Scientists create artificial life

This is a discussion on Scientists create artificial life within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by brewbuck I don't think there is a good. I do "good" things because that's what my momma ...

  1. #91
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383
    Quote Originally Posted by brewbuck View Post
    I don't think there is a good. I do "good" things because that's what my momma taught me. I really don't think it goes any further than that.

    The universe laughs at us for worrying about such silly crap.
    I confess sometimes the nihilist approach is very appealing to me too. I do have some of it in me. Not so much on this aspect, but in other matters (like life and death).
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  2. #92
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by cyberfish View Post
    You got one right here!

    I think it makes sense. If you believe it and doing it calms you, it works as a therapy.

    No my friend..there's the point where psychology cannot help you and they point you to priest. Exorcism is pretty rare...one catholic priest in Vatican says that about 98% of "possessions" are in fact psychological disorders the rest are real possessions and the only way to "heal" the person is through the ritual of exorcism.

  3. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    Why? Is this a trick question?
    I don't know how you look at it...is it?

  4. #94
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by brewbuck View Post
    I do "good" things because that's what my momma taught me. I really don't think it goes any further than that.
    Because you're an unreflective bumpkin . There is obviously a rational and empirical element -- social animals (like homo sapiens) which cannot do any good for anyone else tend to end up ostracised and/or dead. This does not mean they have to do good for everyone, of course.

    I heard of an interesting study lately whereby pre-verbal babies were shown simple morality plays with puppets and clearly demonstrated a passing of judgement on characters who did "bad" things to other puppets. Being well behaved probably has a significant natural/genetic component, or at least our genetic heritage has left us with capacities the evolutionary purpose of which is making moral distinctions.

    Most likely, being "bad" is much more of a learned activity. Eg, AFAIK all carnivorous mammals must learn to hunt.

    Quote Originally Posted by dotunix View Post
    one catholic priest in Vatican says that about 98% of "possessions" are in fact psychological disorders the rest are real possessions and the only way to "heal" the person is through the ritual of exorcism.
    Again, this is just the aliens playing mind games with the clergy.
    Last edited by MK27; 05-23-2010 at 09:54 AM.
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  5. #95
    Registered User C_ntua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,853
    Quote Originally Posted by brewbuck View Post
    I don't think there is a good. I do "good" things because that's what my momma taught me. I really don't think it goes any further than that.

    The universe laughs at us for worrying about such silly crap.
    That is sort of where I was going with my question.
    My personal opinion is that it makes more sense to define good/evil in a way that it gives you a reason to be good/evil. Otherwise, you are most likely worrying without a reason. Creating restrictions rather than freeing yourself from them.

    But it goes the other way around for some. They worry about such silly crap that is why the feel it goes further. Which makes them serious crap for them. Saying that it doesn't "go further" implies that either they are stuck to worry, which is not a very optimistic approach. My point being that the worrying makes it wort it for many people, as the alternative is worse for them.

  6. #96
    Devil's Advocate SlyMaelstrom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Out of scope
    Posts
    4,062
    Quote Originally Posted by ethic View Post
    Personally, I think circumcision is a good thing. I was
    circumcised and it's the best thing that ever happened
    to me.

    +1 for circumcision.
    Gonna raise the TMI flag on this one.
    Sent from my iPad®

  7. #97
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by C_ntua View Post
    My personal opinion is that it makes more sense to define good/evil in a way that it gives you a reason to be good/evil.
    Sure, but as a religious person you must dismiss the logic of nature and make it seem like we need the Church to morally guide us, because it is the foundation of rational morality, when in truth religion is a perversion of such whose historical significance is simply about power and politics, and for whom "morality" is a means of social control used to justify ancient hegemonic political structures and endlessly perverse, abhorrent behaviour by it's followers (eg, Manifest Destiny).
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  8. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    So what is good or bad anyway? How does one define that?
    It can be relative for each person. Is there an absolute definition of these two?

  9. #99
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383
    Quote Originally Posted by dotunix View Post
    I don't know how you look at it...is it?
    Well, I don't know. The answer is on your side, no?

