count as proof...Any more than me positing that you are the devil incarnate, and that, since you can't prove you aren't, it proves that it is true.

Infact the opposite stance is commonly taken, in that saying something is right without any method of disproving it is generally seen as a, in roleplay language, handwave...It is because it isn't something else.

 

 

Also:

 

 

 

*Saying deep things only works when those deep things are actually deep, and you actually know what you are talking about.

 

Basing your world view on the belief that 'nothing is true, everything is permitted' very quickly meets it's demise when you stop believing you are hungry, permit dagger blades to keep your warm and decide you can fly because gravity is a lie.

 

On the other hand, if you intrepret it as saying that you should never believe anything so certainly that you disbelieve anything that contradicts it...then it makes sense.

It allows you think 'deep' things...So rather than thinking 'I can't fly' you come to the conclusion 'My present form, in the present environement, cannot fly, I must change one or the other in order to fly.'

 

Therefore it doesn't mean there aren't rules, just things we can't do...quite the reverse...there aren't things we can't do, only rules which we must follow to do those things...

 

So either you, or whoever instructed you on that, has fundermentally missed the meaning, and as we know from Chaos Theory, one tiny mistake at the beginning and everything changes to something unregonisable.

[Retech]

Order and chaos... Entropy?

[Resistance]

Talking of innovation will anybody help me with my innovation GCSE controlled assessment (coursework that has to be at school)

Basically I am designing and making a prototype of my own idea, it can be whatever I want it to be (it can use emerging technologies or even be a hyper structure like as Dyson sphere). Anyway I'm stuck on idea's and reading through a big list would be helpful.

 

• 
   
  
• Home office integration
  
• Home Gaming
  
• On the move gaming
  
• Space travel
  
• Deep sea travel
  
• Mining
  
• Building safety
  
• Fashion
  
• Input devices
  
• Artificial Habitats
  
• Mobile Phones
  
• Fast Food
  

 

As you can see there is not much idea's that I can come up with, would anybody please continue the list.

[Icuownage]

Sounds a bit crazy for GCSE level stuff.

[Resistance]

That is why I chose it! :P

[The_Mather1]

• Propulsion
  
• Personal flight
  
• Transportation
  
• Power generation
  
• Energy weapon
  
• Wireless transfer of electricity
  
• HD resonator (make whatever it is attached to make sounds)
  
• Decoration
  
• Cooling
  
• Comfort
  
• Recreation
  
• EMS
  
• Armour
  
• Use of fission
  
• VR
  
• Non-virtual entertainment
  

 

 

Archi, that's consequence, not order. Order is when something has its place and does not refrain from it, or in which something is/happens (paradoxes disprove the latter, the first is obviously impossible, or at least unprovable due to the Schroedinger paradox).

With laws I was talking about things that are possible but your concience or someone says you can't do. Physics are more accurately limits and oportunities rather than laws.

Brain damage does not limit your mind, but it scrambles it.

I provided undeniable evidence as to why our minds are unbreakable.

[Resistance]

• Propulsion
  
• Personal flight
  
• Transportation
  
• Power generation
  
• Energy weapon
  
• Wireless transfer of electricity
  
• HD resonator (make whatever it is attached to make sounds)
  
• Decoration
  
• Cooling
  
• Comfort
  
• Recreation
  
• EMS
  
• Armour
  
• Use of fission
  
• VR
  
• Non-virtual entertainment
  

Some of those would be very interesting, I could expand very well upon personal flight and transport.

 

Armour and Energy weapons would be fun to do but I don't want to paint the wrong impression of myself (I have designed a weapon capable of melting a person in 0.483 seconds, it starts by radiating through the skin and then causing heavy condensation on the outside of the skin, the persons bones melt first followed by the outer layer of skin. It is relatively painful but the pain is outmatched by the efficiency)

 

Comfort and cooling could potentially be very interesting to do, I could focus on fans and such.

 

Use of fission would be too hard to do.

 

VR wouldn't give me enough to design as I am designing a software, if I was to design a full body suit it would be too hard because I'd have to take into account ergonomics and I could lose marks for not presenting my idea properly.

 

Whats EMS and HD resonator?

