View Poll Results: What after life do you believe in?

Voters
48. You may not vote on this poll
  • Heaven/Hell

    15 31.25%
  • Come back as an animal

    1 2.08%
  • Come back as a human

    2 4.17%
  • Nothing just nothing you just are nothing, no thinking, well you know

    28 58.33%
  • You live in a blank void

    2 4.17%

After life?

This is a discussion on After life? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Series, you are missing one big thing here: truth is relative. what you see is what you see and that's ...

  1. #106
    Aran
    Guest
    Series, you are missing one big thing here: truth is relative.

    what you see is what you see and that's the truth. It may be affected by what is happening within you emotionally and it may change every second, but the way you see it is still the way it is. Truth is completely relative; what i see as true, you may see as ridiculous and stupid. There is no "absolute truth" or "absolute universe" because everything is subject to the emotions and senses of the viewer. We have no medorating force which can show us how things really are, and until then we might as well just trust what our senses tell us. There's no way to prove senses wrong justifiably because the senses percieving a deception are the same senses that are fooled by it.

    I hope i'm not completely off-base here.

  2. #107
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Series, you are missing one big thing here: truth is relative"

    He is missing many things, but that i'm afraid is not one of them.

    "There is no "absolute truth" or "absolute universe" because everything is subject to the emotions and senses of the viewer"

    I'm afraid there is an absolute truth, the universe does have fixed properties. Masses accelerate toward the Earth at 9.81 metres per second squared (when they are close to the surface). That's fact.

    If absolute truth did not exist neither would reality.

    Our sense's certainly do not sense the universe the way the universe actually "is". That is why we have such trouble in getting our heads round quantum mechanics and relativity, because we cannot picture them: They are completely contrary to our "picture" of how reality is. But we can get past the inaccuracy of our sense's, using maths, we can model physical processes that we cannot concieve of.

    But like i said there is an absolute truth, there are fixed properties of the universe.

    Think about what relative truth would actually mean, someone get's stabbed, but truth's relative so from his perspective he get's stabbed but from someone else's perspective who knows..... he might be alive and well on a beach somewhere, clearly that is nonsense, he is either stabbed on an ally-way somewhere OR lieing on the Beach in Hawai, he cannot be both, because truth is absolute, not relative.
    Last edited by Clyde; 04-16-2002 at 06:06 PM.

  3. #108
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by jinx
    This is my personal opinion, but I think that "Clyde" is a close-minded arrogant SOB who believes he knows everything and his reasoning is unquestionable. BTW, Clyde,
    "Igonorance is bliss." - Joe Pantoliano.
    you must be blissfully happy then !!

    Clyde's certainly got an opinion on him, but at least hes expressing it (look at the sheer LENGTH of these posts!!) instead of just dissing someone, thats easy.

    he actually will debate something sensibly and then go off to find out more if youve given a reasonable argument, and then say "yes, you were right " if you were, or **** you if you were wrong.

    and i don't even like the guy............
    Steve

  4. #109
    Fingerstyle Guitarist taylorguitarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    564
    There is absolute truth, but we are not capable of knowing it. We are limited in our abilities. Truth is not relative, perception of it is.
    However, we can know our own experiences. Unfortunately, that is the extent of what we can "know" for sure, and even those can be wrong sometimes. Math and science can provide a reasonable explanation of how the world works and be incredibly useful, but will never provide absolute truth. It still comes down to faith (belief in something that can't be proved).

  5. #110
    Nosepicker DrakkenKorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    407
    "All truth is parallel, All truth is untrue"
    DrakkenKorin

    Get off my Intarweb!!!!

  6. #111
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Math and science can provide a reasonable explanation of how the world works and be incredibly useful, but will never provide absolute truth. It still comes down to faith "

    Science can never find the "absolute truth" simply because we can't get an infinite number of significant figures on measurements. But we can can get 99.99999% of the absolute truth. So it certainly does not come down to faith, it comes down to probability.

  7. #112
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "and i don't even like the guy............"