    I mean, what on earth do you think an atheist as to say about exorcism? And why exorcism? Don't you agree that is a strange question? I'd expect to be asked... I don't know... what do I think of churches values concerning good or evil, or at the very least questions concerning the doubtful nature of being an atheist (I agree it's hard to believe there is such a thing is true atheism). But exorcism? Weird.

    But you want an answer, right? Fine.

    I think its an ignorant ritual fueled by the church dogma. But that is exceedingly embarrassing in our modern societies and so the church rarely feels comfortable discussing or even hearing it mentioned.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  10. #100
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by dotunix View Post
    So what is good or bad anyway? How does one define that?
    It can be relative for each person. Is there an absolute definition of these two?
    Right, so now we pretend it is all just subjective and relativistic without God to provide a reference point. Maybe y'all should try reading some other book...
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  11. #101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    I think its an ignorant ritual fueled by the church dogma. But that is exceedingly embarrassing in our modern societies and so the church rarely feels comfortable discussing or even hearing it mentioned.
    Few words here:
    -ignorant
    -embarrassing
    -modern

    What is ignorant about it?
    Why embarrassing? Because of the science?
    Modern? Modern technology, modern lifestyle, modern values? Modern as opposed to what? Church teachings?

    Anyway, Church's mission is not spectacle, but to provide the good news of salvation, to spread the faith in Jesus Christ.
    So every exorcism is kept in secret, not to give too much attention to devil (spectacle) and to keep possessed person's dignity.

  12. #102
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by MK27 View Post
    Right, so now we pretend it is all just subjective and relativistic without God to provide a reference point. Maybe y'all should try reading some other book...
    Is that your conclusion?

  13. #103
    spurious conceit MK27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    segmentation fault
    Posts
    8,300
    Quote Originally Posted by dotunix View Post
    Is that your conclusion?
    Yes, as I said before I think the vast majority of people who claim to believe in God are lying. They may have very good reasons to do so -- such lies are no real crime. Religion is not completely without some redeeming value.

    However, I think they are also aware of the "moral weakness" inherent in this stance, and as a defence they make these kinds of arguments (that objective morality is impossible without a God), all of which can be dismissed reductio ad absurdium.
    C programming resources:
    GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
    The C Book -- nice online learner guide
    Current ISO draft standard
    CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
    3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
    cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge

  14. #104
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,383
    Quote Originally Posted by dotunix View Post
    What is ignorant about it?
    The fact they believe and support the notion people get possessed.

    Why embarrassing? Because of the science?
    Because the idea of possessions and exorcism very closely rubs against the notion of superstition. A word very dangerous to any church, and avoided at all costs. It's the fastest way to lose your supporters and the faithful, in these day and age where even Faith is becoming a luxury.

    Anyway, Church's mission is not spectacle, but to provide the good news of salvation, to spread the faith in Jesus Christ.
    So every exorcism is kept in secret, not to give too much attention to devil (spectacle) and to keep possessed person's dignity.
    Right. Yeah. Whatever.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  15. #105
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Croatia
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    The fact they believe and support the notion people get possessed.
    They don't believe here....they actually preform the ritual and through the name of Jesus Christ heal the person.
    It happens that possessed person can't stand any elements which are being used in the process of exorcism (sign of cross, holy water, name of Jesus Christ...). Self suggestion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    Because the idea of possessions and exorcism very closely rubs against the notion of superstition.
    Superstition?
    I think you should study exorcism. See what other side says about it.
    Otherwise..this doesn't make any sense at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F. View Post
    Right. Yeah. Whatever.
    See, that is the problem why people are so judgemental towards religion. No one really understand what the religion is all about. No one actually took time to study church's teachings and yet they take every right to spit on it based on superficial information they gathered from the media.
    That my friend is an ignorance.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Can't create child windows
    By OnionKnight in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-10-2011, 04:13 PM
  2. Computer Scientists and Hacking
    By TheDan in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-04-2006, 08:44 PM
  3. Create a file from c++ program
    By Dan17 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-08-2006, 04:25 PM
  4. Button handler
    By Nephiroth in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-12-2006, 05:23 AM
  5. Satan
    By Unregistered in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 12-03-2001, 10:31 PM

Tags for this Thread


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