0
0

Schrodinger's Cat


 invite response                
2012 Jan 5, 5:04am   34,547 views  68 comments

by marcus   ➕follow (6)   💰tip   ignore  

In this famous thought experiment, which could actually be done, someone might say, "well, since by definition, we don't know whether the cat is alive or dead, the statement that the cat is alive is by definition false."

True, it is false in the sense that we can not know that it's alive. Therefore the statement that it's alive is false.

What might be easy to miss though, by someone who is only parroting this argument and using it in a fallacious way, is that the exact same reasoning can be made regarding someone who says the cat is dead.

That statement is also false.

We just don't know.

« First        Comments 47 - 68 of 68        Search these comments

49   Dan8267   2012 Jan 19, 2:06pm  

But gay marriage is out of question!

50   Dan8267   2012 Jan 19, 2:11pm  

Um, it was the Bible belt that attempted to succeed from the Union and started the Civil War.

51   Dan8267   2012 Jan 19, 2:14pm  

Atheists, winning since 300 B.C.E.

52   marcus   2012 Jan 19, 2:21pm  

Dan8267 says

Marcus's incorrect argument that the Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment means that there is a god?

The funny thing, is that after all the times I clarified, I honestly believe that's his inference of what my point was.

And he wonders why he didn't hear more arguments from me.

Cool Shrekian troll moves dude.

55   marcus   2012 Jan 19, 2:37pm  

You moderates out there, and right wingers too, please don't think that all liberals are assholes like Dan. I think he wants you to think that.

56   Dan8267   2012 Jan 19, 2:52pm  

marcus says

You moderates out there, and right wingers too, please don't think that all liberals are assholes like Dan. I think he wants you to think that.

Wow, I'm the first liberal that wants to see Romney beat Obama in the upcoming election. I'm so far left.

Dan8267 says

It makes no sense for me to argue against your imaginary and paranoid delusions of what you think I believe. I will just say this. I am like a mirror. I reflect the inner image of the person talking to me, only inverted. Right-wing nuts see me as an elite liberal socialist. Left-wing nuts see me as a heartless conservative fascist/capitalist. In both cases, it is the one looking into the mirror that casts the image.

I am orthogonal to the batshit crazy left-right line you and your ultracon counterparts draw. The truth, and my beliefs, does not lie between dumb ass Tea Baggers and dumb ass hippies. No, it lies on the other side of the smart-dumb axis, which evidently runs at a right angle to the left-right axis. So maybe you should stop talking out of your ass about what other people must be thinking, and instead listen and ask questions when you are uncertain.

Yet, I keep having to repeat that. So polarized has our society become.

57   freak80   2012 Jan 24, 11:15pm  

Dan8267 says

Why the hell is an ancient Middle Eastern man being rendered as a white guy with blue eyes? He's literally fucken cartoonified!
I guess the south wouldn't be as apt to worship the guy if they knew he was a dark brown skin man.

Yes, the presentation of Jesus with blue eyes and blonde hair is pretty ridiculous. In African countries, Jesus is portrayed as someone from Africa. I suppose it's just human nature to think that all humans look like the locals. But that's a whole different topic.

But you claimed that Constantine, specifically, cartoonified him and essentially made up everything about his life, and you have yet to offer any specific evidence for that claim.

The following Pauline Epistles were written between 50 and 60 AD and record the same beliefs of Christians today: First Thesselonians, Phillipians, Philemon, First & Second Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. If there's evidence that Constantine did some "shuck and jive" with those documents, then let's hear it.

58   freak80   2012 Jan 24, 11:33pm  

Dan,

Believe it or not, I completely agree with you that "God personally told me to do X, Y, and Z" is very dangerous. During the protestant reformation, that kind of thinking was called "enthusiasm" or literally, "god-within-ism".

The following article is by a conservative Christian and is very critical of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry:

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2011/08/19/the-politics-of-enthusiasm/&sa=U&ei=PiAgT6zEPMagsQKxvrScDg&ved=0CBAQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHLhNg7LzlCFajEa-WtrFEEfuFKqw

Not all Christians are Pentecostal wackos.

59   freak80   2012 Jan 24, 11:42pm  

Marriage is a whole new debate. With regard to marriage, maybe the best solution is to keep the government out it? If marriage is an inherently religious institution, than the establishment clause makes a good case for keeping government out of marriage.