    *goes and sulks*

    btw - the last figure i've seen on the witch burnings put them at 50,000........ heh, so much for 9 million eh.
    Last edited by Clyde; 04-17-2002 at 04:16 AM.

  8. #113
    Fingerstyle Guitarist taylorguitarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    564
    When you're dealing with eternity, 0.0000000001% is a large amount to be off by.

  9. #114
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "When you're dealing with eternity, 0.0000000001% is a large amount to be off by"

    Eternity? Science has the power to tell us the properties of the universe, we can measure those properties to rediculous accuracy, but inevitably we cannot measure them infitite accuracy. But that does not prevent us from understanding how and why things work the way they do.

    What it does do, is prevent us predicting systems that are "sensitive to initial conditions" that is the founding principle of chaos theory, and is the reason why we will never be able to predict the weather long term with decent accuracy. We can still understand exactly how those systems work, we just cannot predict them well.

  10. #115
    Christian
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    618
    >Shame only one of them really exists (mind = body). Strrrrrrrriiike ONE!<

    Body- your body

    Mind/heart - Just as the Processor and memory are the most important part of a computer so is the mind/heart. In charge of everything, as all other parts are used for importing/exporting data or pathways between the deferent parts. The same thing applies for the human mind/heart as it controls the body and all other parts simply act as import/export or paths.

    Soul- a soul just is.

    >For the "soul" to exist neurology must be wrong, not only that even the most basic principles of physics must be wrong, hence all the evidence for physics and neurology is evidence against the soul: Strike TWO!<
    Why? acording to physics mater that is less then the size of the earth falls at a rate of 9.81 meaters a second. How does having a soul effect this. also you have given no proof on a soul not exsiting, you'v only said what it dosn't do.

    >Rationality decrees that we build up a picture of reality based upon positive evidence that stuff exists NOT on lack of evidence that stuff does not exist. If as you seem to be saying the latter is actually valid, then we would all go around believeing in fairies, giant invisable hovering bulls, that we were in the Matrix, etc. etc. because none of them have evidence against them. Anyway like i said there is evidence against a soul.<
    Your are confusing common believe and prove of real or non-existence of something.
    I shall call egypt the harmless dragon

    -Isaiah 30.7

  11. #116
    My diaper's full....... stevey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    759
    Originally posted by Clyde
    "and i don't even like the guy............"

    *goes and sulks*

    >>>>


    btw - the last figure i've seen on the witch burnings put them at 50,000........ heh, so much for 9 million eh.
    >>>>did seem a lot. wished you worked my wages out
    Steve

  12. #117
    Registered User Dual-Catfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    802
    Nothing just nothing you just are nothing, no thinking, well you know.

    Why? I've found stronger evidence to support this than anything else. Could god create a boulder so large, even he could not lift it?

  13. #118
    Aran
    Guest
    Originally posted by Clyde
    "There is no "absolute truth" or "absolute universe" because everything is subject to the emotions and senses of the viewer"

    I'm afraid there is an absolute truth, the universe does have fixed properties. Masses accelerate toward the Earth at 9.81 metres per second squared (when they are close to the surface). That's fact.
    How do you know that is a "fact"? it was viewed by a human and measured. It's measurement is completely relative. If everything in the universe grew 60 feet, would you know? no! everything would still appear to be the same because our system of measurements is relative. We just have faith in nature that all the parts of our universe don't simultaneously expand and contract by billions of miles every second. How do you know that things don't rearrange themselves and completely change their properties once you turn your back to them? you don't. You just simply have faith that things will stay as they were the last time you saw them.

    Sciences are based on observation, and observation is based on senses, and senses are based on humans, and humans are error-prone, generalizing, foolish beings. There is no reason to believe anything that you learn, we just choose to because there is no where else to turn.


    If absolute truth did not exist neither would reality.
    reality doesn't exist, and has never existed. There isn't one reality in the universe, there is one for every living being, and every reality is different. There isn't a single static reality.

