Philosophical Question - Amiguing

[Iggy]

I wonder what the incidence rate of individuals who fall within the Autistic Spectrum are within the Amiga community (or even retro computing communities in general) is compared with society as a whole?
 
I'd be willing to wager it is pretty high.

This is about the fourth time in only a few months that someone I know has asked this question.
And the answer is a clear yes.
Autistic, mentally unbalanced, etc.

[Iggy]

God creating he universe is also a much more unlikely situation than the big bang happening on it's own, you have to brush aside logic completely to believe in God (likely/unlikely of course has no bearing on what actually happened).

Actually, I have no problem with the Big Bang being the mode of creation.
"Let there be light", boom.
Yep, that works for me.
And I also don't have a problem with evolution being yet another mode of creation.
One that, instead of lasting only seven days, continues indefinitely.
Also, when you study biology, you see some weird jumps from one species to it descendants.
For instance, there is no intermediate structure between hair and feathers.
You have one or the other.

[Iggy]

I actually think this will turn out to not be true.
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19422430
 
Having one or the other is like people generally only having one hair colour.
 
While god might have triggered the big bang, none of the large organised religions have dared throw away all their theories about how the universe was created in light of scientific evidence. Instead they have spent a long time trying to disprove science to show that their god exists (which is a logical fallacy but hey).
 
Science cannot disprove the possibility of a god, it can only blow huge holes in religious texts written by man. As the writers god is supposed to have been heavily involved in the creation of those texts then they were either deluded, liars or their god is a practical joker. You could argue that there has been misinterpretation, but I cannot believe that a god that influenced the writing of religion texts would have allowed that to happen.
 
But there could be a god that hasn't influenced any religions that created the visible universe. However this opens up even more questions than it answers as you then have to consider what else is there outside the visible universe. So while god might be the actual answer, it's a rather farfetched and inconvenient one (unless you are into blind faith or you're the one manipulating the masses).

I'm not sure what the reference has to do with the hair vs feathers question, but I wholly agree with you about ancient texts  written by man.
Blind faith to the literal translation of said texts does more to discredit religion than any other practice.

[Iggy]

What makes you think Islam is at odds with natural selection?

Thanks Nik,
I don't have any problem reconciling religion with natural selection either.
Apparently I now have to accept the weight of a lot of other believers with rigid interpretations.

[Iggy]

There seems to be a lot of worry about why God didn't tell us exactly how long it took. Well firstly because it doesn't even matter. It's just a narrative device. Obsessing over the literal meaning of it completely misses the point. Actually if anything it's an etiological myth that explains why we have a seven-day week with one day off, as such it gives us far more useful information about how to live our lives than "13.8 billion years" does.

This latter we were able to find out by ourselves anyway, which is part of the fun of existing. You'll be complaining next that God didn't do your crossword puzzle for you.

Whether God "controlled" evolution or not, I don't know, or why it matters. God created the laws of nature, so He created evolution. But if He does control it at all, well mutations are essentially the result of quantum probabilities, which due to Bell's theorem aren't predictable using any information in the Universe, so if they're not truly random (which to my mind is absurd) this information must be coming from outside the Universe.

Yes, that was good.
Something binds this (and the other) universes at (and below) a quantum level.
And it seems to be based on order.
And if you study evolution closely, you'll notice that not all the mutations appear random.

And, no, I don't believe God actively plays with our DNA.

[Iggy]

God didn't write the bible.
People wrote the bible.
My bible is written in English as are most.

True, except maybe the last line.
It has to be the most translated book of all time.

[Iggy]

It's obvious to me that it's this world that looks after us. We're quite powerless, and can't control or contend with the extraordinary power of nature, at least not for a LONG time. As of yet, she provides everything we require.
If Mother Nature wants to get rid of us, she will in a heart beat. We won't have a say in it.

I too, believe that will inevitably happen.
And, sorry Star Trek fans, but our bodies aren't well suited to other environments.
But, hopefully, I won't live to witness it.

Finally, I think the term caretakers is more in how we treat the planet.
Since we can't really control our eventual fate, but we can do a lot of damage.

[Iggy]

Caretaker is what is meant in the narration I mentioned earlier when I translated it as viceregent.

I rather figured so, Nik.
And if we trash it, we hasten our demise.

[Iggy]

That's quite an assertion, to be saying that every single religion is not just altogether wrong, but obviously altogether wrong. It's certainly not easy (or probably even possible) to prove them right, so skepticism is understandable, but that's a far cry from any of them being as self-evidently groundless as you're saying...

Yes, that is a good point.
And I think most people don't really get religions.
Most have lesson embedded in them on how to be a better person (humility, giving, consideration, etc).

Good reference, believe it or not, Black Sabbath - After Forever

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/black+sabbath/after+forever_20019384.html

Perhaps you'll think before you say that God is dead and gone
Open your eyes, just realize that he's the one
The only one who can save you now from all this sin and hate
Or will you still jeer at all you hear?
Yes! I think it's too late.

Yeah, the self proclaimed 'Prince of Darkness' is a Christian.
Went to a boys school in Birmingham.
Practiced at Saint Joseph's RC originally (as did Judas Priest).

And Ronnie James Dio was Catholic.

[Iggy]

'Blatantly obvious' to you perhaps.

You'll find out for sure one day.....

Actually, if he's right, he won't find out.
He'll just die.

But I think the answer is all around us screaming for attention and people like him are just deaf to the sound.

[Iggy]

Perversely enough, when I study complex physics is when I'm most convinced that there is a unifying force behind all this.

[Iggy]

I never said there isn't more, just that human religion is wrong.

The only answer is that there has always been something, and what or who that is, is unknown. From purely mechanical, physical 'stuff' all the way to one or more omnipotent beings, and even both. It's possible, but I seriously doubt the answers are in thousands of years old books.

You are now closer to what I feel.
Humans are chronic screw-ups.
So how could we divine to nature of the universe within our limitations?
But that doesn't mean we should use whatever is positive to improve ourselves.

[Iggy]

True, I just find it highly unlikely any one of them is right.

I like the use of that word.
That is why its sometimes useful to roll your own.

[Iggy]

...But worse, much worse than that, it implies that a machine could never be "intelligent" or "creative" or even be considered as sentient. This to me seems absurd, I think it's perfectly reasonable to have sentient machines and for that I will argue

Pure science fiction, the idea of sentient machines.
Machines that mimic sentient behavior so well that it seems realistic?
Sure.

Now your point on animals?
I wholly agree, they deserve consideration.

[Iggy]

Doesn't answer the question, if a machine can be sentient?

And, further, how will we tell?
What if its just a really good simulation of sentient thought?