Considering my name is Gabriel (after the Archangel Gabriel, who is also believed (by some) to be the personification of the Holy Spirit), I'm pretty sure this means that I am the Antichrist.
You can start begging me for mercy now.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
On Pascal's Wager
If I got it right, Pascal's Wager states that even if there is no proof for the existence of God, one should act as if they do believe in God because if they're wrong, they lose nothing and have the same result as a person who didn't believe in God and was right, but if they're right, then they get to go to Heaven and party with the angels. On the flip side, if you don't believe in God, you run the risk of being wrong and going to Hell to party with the devil.
In other words:
Believe in God, just in case, even if you don't really believe in God, act like you do.
There are two things wrong with this, the first being that people who follow this advice believe they're able to trick God. If God really is as omniscient as his followers claim him to be, wouldn't he know that you're just lying? And wouldn't that make it worse? I'm pretty sure that lying itself is a sin, you'd have to think that lying to GOD HIMSELF is a big no-no. Unless God's just a narcissist (with a violent need for attention and he doesn't care whether you truly believe in him as long as you say nice things about him), he'll just send you to hell along with the other dirty non-believers.
Then there's also the problem of the fact that, if this is true and that all it takes to go into Heaven is pretending to believe it exists without any actual proof, then God is no better than (what G0dItself likes to call) an abusive husband/wife. They don't really care if you love them or not, as long as you act like you do. With a being so, supposedly, omniscient and caring as God, you'd think he'd give you a little bit of a leeway when it comes to believing in him before you die and go to Heaven (or Hell).
By far Pascal's Wager has to be one of the most immature arguments for a belief in God, requiring nothing more than a fear of Hell.
Monday, May 11, 2009
The Veil of Maturity
WARNING: This is an emotional one, filled with teenage angst.
I think ti was about two weeks before Spring Break that I met this girl on MySpace. She was pretty cool, we had a lot of common interests and she was pretty smart. I went out with her (and her cousin & cousin's bf) to watch a movie one weekend and we had fun. Then in the week before Spring Break, one night we stayed up late chatting with webcam and at one point she asked how she could prove that she liked me. I told her to kiss me the next time we saw each other. She said ok, and... I felt happy. I thought it was actually happen.
The day came that we went to the beach with her best friend and her friend who was like a brother to her. Because we didn't get one moment alone together (partly because of her friends, partly because she didn't want to just leave them alone), we didn't get to kiss. I didn't want to be a dick, so I told her not to feel bad, we could just see each otehr again. The only thin was that the next weekend I had to go on an orchestra trip to Tennesse the whole weekend (during which I bought a shirt and necklace made for her).
The next two weekends we couldnt' hang out because she was sick. Then, last week, she told me that she got a boyfriend. (now to the point of this post)
WHAT THE HELL!? She fucking toys with my emotions for WEEKS, making me think that for once I actually had an honest chance at having a deeper relationship with someone, that I would for the first time kiss a girl, and then out of NOWHERE, she gets a boyfriend!?
WHAT THE HELL!? Did I become nothing? Did we already become friends?
The worst part is that I swear to fucking god she doesn't even realize how much she's hurt me!
AH! I should have fucking expected it, I swear, she's only in 10th grade after all. I should have known that no matter how mature she seemed, she's still a fucking kid.
I am SO glad that I won't have to deal with this bullshit for much longer. Never have I been more excited to get out of high school and into college (that coming from the guy who's been waiting since freshman year to get out).
I think ti was about two weeks before Spring Break that I met this girl on MySpace. She was pretty cool, we had a lot of common interests and she was pretty smart. I went out with her (and her cousin & cousin's bf) to watch a movie one weekend and we had fun. Then in the week before Spring Break, one night we stayed up late chatting with webcam and at one point she asked how she could prove that she liked me. I told her to kiss me the next time we saw each other. She said ok, and... I felt happy. I thought it was actually happen.
The day came that we went to the beach with her best friend and her friend who was like a brother to her. Because we didn't get one moment alone together (partly because of her friends, partly because she didn't want to just leave them alone), we didn't get to kiss. I didn't want to be a dick, so I told her not to feel bad, we could just see each otehr again. The only thin was that the next weekend I had to go on an orchestra trip to Tennesse the whole weekend (during which I bought a shirt and necklace made for her).