    Our sense's certainly do not sense the universe the way the universe actually "is". That is why we have such trouble in getting our heads round quantum mechanics and relativity, because we cannot picture them: They are completely contrary to our "picture" of how reality is. But we can get past the inaccuracy of our sense's, using maths, we can model physical processes that we cannot concieve of.
    i find it stupid that we use things based on probably error-prone observations to determine things that we can neither ever see nor understand. The original givens have the same chance as being flawed as what we are trying to figure out.

    But like i said there is an absolute truth, there are fixed properties of the universe.
    prove it.

    Think about what relative truth would actually mean, someone get's stabbed, but truth's relative so from his perspective he get's stabbed but from someone else's perspective who knows..... he might be alive and well on a beach somewhere, clearly that is nonsense, he is either stabbed on an ally-way somewhere OR lieing on the Beach in Hawai, he cannot be both, because truth is absolute, not relative.
    everyone is a trillion places doing a trillion things at once. Just because you know something isn't false is a good enough reason to prove its truth (at least to you).

  14. #119
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    200
    If everything in the universe grew 60 feet, would you know? no! everything would still appear to be the same because our system of measurements is relative.
    Patently false and ridiculous. Trust me, if an electron suddenly became "60 ft" larger(actually meaningless since no dimension is specified. Perhaps you mean doubled, but it still wouldnt work) I think you could notice some differences, considering the 4 inch pen would only be 1.005 times larger than the electron. Rather drastic effects would follow, possibly.

    As to the rest of this thread, the absurd "scientific/philosophy" statements and the "nihilism/existentialism" opinions (quite popular nowadays among the types who listen to Linkin Park et al) are too ridiculous and self contradictory to deign to reply to. I'll stick to refuting wrong science.

  15. #120
    monotonously living Dissata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    341
    I would like to bring one aurgument into this board. Logic. By having logic, and using logic, we are doing something that is in essence, supernatural (not as in religious, but as apposed to natural). our logic, and use of logic is direct proof of items coexisting outside of nature, and her laws. the laws of nature state that things have instinct, and that under the exact same conditions, everything WILL behave in the exact same way. Humans don't. emotion is unpredictable, and uncontrolable (though we can control our emotions to some extent) animals do not have emotion, they have instinct, they have drive, they live in a naural world in which they do no percieve as anything but natural, they don't think, they do no dabate, they have not logic, and they have no form of advanced communication.

    Humans are the only species found that has these properties. If these were the functions of a mere brain then animals would to extent have these abilities. I will expand upon this therom

    can we debate that there is nothing supernatural by proving that there is something natural? that is like saying tour going to prove we have no hands by saying we have feet. Our logic comes from a supernatul force cause, whatever. a force that coexists and at the same ime defies nature. emotions are a friction of these existances. ideas that you just come up with, spontanious thoughts are caused not by spontanious movements of protons, but by the force of something supernatural causeing those protons to be spontanieous.

    something to think about on why the protons cannot just be spontaneous is: what in this universe, that we can completely prove is spontanious? what theory in any scientific theory includes somthing spontanious? there is nothing spontaineous in science! nothing that is not perfectly in order. what we see as spontaneous is either in a much more complex pattern than we are guessing or that they affected by something else which would be supernatural.

    I am not good at explaining things and I'm not sure I got the correct theory across that i was trying, but if you want to read more on this subject here are some links supporting, and contradicting the book, I encourage you to think for yourself, use you logic and find the what can only be logical truth. (I'm not saying I'm right, far from it, I want you to study the subject for a year and tell me the answer)

    I found something that tries and disproove the book.
    read the book. read the article

    http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../miracles.html
    if a contradiction was contradicted would that contradition contradict the origional crontradiction?

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Game Of Life 3D
    By blackslither in forum C Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-02-2008, 03:30 PM
  2. Artificial Life: Where to Start?
    By Mr.Sellars in forum General AI Programming
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-22-2007, 03:03 AM
  3. Game of life
    By JoshR in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 04-03-2005, 03:17 PM
  4. The Meaning of Life: A Trick Question?
    By chix/w/guns in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-12-2004, 08:53 PM
  5. Life, The Universe, and everything else
    By ZooTrigger1191 in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-29-2003, 05:33 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21