h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

That's a good point. I'll think of a comeback...I'm going to try and not ask if we are real because then things get really complicated.

Then I'll try not to say that we aren't

Yeah, that post was pointlessly confrontational - sorry. But I still think you're being a little bit closed minded about this - I wasn't saying it was wrong for people to find and strive to fulfil their own individual purposes and goals in life, just that it isn't necessary to regard the belief that existence has no cosmic, universal meaning as in some way deluded and self-indulgent. You describe Katybobs as "subject to the negative and depressing philosophy of the no-purpose brigade", as though she was kidnapped in the night and brainwashed by some weird nihilistic cult. It's just a belief to be supported or discarded, like any other, and it is in no way "actively limiting our growth as individuals and as a species".

Like I said, sorry about the overly aggressive post

I don't think /we/ can live by the laws in a religious book; however, I think there were people and societies in history who quite happily could, and would, live precisely by these laws. However, the breakdown of religions and groups into different, conflicting factions was a surefire indicator that this time was now past, and demonstrates the necessity of developing: -

(a) a personal moral code - in my opinion, one which places others on the same level as ourselves, and serving others above fighting them;

(b) a personal relationship with God and one's own spirituality;

(c) a society equipped to deal with different and diverse worldviews without encouraging - or even allowing - conflict between the elements of which it is composed.

- Jordan

Wishful thinking, Euro! Wouldn't it be cool if those student loans were illusory.

Well two out of three ain't bad, Jordan. I can't make any sense of (b)!

Hey Hass! I already played that card in my post #4795

Toxx
Snap
but he was right , money is illusory, more so than a steam engine

Toxx
Oh and as for giving you all my illusory money. I already did. It's in your pocket. Can't you see it ?

Hmm...I've thought long and hard about this and here it goes. I'm nearly saying we don't exist but not. I'm grasping at straws whatever but I'm not admitting defeat yet!
Being only 17...the steam engine is no longer in existence nor was it during my life time (as far as I'm aware) so it quite possibly never existed and I'm just being gullable believing it did.
Now I need time to come up with an answer to the question about the invention of computers before someone asks.

Hass, do try to keep up! I was the first in this conversation to mention the illusory nature of money. I don't think I'll bother to continue.

By heck, Euro. It takes an awful lot of evidence to convince you! No wonder God is having a hard time!

steam engines are still in existence, still operable and still used. Go to Quorn & Woodhouse Station and you will perhaps be lucky enough to see Mallard, Sir Nigel Gresley, even the Flying Scotsman... even normal stations pay host to minor locomotives.

Then try this simple experiment... stand on the tracks and see if they're really not real.

OK...OK...steam engines still do exist. I have one last thread to hang onto though. We didn't, technically speaking "truly" invent steam engines. If you trace all of our inventions back, way back to the beginning, we basically just stuck a load of stuff together and gave it a name. All of the stuff already existed. Therefore, our inventions...hmm
I think I'll just say tu ché (or however it is spelt. However I am not too keen on dying so I will not be standing in front of a train as was suggessted. Also, I would not wish to create the disruption to the already crap services or disgust people with my body spread like jam all over the tracks. I've seen this before, it ain't pretty.

I'd try 'touché' Euro. Now would you please explain to me how anyone could ever construct the prototype of a new invention without using existing materials?

I like your point about a concensus, or average reality, that seems especially true at the moment - as the idea that we associate with people who fit our personal profile! Hence the fact that people who read the same newspapers, listen to the same radio station etc., have the same views - on Iraq for instance. Your idea seems very true.
Also, you're right about objective reality being too vast for us as individuals to handle. Where I'd differ, is in the objective reality and overall beingness of God. God exists 'out there', and for each individual as she/he knows God (who is objectively real) but it's like the blind people studying an elephant! One thinks it's like a rope, (the tail) another like big canvas sails (the ears). There is, however, a *real* elephant, incorporating those things!

We did. There was a kettle, there was heat, water, steam existed and there was Mr. Watt, but there wasn't a steam engine. The *idea* did not exist, did it, since it's the idea that makes the invention- hence all the ones which are prototypes, or still on paper, but nevertheless count as inventions.
I have a cake here. Well, to be technical it is just a bowl, and there are ingredients somewhere. Want a slice?
My boyfriend has zygotes. I have zygotes and a place to grow 'em. Do we have a baby yet?

it's not a cake til you bake it, even if the component parts are there. It's not an invention, 'til you invent it.

