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

Queex, can you remind me what a Nash equilibria is? Having seen the film about him I have this idea that it's something to do with picking women up in a bar, but I know that's wrong . Is it also true that all ESS's are Nash equilibria? Presumably not?

Hmm, I think consciousness cannot be achieved, it's more like a feedback of thoughts and reactions.

If god<>Life, what's the difference?

Dear Elfrida,



That's not quite the point. Of course there is a meaning that people give each other. But what I was driving at is: Is there a meaning of the whole Life to somebody else? Does somebody weep when the earth and the handful astronauts are suddenly killed, possibly by a nuclear war started by some religious fanatics? No, because there is nobody to take notice. Nobody.

It is a question of facing reality, and making the best of it. So go and hug your partner.

Not surprisingly, I agree totally, PC.

Possibly more surprisingly, I agree with you too Wonko, when you say:



I see no contradiction there.

B

P-c and Ben: If god is an emergent property of life... what *is* god?

Wonko: That bit about the dealer who smiles all the time... I'm pretty sure they're talking about Death.

Nice one, oh formerly Glorious Leader!

This is a difficult question. If you were a neuron, how might you answer the question "what *is* mind?" Even if you were a Blatherskite , how would you answer that question if a neuron (somehow) asked you?

I hope my analogy is good enough to explain why I'm avoiding your question....

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

And what about those of us without partners.

I know there is mind, because I have one. I think it's an emergent property of neurons because it disapears when you mess with enough of them.

I don't know there is god, so I see no need to describe it as an emergent property of anything. I see no evidence of god anywhere and reject the idea along with other figments of imagination, such as fairies and demons.

What evidence do you see of something bigger than mind, p-c, and why do you feel the need to label it 'god'?

Blatherskite: I think we're not talking death, but good old YHWH here. The rest of the book is about the coming of the apocalypse, four horsemen (well, actually one is a woman) and the whole package... except things don't turn out exactly as planned since the anti-christ has been raised in an English village instead of by an American Satanist couple...
Of course P&G, or whichever of them came up with the bit, might have been thinking of death originally and just put it in there because it was funny and mostly fit.

Hi Wonko...sorry, I didn't make myself clear there
Just as I'm happy to acknowledge that there are many 'meanings' outside my immediate awareness (my friend in another country's sense of meaning, for example) then by extension I have no difficulty in conceiving of meaning existing elsewhere for all kinds of beings other than myself, many of whom I will never 'know".
It's only a small step from there to the notion of the universe itself having, knowing or even 'being' Meaning.

Well if anyone in the Uk saw, god is simply an epilectic seizure in the frontal temporal lobes.

Thanks, P-c That's pretty much the question we come here to answer for ourselves, isn't it?

I think it does need to be answered, though. If god is a property of life, then it must be observable. For instance, my desk has properties of size, shape, density, texture, temperature, strength, and color, to name a few. All of these can be observed, measured, tested, and in various ways altered.

So, if god is a property of life, how can it be observed? What are its characteristics? If we don't give definition to the term, then it becomes meaningless.

Which ties this neatly into the earlier discussion on meaning.

NAITA: I have read Good Omens. I've also read some of the Discworld series, and in it Pratchett frequently makes darkly comical references to Death's smile. The quote you gave fits the pattern. Still, it's literature, and thus open to interpretation. I like the implications of playing a game with Death, myself.

Hmm, I don't like it expressed like that. Not at all. I know the context we've already established makes it make sense, but I don't like the term "property", as though god is subsidiary or subordinate to life. A mind emerges from a network of neurons, but I think that to call mind a property of neurons, or of a network of them, gives the wrong impression.

Having had my rant, though, your points are fair ones, damn it!



I'm going to bottle out on this one, I'm afraid. I'm not hugely attached to an actual existing and demonstrable God. My beliefs remain more or less unchanged if God is merely a comfortable concept I invented on which to hang my other opinions of what reality is, and why. I *feel* that God is an emergent quality of all life, and it makes sense to me. Enough so that I really feel no need to justify it to others, or to convince them.

I am happy with my God, particularly in the sense that I don't feel my belefs distort my perspective on the world too much. Hey I'm rambling, so I'll stop. Am I making any sense?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Blatherskite: I was going to say, 'Yes, but this one starts "God does not ..."' And God is not Death. But the quote also mentions a Dealer, and of course, that 'could' be Death, I just assumed God would have control there as well.
And when it comes to Gods playing games I prefer the Discworld version.

"Thunder rolled.
He rolled a six."

And of course the Lady who rolls seven with a six-sided die.

P-c: Don't get mad at me... you chose the word "property."

NAITA: Another possible interpretation is that God and Death are the same person.

How about Life?

P-C, I care, but I'm not quite sure what the winner's price is. Why do you stick to the god tale? Is it important to you to have a symbol for the whole existence, would you mind being alone, without a driver, not knowing the destination with death around the corner? Well, that's Life!

NAITA, you're a good man, you should have a good woman. My advice is: if you're young look for an older woman, and vice versa.

Ben, we should be hugging instead of having an argument.

Colonel, death indeed is more interesting, as it puts chance right in front of our view, whereas birth catches us by surprise. But Life is not the time between birth and death, it is much more. It is the millions of years the genes took in duplicating and growing, the individuals being only playgrounds and testing sites for them. The same is for memes, which will settle over to computers soon as these will get better and begin their Life of their own.

Elfrida, wonder why your name is not Elfrieda! You know, I'm a realist, that means (to you!, hopefully) I try to stick to reality as much as I can. That's how I can see through the fog of symbols which live on their own. They are not there in my view. I have an clear view on reality. Sounds good, doesn't it?

Does anyone know about animals that trade? I don't, and I think that's the beginning of civilization, as has been pointed out before. I think it is a gene which says: don't try to take it all, give something back, it's better for you in the long term.

Wonko, that was almost helpful, except you didn't define 'young'. I'm 28, should I be looking for older women, or young girls?

NAITA, you've good so much charme, I think you can have both! First I'd suggest a woman at the age of around 40, who knows what she wants and don't you be distracted when she already has a partner - it doesn't matter.

Wonko...I'm Elfrida not Elfriede because it's the Saxon version of the name (Queen Elfrida was the mother of Ethelred the Unready) and in old English it's Aelfthrytha which means 'the strength of elves' My mum was reading a novel about the Saxons while heavily pregnant with me, and liked the name enough to christen me with it!
I'm tempted to ask "What is reality?" but I won't!