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

Hmmm. It *is* very complex...but is it beyond our capabilities? We seem to do fine job RE-creating the world in our memories (or so we think); it doesn't seem much of a stretch to say we could be creating it in the first place. A scary stretch, but not much of one.

And welcome, Queex. Got any thoughts on how we might all really be butterflies? Share 'em.

s and s,
~Wes

So, is that saying there is no world at all? Or there is a world and we just change it as we go through and construct what we like? If that question is answered I can continue an argument along some line..

That you are all figments of my imagination is implausible, but *not* impossible, despite the very sensible reasons that have been put forward. Because it isn't impossible, this aspect of the conversation can go nowhere. The only answer that I know is that the most likely (to me) situation is that the world and the people in it really do exist, so I assume this is so, and get on with my life. I do this in the knowledge that I could be quite wrong, but that's happened before, so....

If you *should* be mad enough to proceed with this, you might like to browse my journal entry "What is reality?", which you can find on my home page (just follow the link at the head of this note). It isn't definitive - of course - but it's my best effort to date.... Any constructive comments would be more than welcome.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Well, I'm here to stay. You can't argue with good sound logic. It seems like this might be the most logical place on earth.

I hereby name my chair....Jimmy Squatspot Jr. He's a Jr. because he seems a bit short for my desk.

I challenge the rest of you to name the position I hold in the FFFF. Ask what you will. Make assumtions. Tell lies. After you have all/none of the facts, put me in my place.

Welcome, Jake!

I feel silly and baa-ish just nodding my head and agreeing to everything you've just said, Pattern-Chaser, but I share the same idea of it. In fact, I think I tried to type something similar to that on this forum but deleted it because I couldn't get it out.

Still, what's the fun of it if we can't throw wild ideas around?

Quille said:
So, is that saying there is no world at all? Or there is a world and we just change it as we go through and construct what we like? If that question is answered I can continue an argument along some line...

No answer for you, sorry. It's saying that the world exists in one (more? ) of a range of states anywhere from:

The only "real" thing in the universe is an entity named Squirgel, who is a floating ball of pure thought of which the entire galaxy is a figment of imagination...
TO
...nearly everything exists in exactly the same manner as which we perceive it, save one small difference that we create in our minds: the Frogstar Fighters are a different color.

There's just no way for us to prove or disprove either of those world views, or anything in between. Which makes it darned hard to construct an argument....

s and s,
~Wes

I couldn't agree with you more on that point, Ex Libris

The range of possibilities, when it comes to the subject of reality, are staggering. I'd venture to say infinite, but infinity is such a set idea these days that I tend to think it far too defined for my uncertain perspective.

Self-Paradoxical (real?)

If we say that the definition of two things being different is that we can distinguish between them, then when we consider the nature of reality it all solves itself.

If we are unable to distinguish between them then they are, in fact, equivalent.

I like that idea. Or maybe I've been looking at set theory for too long.

<>

Only for so long as we can't distinguish between them. As soon as we have the understanding (or whatever else it takes) to tell the difference, they are no longer equivalent. I add this obvious comment because it is reasoning I have used myself, again and again, and I want to be sure I have it aright, so that I can use it safely. Excuse me if this reminder was unnecessary for you; I needed it!

An example: The world was created billions of years ago, or God created it in 4004 BCE (but containing a fossil record and so on, to make it look like it was billions of years old). These two are indistinguishable to me, so I feel free to believe either one, or both, as it suits me. I only have to remember this is valid until I become able to distinguish the two by some means or other....

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Hey, I'm a Bayesian statistician. I scoff at your outdated concept of objective reality .

Excellent! So - if you've finished scoffing - enlighten me! Where am I going wrong?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Some things it will never be possible to tell apart, such as:

Did yesterday happen, or has the universe and my entire past been created this second?

There will never be any way of distinguishing between the two. Therfore, by that nice definition of different, the two alternatives are actually the same.

*sits about and looks confused and starts playing with the smiley again*

There's one! PULL!

*BLAM*

*looks at the dead * Yes..definately red

Have you moved up a ranger level Queex? I thought it was 8 last time I looked..

too..I'm afraid I really can't spell but maybe it was my fait to mispell to bring up some thought in other's minds..

I level quite frequently. Fairies aren't worth many XP, though.

Oh well that isn't any good.

Elves, however, yield plenty.

Um. Come over here. I've got something to show you.

*hides in infinite reality (or not-reality as might be the case) as a named Quin*

*emerges from cave, in cloud of dust, bourbon, and old pizza boxes*


Oh goodness, it's bright out here. Hello. We seem to have new members.

Queex, welcome, I've got you added to the roster. Nice chair name. I also like that bit about not being able to distinguish the Billions-years-old universe from the silly brand-new one, therefore there being no difference. Good stuff.

Self-Paradoxical, did you ever do an official join request? Which is to say, is there a chair title with which I shall add you to the roster? No pressure; I'm just not sure whether I might have missed it. You've been around for a few pages now, haven't you?

Jake, hi. Welcome. So we're to interrogate you, are we, and then make assumptions and come up with a chair name? Well, we could start out with the standard set.

Name? Presumably "Jake Denotsko". Quest? Favourite Colour? Is there a "God", of the nature that it makes a difference which personal pronoun you use for him/her/it/Him/Her/It? What is your preferred method for dealing with door-to-door evangelists? Do you have a couch I can crash on if I'm in the neighborhood? What do you consider to be the true "Breakfast of Champions"?

That should do for now.



Oh, BTW, I can testify, for what it's worth, that MaW and Lucinda, if they're figments of my imagination, are of the particularly realistic variety. I met them both in London at the Summer Party. We didn't think to get an FFFF photo of the three of us, but chances are we wouldn't all show up on film anyway.