Philosophy Now Forum

Apologies to Aetixintro and everyone else for hijacking this thread with my attention seeking ways, and to Chaz for telling you you were wrong about the aiming ability of computers, when you were of course totally essentially correct as always. Off now to split some hairs with a sharp object, before...

Maybe it's needed, but I don't see how we can get there... Any suggestions? True, pico-engineering in this context would be GREAT!! :) If you build some micro scale robots, and give them instructions to build smaller versions of themselves (easier said than done!) you could possibly kick off a recu...

Haha, I couldn't tell at first, what does that say about me, doh :P You? What does it say about me that you thought those were normal Typist posts?? :lol: :lol: Hah, in honesty I didn't read the name until the second post, and was still primed for contention, and I'm just very gullible too! :lol: &...

Arising_uk wrote:

bytesplicer wrote:... am I missing something there?[/b]Yes, Typist is just attempting to take the piss out of CW.

Haha, I couldn't tell at first, what does that say about me, doh

Wow! Even though this seems to be aimed at me, NO! You're wrong again, due to your unreasonable inflection upon the suchness of oneness within the paranoid parabolical divergence paradigm. Hahaha, that was a very well constructed non-argument! I am bowled over by the sheer awesomeness of that sente...

Wrong, misinterpretation, illogical, preposterous, pathetic squirmy word play, irrepresentational of irrational irreality, in a pedalogical shrillness of prehistoric numbering systems, which is not related to whining about archaeological permutations of the linear order of supposedly circular argum...

We are Borg! We are Bored! Haha that is more apt! Ah, I get it now. Thanks, quite thought provoking. Yes, makes perfect sense. If the boundary between the real world and simulation is made blurry, this would seem to be a logical outcome. The whole of idea of making a permanent commitment to a simul...

Not that the history of mathematics is at all relevant to what I'm saying, but I think you're way off here. First, mathematics is and has been an ongoing process, we have methods now far in advance of what the Greeks or Babylonians had come up with, we see more of nature, and the application of tha...

Haha, still, those pimply 19 year olds probably also have an awesome fantasy back-catalogue! Oh that's silly, they don't even know who Diane Lane is!!! :lol: Seriously, your comment made me realize that emerging simulation technology would be led by young people, those not imprisoned within the old...

This is starting to go too far. Inevitably we would express the action of the brain as mathematical. But as maths is ipso facto and invention of Babylonian and Greek scholars, identifiable at a particular historical point, it is rather churlish to say that we have hit upon the language of god as so...

In a way the whole basis of our art is linked in with the idea of simulation (art itself being a simulation of a kind, something that takes your mind someplace else, or a glimpse into an alternate, or modified reality). Good point, that's interesting. I hadn't thought of that, but I see your point....

What happens if we develop technology that fulfills all our dreams by giving us everything we want, and after gorging for awhile, we then realize we STILL aren't happy? Could be a very existential moment, leading to suicides etc? You should know there is no such thing as true happiness. It doesnt m...

This is starting to go too far. Inevitably we would express the action of the brain as mathematical. But as maths is ipso facto and invention of Babylonian and Greek scholars, identifiable at a particular historical point, it is rather churlish to say that we have hit upon the language of god as so...

Some good answers there, not all of which I agree with entirely but you make a strong case for why I may be over-imaginating things :) The places where we truly diverge are quite difficult to resolve. "No because there was no maths involved, in any sense. The brain using its own method, unconsc...

Haha, you've clearly thought about this a lot you naughty little imp! No, that's wrong, I don't believe in thought, as I've clearly explained in my 47,234,983 posts on this forum. But, oh my, you are proving to be a spectacular simulation scenario speculator. :lol: Heheh you are prolific to say the...