(I am surprised you have not seen a steam locomotive. I doubt they'd do as much damage as a modern express, especially near a station where they are stopping... however you could always tear up your red flannel petticoat and wave it just to make sure.)

I'm soooooo tempted to say that even the inventor of the wheel used all that spare plastic and rubber that was lying about, just waiting to be made into something!

Hmm...

If you chose to have no part of communing with a deeper 'spiritual' self, or with God, then I guess you've dictated just the type of personal relationship you want with them - the null relationship, so to speak!

And about inventions - well said Mandragora, each and every time you seem to hit the nail on the spot. The 'standing in front of an express train' bit is rather like Dr. Johnson's rebuttal of Berkeley's position of extreme solipsism, which is so well-known after the publication of 'A Brief History of Time' that repeating it would be unforgivable! However, the assertion about inventions strikes a deeper chord with me.

But then I think about it, and I write a mile long posting. And I say 'this doesn't really make sense.' So I start again. And again. And I've came, finally, to one conclusion: perhaps the matter to make it was there before, but you are ignoring one fundamental aspect of the Universe and it's laws: activity. Force, energy, location, velocity and momentum are aspects of matter just as real as any other such as colour and substance. They are dynamic, which is precisely the point. Arrangements of matter in specific forms creates a dynamical pattern which does not exist in matter outside of that form. Thus, inventions - inasmuch as they are specific examples of patterns of dynamic arrangements of matter - are unique.

Even the example of the wheel - whilst rolling objects may exist in nature, the use of a specific object capable of spinning on a pivot is the creation of a new, dynamic arrangement of matter. Even novel /methods/ can legitimately count as inventions in this respect.

- Jordan

Ok so you can't follow the law written in a book, so what about the law in your country, its written in a book and you follow it. If your good that is. I follow the Quran as much as possible. I do my best to live as a example of the Quran in a person. Yes I make mistakes and I am now where near getting to the point that Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) was but he was described as the walking and talking Quran. Every thing he did never contradicted the Quran and his life was a example of how a Muslim should live. Point is I do my best to follow it and I am happy. When I do my prayers I feel my closeness with God and when I read the Quran and Hadith I cry because it means that much to me. There is nothing that compares ti the felling I get. It probabley holds true to Jorden when reading the bible and praying. Anyway my point is I am following the teachings of Islam as much as possible and most people comment on how mature and self assure I am about things. I'm 21 this year if your wondering.
Anyway

As for money, I'm always broke. But when I get money I seldom spell it on myself as according to my faith I have all I need to live. Meaning materilistic things have no bearing on my life. I can't understand why people keep wanting more and more money if you can answer then please tell me.
My answer I came up with, with a few years is rooted to my faith which is:

People worship god right? Well anyway a lot. Some people have several gods according to there belief. They worship idols which are statues of there Gods. (Strickly not allowed in Islam). Any way you get a statue made of metal and people worship it. Then you get others who say they believe in God and say they do not worship statues but they are possesed with wealth. Well say we melted that staute down and turned it in coins. Then they are both the same thing. Idols and money are the same sides of the coin so to speak. People say they don't believe in gods all Idols but they worship money and shops instead.
Well thats my theroy I'm sure you have a lot of things to say about it.

One last thing. I will tell you a Hadith about the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) to show what sort of person he is.

Aishah was one of the prophets wife and is seen as a example of the most perfect of Women in Islam but one day some thing happened and she got angry this is what happened.

One day the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was walking with Aishah when they went past a group of Jews. Upon passing they shouted thee Muslim greeting. But instead of saying Salaam Alaikum they used a Hebrew word which ment die. The prophet simpally replied Alaikum.
Aishah was furious and started shouting abuse at them. Then Mohammad (pbuh) turned and said to Aishah to stop shouting at them, to which she replied 'did you not hear what they said?' and Mohammad (pbuh) replied 'did you not hear what I said, I said Alaikum'.

The reason this is important is that instead of getting angry he simpally returned the gretting with one half of the return greting which is wa' alaikum salam but by giving just alaikum it simpally ment and upon you. Meaning that what ever they said he simpally said and upon you. Which I think is great.

Adib