The next two weekends we couldnt' hang out because she was sick. Then, last week, she told me that she got a boyfriend. (now to the point of this post)
WHAT THE HELL!? She fucking toys with my emotions for WEEKS, making me think that for once I actually had an honest chance at having a deeper relationship with someone, that I would for the first time kiss a girl, and then out of NOWHERE, she gets a boyfriend!?
WHAT THE HELL!? Did I become nothing? Did we already become friends?
The worst part is that I swear to fucking god she doesn't even realize how much she's hurt me!
AH! I should have fucking expected it, I swear, she's only in 10th grade after all. I should have known that no matter how mature she seemed, she's still a fucking kid.
I am SO glad that I won't have to deal with this bullshit for much longer. Never have I been more excited to get out of high school and into college (that coming from the guy who's been waiting since freshman year to get out).
Friday, May 1, 2009
Good Morning Mr. Robato, how was your trip?
When the issue of artificial intelligence comes up, most people tend to focus on the potential threat of robots becoming superior to people and eventually taking over/killing us all. While this is important, people forget about the other issue that A.I. will bring up.
The issue being whether or not those robots with A.I. will be considered alive or not and the effects of this on humans.
For most of us it seems pretty obvious that robots can't be considered alive seeing as they're mechanical and not biological, no matter how smart they are. That being said, if a robot is able to learn and feel emotions, would we still consider it just a machine? If it can develop feelings and relationships, what then? Maybe it isn't alive by medical standards, but if it can think for itself and if you wouldn't otherwise that you were talking to a robot, what difference does it make that its body is made of metal? It wouldn't be human, of course not, but could it not still be a living being? Maybe "living" isn't the appropriate term, but it could still be considered aware.
And if it could be considered aware (of itself, of its surroundings, of other people), what effect would it have on humans? If I could develop a real relationship with my computer, what does that mean for me? If it got to the point where I would feel hurt over the loss of a mechanical friend, as much as I would over a human friend, how would it impact society? Or would it at all? Would it really make a difference whether my friend was born from a human or made in a factory?
Personally, I can't wait to find out.
The issue being whether or not those robots with A.I. will be considered alive or not and the effects of this on humans.
For most of us it seems pretty obvious that robots can't be considered alive seeing as they're mechanical and not biological, no matter how smart they are. That being said, if a robot is able to learn and feel emotions, would we still consider it just a machine? If it can develop feelings and relationships, what then? Maybe it isn't alive by medical standards, but if it can think for itself and if you wouldn't otherwise that you were talking to a robot, what difference does it make that its body is made of metal? It wouldn't be human, of course not, but could it not still be a living being? Maybe "living" isn't the appropriate term, but it could still be considered aware.
And if it could be considered aware (of itself, of its surroundings, of other people), what effect would it have on humans? If I could develop a real relationship with my computer, what does that mean for me? If it got to the point where I would feel hurt over the loss of a mechanical friend, as much as I would over a human friend, how would it impact society? Or would it at all? Would it really make a difference whether my friend was born from a human or made in a factory?
Personally, I can't wait to find out.
Huh, the Captain's Log.
Taking a look at the Invisible Pink Unicorn's blog roll, I saw that this blog was on the list.
Thanks for the reminder IPU. I'll start blogging again this afternoon (or right now, if I can find the article).
Thanks for the reminder IPU. I'll start blogging again this afternoon (or right now, if I can find the article).
Saturday, November 1, 2008
What is Reality?
Suppose that all that is reality is only reality within the confines of our universe, assuming that the universe, whether infinitely expanding or not, has, at any moment, a finite amount of space. Also assume that there are multiple universes, ours being only one in an infinite number of universes. Then, taking both into, what is it that exists, or more correctly, doesn't exist, between the universes? If what is real is only real in our universe, than doesn't that mean that once we leave our universe and venture between ours and others, that we would not exist?
