info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
To choose
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Nando Ronteltap
May 28, 2022, 8:06:12 PM5/28/22
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
It means to make one of alternative possible futures the present. Or maybe, to make a possible future the present, or not. But that may be a distinction without a difference.
It is a certain fact that (real) randomness exists in the universe. Events which have multiple possible outcomes, and it is decided.
Some quantumcomputer experiment exploited the reality of the possible route that a photon "could" have taken, but did not take, in order to search a database, without running the search algorithm.
So that is not just theory, but practise, that freedom is indeed, real.
Then obviously subjectivity is about what it is that makes this real randomness, these decisions, turn out the way they does. Obvious because, the logic used with subjective words in common discourse, is that they are about what it is that makes decisions turn out the way they do.
Which means creationism is true:
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
1. There are the alternative futures A and B availabe.
2. A is made the present, meaning A is chosen.
3. Then there is the question, what was it that made the decision turn out A?
4. Then the answer is a choice between subjective words P and Q.
5. There are the alternative future available of saying it was P, and saying it was Q.
6. P is made the present, meaning the subjective opinion expressed is that P made the decision turn out A
The spirit sees both alternative futures A and B, and makes either of them the present.
To combine choosing with selection of options, requires a simulation of what the result would be when A would be chosen and when B would be chosen. Which results are then run through a selection procedure, which forces to a particular result. Supposing the result of the selection procedure is option A.
So now the spirit still has the possibilities A and B available, and the option A is shown as the result in the simulation.
Whatever. It is getting too complicated to describe the precise detail of human decisionmaking processes.
In any case the whole bit about selecting options is obviously just a complicated way of choosing, and not the fundamental meaning of it.
Yet still the great majority of people conflate the moral advice to do your best, with the barebone logic of choosing.
When faced with alternative possible futures A and B, people cannot resist the temptation to think, which one is better? The spectre of the best.
I insist you all stop that foolishness, and accept the obvious truth of creationism. So that people are free to do science, objectivity, and religion, subjectivity. Instead of as now, that subjectivity and objectivity are held in a bizarre competition with each other.
It is a certain fact that (real) randomness exists in the universe. Events which have multiple possible outcomes, and it is decided.
Some quantumcomputer experiment exploited the reality of the possible route that a photon "could" have taken, but did not take, in order to search a database, without running the search algorithm.
So that is not just theory, but practise, that freedom is indeed, real.
Then obviously subjectivity is about what it is that makes this real randomness, these decisions, turn out the way they does. Obvious because, the logic used with subjective words in common discourse, is that they are about what it is that makes decisions turn out the way they do.
Which means creationism is true:
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
1. There are the alternative futures A and B availabe.
2. A is made the present, meaning A is chosen.
3. Then there is the question, what was it that made the decision turn out A?
4. Then the answer is a choice between subjective words P and Q.
5. There are the alternative future available of saying it was P, and saying it was Q.
6. P is made the present, meaning the subjective opinion expressed is that P made the decision turn out A
The spirit sees both alternative futures A and B, and makes either of them the present.
To combine choosing with selection of options, requires a simulation of what the result would be when A would be chosen and when B would be chosen. Which results are then run through a selection procedure, which forces to a particular result. Supposing the result of the selection procedure is option A.
So now the spirit still has the possibilities A and B available, and the option A is shown as the result in the simulation.
Whatever. It is getting too complicated to describe the precise detail of human decisionmaking processes.
In any case the whole bit about selecting options is obviously just a complicated way of choosing, and not the fundamental meaning of it.
Yet still the great majority of people conflate the moral advice to do your best, with the barebone logic of choosing.
When faced with alternative possible futures A and B, people cannot resist the temptation to think, which one is better? The spectre of the best.
I insist you all stop that foolishness, and accept the obvious truth of creationism. So that people are free to do science, objectivity, and religion, subjectivity. Instead of as now, that subjectivity and objectivity are held in a bizarre competition with each other.
0 new messages