[The_Mather1]

EMS is electronic muscle stimulation, a way of training without doing anything, and a HD resonator would attach and shake to make something flat into a speaker.

[Resistance]

and a HD resonator would attach and shake to make something flat into a speaker.

 

 

I showed this to my DT teacher.

[Earth]

Just bloody briiliant, I've been playing a three disk game, Blue Dragon, for over a week, and now I fin the third disk is scratched to hell. Can't use it at all, and I am now uber pissed.. We tried buffering it, but we found out that theres no propper buffer machine in the gamestore we went to, so the store atendant handbuffed it.. And it still won't work.

[Grim_]

Talking of innovation will anybody help me with my innovation GCSE controlled assessment (coursework that has to be at school)

Basically I am designing and making a prototype of my own idea, it can be whatever I want it to be (it can use emerging technologies or even be a hyper structure like as Dyson sphere). Anyway I'm stuck on idea's and reading through a big list would be helpful.

 

• 
   
  
• Home office integration
  
• Home Gaming
  
• On the move gaming
  
• Space travel
  
• Deep sea travel
  
• Mining
  
• Building safety
  
• Fashion
  
• Input devices
  
• Artificial Habitats
  
• Mobile Phones
  
• Fast Food
  

 

As you can see there is not much idea's that I can come up with, would anybody please continue the list.

 

 

Well if you really tried I'm sure you could create your own table top gaming system (but that might not be accepted). Another option would be to create a tesseract configuration and find a use for it (possibly in computing or something along those lines). Erm for something for home use (that you could create a prototype fairly easily for) An artificial habitat (I presume hermetically sealed) would be fairly easy to do. If you can program you could create some sort of basic robotic script for use in helping the disabled as well.

[archimage_a]

Archi, that's consequence, not order. Order is when something has its place and does not refrain from it, or in which something is/happens (paradoxes disprove the latter, the first is obviously impossible, or at least unprovable due to the Schroedinger paradox).

Right...So you are saying that Order is invented, Consequence is mystically enshrined as a universal truth.

A) Semantics.

B) Falsifiable.

C) Schroedinger's Paradox is a human construction based on the fact we don't know where electrons and what not are. Electrons, oddly enough, actually do have a location...

D) Order is the inherantly linear progression of A to B, nothing 'just happens'... So Order and Consequence are similar concepts, Consequence deals with 1 specific action, Order deals with every action.

 

With laws I was talking about things that are possible but your concience or someone says you can't do. Physics are more accurately limits and oportunities rather than laws.

So not what you said then...This is what I meant about saying deep things...

Also, treating physics as a set of limits is fundermentally flawed, since physics has no limits only reactions.

What you mean is treating physics as a set of human defined limits as to what is tolerable/what won't kill, maim or injure you...which is a human invention...

These flaws mean that you are just designing a system that is far too complicated, trying to make the facts fit the ideas rather than the ideas fit the facts...'Simply saying that rules exist, and you either need to bypass them or follow them for desired results' is far more succinct, far more accurate...and far more useful then airy fairy deep speak.

 

Brain damage does not limit your mind, but it scrambles it.

So you are saying if I made scrabbled eggs from a fertalised chicken egg, the chicken's mind isn't limited in any way?

Or, in computer speak, a reformatted memory card doesn't lose any of the information saved on it before the format?

 

I provided undeniable evidence as to why our minds are unbreakable.

No...you provided a pseudo-arguement as to why our minds are unbreakable.

'Are minds are energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed, therefore our minds cannot be destroyed, therefore minds are unbreakable.'

Or

'My cat has four legs, my dog has four legs, therefore my dog is a cat, therefore I can use a catflap instead of a dogflap.'

Or

'A piece of coal is condensed energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed, therefore the coal cannot be destroyed, therefore my fire will never go out.'

 

Saying our minds change is the same as saying they are destroyed and created every second, the cycle itself is bound by entropy and physics, with the energy used never being destroyed, only less ordered, less useful...

Hence, like a sandwich left on a plate for a few days, it stops being useful fairly quickly...and, as such, stops being a sandwich. You can say the sandwich 'lives on' through the mold, spores and such, but it seems like a pretty limited kind of existance...and certainly it does not exist as the unbreakable sandwich...

[Retech]

Just won a game of Civ V as Japan with a technological victory. My score was "Nelson Mandela" level, which is ironic because I was destroying and repressing for most of the game.

 

Of course we all know that mathematics is infallible.

[The_Mather1]

Electrons don't have a specific locations, that is only in the simplfied model.

I'm saying that which thinking things don't accept are not something we are bound by.

No, while the scrambled chicken arguement is just litteral, the formating example is completely unrelated, as formatting is nullifying data. The figural meaning of scrabling is unorganizing, an example would be to put notes into a box in a way that you know where each of them are then shaking the box. No matter how long you shake, it'll still contain all the previous data, but when looking for something and taking that which is where it was supposed to be, the results may be... interesting...

Unrelated examples, those are physical objects wherein parts of their details are in question, while a mind is the actual, active energy. That energy will neither cease to exist as such the mind will never cease to exist. An example would be to tear a computer apart and leave the parts for others to take, if the parts are never broken has the computer then ceased to exist?

[Retech]

The difference is that a mind is a specific arrangement(s) of energy. A better example with the paper would be to shred it. You could put it back together, but it would probaly be just as easy to put it together with something entirely different.

[The_Mather1]

Correction, a sensical mind requires specific paterns, but it does not need to be sensical to exist.

[Retech]

In that case, we could define a mind as "energy", and then what you were saying would be true, but pointless.

 

We could also define anything as energy and have it be true, but then it's just misleading.

[The_Mather1]

But the point is that a mind is energy, I never said it had any point to it that it is.

[archimage_a]

Electrons don't have a specific locations, that is only in the simplfied model.

Yes, the universe, in an effort to be more mysterious, breaks the laws of physics...Electrons have specific locations...We don't know where they are, but they have them.

 

I'm saying that which thinking things don't accept are not something we are bound by.

I am saying gravity ignores thought.

 

No, while the scrambled chicken arguement is just litteral, the formating example is completely unrelated, as formatting is nullifying data. The figural meaning of scrabling is unorganizing, an example would be to put notes into a box in a way that you know where each of them are then shaking the box. No matter how long you shake, it'll still contain all the previous data, but when looking for something and taking that which is where it was supposed to be, the results may be... interesting...

So it is possible to nullify computer data but not organic data...interesting.

Also, shaking a box containing a china doll may break the doll...Undercutting your other argument.

 

Unrelated examples, those are physical objects wherein parts of their details are in question, while a mind is the actual, active energy. That energy will neither cease to exist as such the mind will never cease to exist. An example would be to tear a computer apart and leave the parts for others to take, if the parts are never broken has the computer then ceased to exist?

Which assumes death is a peaceful process where the mind is carefully dismantled. If you took a sledge hammer to a computer the computer itself ceases to exist...since it is a collection, rather than a single entity.

Comparatively the 'mind' is a collection of thoughts, if you remove the brain, aka the container, or damage it, then they disperse, the mind ceases to exist, and the thoughts become random electrical signals.

 

The whole is more than the sum of its parts....

[The_Mather1]

I'm saying that which thinking things don't accept are not something we are bound by.

I am saying gravity ignores thought.

:blink:

No, while the scrambled chicken arguement is just litteral, the formating example is completely unrelated, as formatting is nullifying data. The figural meaning of scrabling is unorganizing, an example would be to put notes into a box in a way that you know where each of them are then shaking the box. No matter how long you shake, it'll still contain all the previous data, but when looking for something and taking that which is where it was supposed to be, the results may be... interesting...

So it is possible to nullify computer data but not organic data...interesting.

Also, shaking a box containing a china doll may break the doll...Undercutting your other argument.

A china doll is not data, notes, files and memories are.

[archimage_a]

Memories don't go in boxes...

 

You are now being intentionally obtuse, which means there is no point in carrying on...You can't wake someone who is pretending to be asleep.

[Jehosaphat]

This thread has too much srs bsns. Seriously, Tavern, lighten up.

 

I'm eating a muffin, and IT IS GOOD.

[jasignhagj]

I just ate a garlic but and IT WAS GOOD.