But then, you have to question the quality of existence. It was once famously said by René Descartes that "cogito, ergo sum," in other words, I think, therefor I am. By saying this, he means that by just entertaining the question "do I exist?" he has proven to himself that he exist. He also means that just because he has proven to himself that he exists, that does not mean he has proven the existence of anyone else, whether to himself or to anyone else. All things considered, there's not much you can say to go against this. However, the idea itself rests on a common agreement on what it means to exist.
If a robot capable of artificial intelligence is able to prove to itself that it exists, does that mean that it does exist? That is where the idea ends, the fact that, even if the robot can its existence to itself, its existence cannot be proven to anyone else. This applies to people too; it's all good and well if you can prove to yourself that you exist, in the end no one can take that away from you, but if you can't prove your existence to anyone else, then do you truly exist? If you are ignored by everyone, everything, then what does it matter that you exist to yourself?
I've heard that there once was a philosophy professor who asked his students to prove to him that the chair in the room exists. Many students tried and failed, resorting to the senses for proof. It was only when a student asked "what chair?" was the professor satisfied.
This story, however, means nothing. If something exists to one person but doesn't to everyone else, then it's possible that the one person is crazy. At the same time, though, it's also possible that everyone else is crazy, and that only the once person isn't. Is so then how can anything be proven to exist? Even if everyone agrees that the chair does indeed exist, then what does it matter if the chair exists or doesn't? Does a universal agreement on the existence of something make it exist? But what if then, when everyone else agrees a person exist, what if that person doesn't agree on his own existence? What does it mean then? Is "cogito ergo sum" completely irrelevant then?
It all comes back to the question that once we exit the universe (if it is at all possible), do we (assuming we do indeed exist) cease to exist? If reality is defined by what we believe to be real, if reality is confined to the limits of the universe, what happens when we break the limit and enter the other place?
I guess it all depends on whether or not every universe is packed tight together, or there's a shit load of nothing between it all, like a brick wall held literally together by shit.
But then, you have to question the quality of existence. It was once famously said by René Descartes that "cogito, ergo sum," in other words, I think, therefor I am. By saying this, he means that by just entertaining the question "do I exist?" he has proven to himself that he exist. He also means that just because he has proven to himself that he exists, that does not mean he has proven the existence of anyone else, whether to himself or to anyone else. All things considered, there's not much you can say to go against this. However, the idea itself rests on a common agreement on what it means to exist.
If a robot capable of artificial intelligence is able to prove to itself that it exists, does that mean that it does exist? That is where the idea ends, the fact that, even if the robot can its existence to itself, its existence cannot be proven to anyone else. This applies to people too; it's all good and well if you can prove to yourself that you exist, in the end no one can take that away from you, but if you can't prove your existence to anyone else, then do you truly exist? If you are ignored by everyone, everything, then what does it matter that you exist to yourself?
I've heard that there once was a philosophy professor who asked his students to prove to him that the chair in the room exists. Many students tried and failed, resorting to the senses for proof. It was only when a student asked "what chair?" was the professor satisfied.
This story, however, means nothing. If something exists to one person but doesn't to everyone else, then it's possible that the one person is crazy. At the same time, though, it's also possible that everyone else is crazy, and that only the once person isn't. Is so then how can anything be proven to exist? Even if everyone agrees that the chair does indeed exist, then what does it matter if the chair exists or doesn't? Does a universal agreement on the existence of something make it exist? But what if then, when everyone else agrees a person exist, what if that person doesn't agree on his own existence? What does it mean then? Is "cogito ergo sum" completely irrelevant then?
It all comes back to the question that once we exit the universe (if it is at all possible), do we (assuming we do indeed exist) cease to exist? If reality is defined by what we believe to be real, if reality is confined to the limits of the universe, what happens when we break the limit and enter the other place?
I guess it all depends on whether or not every universe is packed tight together, or there's a shit load of nothing between it all, like a brick wall held literally together by shit.
What do you do when you need new friends?
Don't understand? Let me explain.
We all have our different groups of friends. Most commonly, it's the friends at school/work/group, and the real friends, the friends we hang out with, tell our secrets to, the people whom we would do anything for. For most of my life, I mainly had friends from the first group. Friends from the second were hard to come by. I've met people who could have gone from the first group to the latter, but the way my life went made it impossible, or extremely difficult.
In 9th grade, for the first time in a long time, I met people who (at the moment of writing, this following sentence is under question by the author) are definitely people who are of the second group. But then my time with them was cut short when I switched high school. Earlier this year, I started talking to one of them again, the one who I felt most connected to. Now, we've become better friends, and I've befriended a few of her friends who I didn't know before.
In the school I go to, I'm not sure which group my friends belong to. I know some who definitely belong in the first group, but the rest I'm not sure where they lie. I can think of a few who don't belong in the first group, but at the same time I'm not sure if they go into the second, but more like somewhere in the middle. Or maybe they are in the second, but they're not the kind of friends I'm looking for.
That's what this is about. The friends I do have, I'm not sure about. But at the same time, I don't know where else to go. When I say they might not be the kind of friends I'm looking for, I mean that I don't feel so close to them as I should, or at least as I need them to be. It's so confusing.
But, for sure, without doubt, I know there is one friend who is of the latter group. I can trust her, and we work so well together. I don't mean in a romantic way, I'm happy being friends, and it's not like it's a problem. I really am so happy that she's my friend, and I know that she feels the same way about me.
The problem that there is, though, is that I'm not sure if the kind of friendship we have is the kind I should have in others. I'm not saying that in the "I shouldn't feel about other people the way I should about her" kind of way, but more like, shouldn't I feel that way about other people?
I know I'm not the only person who feels this way, but I know that no one around me feels that way, so now... I dont' know what to do, or how to feel. A part of me feels so lonely knowing that there's only one friend that I have that I might actually, truly consider a friend. But then the other part of me thinks I'm just overreacting to how I feel, and I should calm down.
What the fuck am I supposed to do!? Why the hell does this have to be so hard? Why can't I just be happy with what I do have and just shut up!?
Why won't anyone help me?
We all have our different groups of friends. Most commonly, it's the friends at school/work/group, and the real friends, the friends we hang out with, tell our secrets to, the people whom we would do anything for. For most of my life, I mainly had friends from the first group. Friends from the second were hard to come by. I've met people who could have gone from the first group to the latter, but the way my life went made it impossible, or extremely difficult.
In 9th grade, for the first time in a long time, I met people who (at the moment of writing, this following sentence is under question by the author) are definitely people who are of the second group. But then my time with them was cut short when I switched high school. Earlier this year, I started talking to one of them again, the one who I felt most connected to. Now, we've become better friends, and I've befriended a few of her friends who I didn't know before.
In the school I go to, I'm not sure which group my friends belong to. I know some who definitely belong in the first group, but the rest I'm not sure where they lie. I can think of a few who don't belong in the first group, but at the same time I'm not sure if they go into the second, but more like somewhere in the middle. Or maybe they are in the second, but they're not the kind of friends I'm looking for.
That's what this is about. The friends I do have, I'm not sure about. But at the same time, I don't know where else to go. When I say they might not be the kind of friends I'm looking for, I mean that I don't feel so close to them as I should, or at least as I need them to be. It's so confusing.
But, for sure, without doubt, I know there is one friend who is of the latter group. I can trust her, and we work so well together. I don't mean in a romantic way, I'm happy being friends, and it's not like it's a problem. I really am so happy that she's my friend, and I know that she feels the same way about me.
The problem that there is, though, is that I'm not sure if the kind of friendship we have is the kind I should have in others. I'm not saying that in the "I shouldn't feel about other people the way I should about her" kind of way, but more like, shouldn't I feel that way about other people?
I know I'm not the only person who feels this way, but I know that no one around me feels that way, so now... I dont' know what to do, or how to feel. A part of me feels so lonely knowing that there's only one friend that I have that I might actually, truly consider a friend. But then the other part of me thinks I'm just overreacting to how I feel, and I should calm down.
What the fuck am I supposed to do!? Why the hell does this have to be so hard? Why can't I just be happy with what I do have and just shut up!?
Why won't anyone help me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