Ultimately, what's the point of "marriage" anyway, now that pro-creation is essentially "optional?" Is marriage just a tool for "gold diggers" to get their hands on another person's money?

But again, that's a whole 'nuther topic.

60   Dan8267   2012 Jan 25, 12:45am  

wthrfrk80 says

But you claimed that Constantine, specifically, cartoonified him and essentially made up everything about his life, and you have yet to offer any specific evidence for that claim.

Correction, what I said was:

Dan8267 says

Christianity was a radical religion when it was started. That's why Christ was crucified. He was a threat to the establishment. After he died, like all rebels, he was cartoonified and incorporated into the state by Constantine, who found Christ useful for manipulating the peasantry of the Roman empire. Had that not happened, Christianity would not even exist. But when that happened, Christianity ceased being a radical religion and started towing the state line.

And this is well supported. For example, the book Constantine: Roman Emperor, Christian Victor goes into detail about how Constantine manipulated Christianity for political gains. Publishers Weekly book summarizes this book and Constantine's motives

Stephenson, a historian at the University of Durham, successfully combines historical documents, examples of Roman art, sculpture, and coinage with the lessons of geopolitics to produce a complex biography of the Emperor Constantine. Rather than the divinely guided hero of legend who singlehandedly brought pagan Rome to Christian orthodoxy, Constantine is depicted as very much a product of his political environment. Recognizing the growing influence of the Christian Church, he adapted the generally pacifist faith to the Roman theology of victory and created a newly militant Christianity that would sustain his rule. Constantine wisely sought to impose religious toleration on the diverse Roman Empire while discouraging trivial disputes among the Christian faithful. Stephenson examines the variety of religious beliefs in the early fourth century with emphasis on Mithraism, a pagan mystery cult practiced by pre-Constantine soldiers, and on the bitter divisions within victorious Christianity that ultimately led to the Council of Nicaea. Constantine is revealed as a master politician who, while delaying his own baptism for reasons not fully explained in the text, became the ruler of both church and state.

But all the physical evidence and historical documents isn't going to convince you that Christianity could have easily been a footnote in history if it weren't for Constantine. After all, if Christianity exists only because a corrupt politician -- and I know that's redundant -- decided that it would be useful for controlling the masses, then surely Christianity has no merit and is nothing but lies. Since you cannot accept the conclusion, you ignore the facts. That is the entire basis of faith. Science, on the other hand, says that the facts determine the conclusion and whether or not you like the conclusion has no bearing on whether or not it is correct.

61   freak80   2012 Jan 25, 1:06am  

Dan8267 says

But all the physical evidence and historical documents isn't going to convince you that Christianity could have easily been a footnote in history if it weren't for Constantine.

Why do you say that? If Chrisitianity is little more than Constantine's invention, I don't want anything to do with it. Why live for a lie? That would be tragic.

If there's good evidence that Christian beliefs were not actually established by Jesus and Paul in the first century, but rather by Constantine, I will reject Christianity. I will read that book.

At this point, I just want the truth.

63   freak80   2012 Jan 25, 1:47am  

Dan,

I'm behind a Websense firewall, so I cannot watch any videos right now. What is the video about? Can you explain it in words?

64   Dan8267   2012 Jan 25, 2:16am  

You can't handle words!

65   freak80   2012 Jan 25, 2:18am  

That's an extremely rude comment, is it not? Why should I take you seriously any longer?

66   Dan8267   2012 Jan 25, 3:56am  

wthrfrk80 says

That's an extremely rude comment, is it not?

No, your humor detector is malfunctioning. Try hitting it on the side.

67   MisdemeanorRebel   2012 Feb 1, 2:31am  

Cloud says

"all catholic woman are sluts."

http://vimeo.com/7247863

68   Dan8267   2012 Feb 1, 4:05am  

thunderlips11 says

Cloud says

"all catholic woman are sluts."

http://vimeo.com/7247863

Homo Economicus. Like Bigfoot, reported to exist in fantasy books, but never seen in the wild.

Is that pedophile Cloud still stalking me? I have him on ignore but, this comment seems to indicate that the stalker is still jizzing out his mental masturbation. Talk about obsessive. It's like I'm reliving Single White Female.

« First        Comments 47 - 68 of 68        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions