Emergent Complexity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-04-2013, 01:30 PM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(16-01-1970 01:20 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "Eternal" in Philosophy and Theology is TIMELESSNESS, NOT ENDLESS TIME. BlowJob needs an education, seriously, badly.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eternity/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2013, 02:01 PM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(10-04-2013 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(16-01-1970 01:20 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "Eternal" in Philosophy and Theology is TIMELESSNESS, NOT ENDLESS TIME. BlowJob needs an education, seriously, badly.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eternity/

Seriously. Now all ya gotta do, is tell me how in a timeLESS environment, a T+ 1 works. BTW, the Stanford article is EXACTLTY what I just said. Thanks for confirming it. Thanks for yet again FAILING to answer or address even ONE of the points I made.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-04-2013, 05:22 PM
RE: Emergent Complexity
Simplicity and Complexity are a matter of perspective.

If we look at a thunder storm, can we pick a moment when it begins ?
At what moment did the blowing wind, occasional lightning and darkened skies become a thunder storm ?
Is the storm simple or complex ?

If you see complexity, do you also see the hand of Thor in the making of the storm ?
If you understand all the natural components that are involved in the storm, all the physics of how weather is generated, then you may see it as a simple natural act, devoid of a god like Thor as some would say is a necessary component for any storm to begin.

Complexity is what we see when we don't understand how it all works.
Simplicity is what we see when we do

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Rahn127's post
11-04-2013, 12:09 AM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(10-04-2013 02:01 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(10-04-2013 01:30 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/eternity/

Seriously. Now all ya gotta do, is tell me how in a timeLESS environment, a T+ 1 works. BTW, the Stanford article is EXACTLTY what I just said. Thanks for confirming it. Thanks for yet again FAILING to answer or address even ONE of the points I made.

You're cherrypicking what you want out of the Stanford article. It talked about timelessness AND everlastingness. You focused on the former and ignored the latter.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2013, 12:15 AM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(10-04-2013 05:22 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Simplicity and Complexity are a matter of perspective.

If we look at a thunder storm, can we pick a moment when it begins ?
At what moment did the blowing wind, occasional lightning and darkened skies become a thunder storm ?
Is the storm simple or complex ?

If you see complexity, do you also see the hand of Thor in the making of the storm ?
If you understand all the natural components that are involved in the storm, all the physics of how weather is generated, then you may see it as a simple natural act, devoid of a god like Thor as some would say is a necessary component for any storm to begin.

Complexity is what we see when we don't understand how it all works.
Simplicity is what we see when we do

What if I see and understand a hydrogen atom and a phospholipid. Is one more complex than the other? Or are they both equally simple because I understand them?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2013, 02:46 AM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(11-04-2013 12:09 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(10-04-2013 02:01 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Seriously. Now all ya gotta do, is tell me how in a timeLESS environment, a T+ 1 works. BTW, the Stanford article is EXACTLTY what I just said. Thanks for confirming it. Thanks for yet again FAILING to answer or address even ONE of the points I made.

You're cherrypicking what you want out of the Stanford article. It talked about timelessness AND everlastingness. You focused on the former and ignored the latter.

Speaking of "cherry picking" YOU have not even begun to address ANY of the point sI have made. 1 article from Stanford isn't going to do it. YOU have to explain how and why it refutes something. Seriously ? How is a "perfect god" "improving" ? Name 1 theologian or philosopher that has ever said anything so completely lame.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2013, 03:08 AM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(11-04-2013 02:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(11-04-2013 12:09 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  You're cherrypicking what you want out of the Stanford article. It talked about timelessness AND everlastingness. You focused on the former and ignored the latter.

Speaking of "cherry picking" YOU have not even begun to address ANY of the point sI have made. 1 article from Stanford isn't going to do it. YOU have to explain how and why it refutes something. Seriously ? How is a "perfect god" "improving" ? Name 1 theologian or philosopher that has ever said anything so completely lame.

If I had some respect for you, I would make it a point to respond to more of your posts. Sometimes I read a post that I don't really want to bother responding too, but will respond out of respect to the person who wrote it.....you're not one of those people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2013, 07:24 AM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(11-04-2013 12:15 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(10-04-2013 05:22 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Simplicity and Complexity are a matter of perspective.

If we look at a thunder storm, can we pick a moment when it begins ?
At what moment did the blowing wind, occasional lightning and darkened skies become a thunder storm ?
Is the storm simple or complex ?

If you see complexity, do you also see the hand of Thor in the making of the storm ?
If you understand all the natural components that are involved in the storm, all the physics of how weather is generated, then you may see it as a simple natural act, devoid of a god like Thor as some would say is a necessary component for any storm to begin.

Complexity is what we see when we don't understand how it all works.
Simplicity is what we see when we do

What if I see and understand a hydrogen atom and a phospholipid. Is one more complex than the other? Or are they both equally simple because I understand them?

I don't know what "equally simple" means. A hydrogen atom is simple and complex. A phospholipid is simple and complex. It is about perspective. At what level am I viewing the Hydrogen atom? Is it at the macro scale of its basic properties? Simple. Is it at a finer scale of its basic components and their individual properties? Complex. Same goes for the phospholipid. And no, they are not "equally simple" if you mean that at the level they are simple, they are equal.

And something being simple or complex is not contingent upon any one persons ability to comprehend it. If that were the case, then nothing would be simple since there would always be people unable to comprehend it.

But I can only assume you are not actually trying to make a legitimate point and are instead, trying to play with words to muddle the issue so that you can claim some sort of hollow victory.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
11-04-2013, 08:31 AM (This post was last modified: 12-04-2013 11:33 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Emergent Complexity
(11-04-2013 03:08 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(11-04-2013 02:46 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Speaking of "cherry picking" YOU have not even begun to address ANY of the point sI have made. 1 article from Stanford isn't going to do it. YOU have to explain how and why it refutes something. Seriously ? How is a "perfect god" "improving" ? Name 1 theologian or philosopher that has ever said anything so completely lame.

If I had some respect for you, I would make it a point to respond to more of your posts. Sometimes I read a post that I don't really want to bother responding too, but will respond out of respect to the person who wrote it.....you're not one of those people.

Exactly. You can't. Just like Egor. Respect has nothing to do with it. Admit it. You are a troll..

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
11-04-2013, 03:01 PM
RE: Emergent Complexity
(11-04-2013 07:24 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  And something being simple or complex is not contingent upon any one persons ability to comprehend it. If that were the case, then nothing would be simple since there would always be people unable to comprehend it.

True, but the perception of that thing changes in the mind of someone that gains greater understanding of that thing. Objectively the object has not changed, but subjectively an increase in understanding makes the entity in question appear less complex. That's my two cents.

I hope no one is replying in an attempt to change Heywoods mind, but instead only replying as target practice. Using faulty arguments for his points of view and ignoring rebuttals, he's not going to change his mind on this. Presupposing the conclusion is a nasty (and unscientific) thing to do.

2.5 billion seconds total
1.67 billion seconds conscious

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: