News:

Testamonial:  And i have actually gone to a bar and had a bouncer try to start a fight with me on the way in. I broke his teeth out of his fucking mouth and put his face through a passenger side window of a car.

Guess thats what the Internet was build for, pussy motherfuckers taking shit in safety...

Main Menu

Plus, I Got Religion

Started by Mesozoic Mister Nigel, March 08, 2009, 01:18:16 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

fomenter

"So she says to me, do you wanna be a BAD boy? And I say YEAH baby YEAH! Surf's up space ponies! I'm makin' gravy... Without the lumps. HAAA-ha-ha-ha!"


hmroogp

Urraco

Two THREE words:

QUANTUM
PHYSICS
BIATCH

Spørk, børk? Pørk!

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

#302
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on March 14, 2009, 10:32:40 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
You, of all people, are a proponent of sanity?

Yes. And, unlike a lot of people, I have the experience of both sides of the fence. Ironically, during one of my "episodes" I got religion big-time. Through the process of recovery I gained a bit of insight on how the religion meme had affected me. It'd always been there, conditioning from early childhood, through education and various other propaganda streams but it was relatively benign. Insanity made it malignant, rapidly growing through my psyche like some kind of fucking uncontrollable logic tumour.

Since then I've revised my opinion that a little bit of religion isn't a dangerous thing. It's a highly irrational meme who's fundamental instrument is a surrender of will and it's like a little ticking timebomb. Maybe it will never blow up but one day it might and god will tell you to do something, potentially terrible, and you will be compelled to carry out his word. Why invite something like that into your head if you can possibly avoid it?

It seems to me that, like many Westerners, your idea of "religion" is based on the Judeo-Christian model, and so your assumptions about religion revolve around it.

For what it's worth there's really nothing ironic about your swings between being extremely religious and extremely atheistic. I've seen that many people who are prone to an extreme in one direction are also prone to be extreme in the opposite direction should they ever change their minds... and interestingly, being extreme doesn't seem to offer any protection from being likely to change their minds.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 05:45:31 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:42:44 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 12:43:38 PM
Kevin: "The 2, naturally, already contains the Hidden One, so when it is written '2+2=4', what the formulation actually means is '1+1=4'.  Which, as you can clearly see, means '(1(+1))+(1(+1)) = 4(+1)'.  But these are complex theological discussions which you shouldn't concern yourself with."



Fuck it, I'm gonna become a numerologist and make some money.

I've never understood this "2+2 can =5" stuff.

If you put two apples on a table, then put two more, you don't magically get another apple.

It's because numbers arn't real; however, the apples are. They work by different rules.

I hold up two fingers, then I hold two more up. I don't magically get another finger.

Fingers are real too. Same as apples. Take a math class.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Soylent Green

Quote from: Nigel on March 14, 2009, 06:13:30 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 05:45:31 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:42:44 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 12:43:38 PM
Kevin: "The 2, naturally, already contains the Hidden One, so when it is written '2+2=4', what the formulation actually means is '1+1=4'.  Which, as you can clearly see, means '(1(+1))+(1(+1)) = 4(+1)'.  But these are complex theological discussions which you shouldn't concern yourself with."



Fuck it, I'm gonna become a numerologist and make some money.

I've never understood this "2+2 can =5" stuff.

If you put two apples on a table, then put two more, you don't magically get another apple.

It's because numbers arn't real; however, the apples are. They work by different rules.

I hold up two fingers, then I hold two more up. I don't magically get another finger.

Fingers are real too. Same as apples. Take a math class.

They work the same way, otherwise you couldn't have word-problems in math and math couldn't be applied to anything in the real world. And you wouldn't be able to say "I have two apples" because to get two you need to add 1 and 1 together.

Urraco

Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 06:30:49 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 14, 2009, 06:13:30 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 05:45:31 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:42:44 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 12:43:38 PM
Kevin: "The 2, naturally, already contains the Hidden One, so when it is written '2+2=4', what the formulation actually means is '1+1=4'.  Which, as you can clearly see, means '(1(+1))+(1(+1)) = 4(+1)'.  But these are complex theological discussions which you shouldn't concern yourself with."



Fuck it, I'm gonna become a numerologist and make some money.

I've never understood this "2+2 can =5" stuff.

If you put two apples on a table, then put two more, you don't magically get another apple.

It's because numbers arn't real; however, the apples are. They work by different rules.

I hold up two fingers, then I hold two more up. I don't magically get another finger.

Fingers are real too. Same as apples. Take a math class.

They work the same way, otherwise you couldn't have word-problems in math and math couldn't be applied to anything in the real world. And you wouldn't be able to say "I have two apples" because to get two you need to add 1 and 1 together.

And you wouldn't be able to say "I have two apples" because to get two you need to add 1 and 1 together.

... is this too hard for you?
Spørk, børk? Pørk!

zen_magick

Quote from: Nigel on March 14, 2009, 06:08:00 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on March 14, 2009, 10:32:40 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 07:26:10 PM
You, of all people, are a proponent of sanity?

Yes. And, unlike a lot of people, I have the experience of both sides of the fence. Ironically, during one of my "episodes" I got religion big-time. Through the process of recovery I gained a bit of insight on how the religion meme had affected me. It'd always been there, conditioning from early childhood, through education and various other propaganda streams but it was relatively benign. Insanity made it malignant, rapidly growing through my psyche like some kind of fucking uncontrollable logic tumour.

Since then I've revised my opinion that a little bit of religion isn't a dangerous thing. It's a highly irrational meme who's fundamental instrument is a surrender of will and it's like a little ticking timebomb. Maybe it will never blow up but one day it might and god will tell you to do something, potentially terrible, and you will be compelled to carry out his word. Why invite something like that into your head if you can possibly avoid it?

It seems to me that, like many Westerners, your idea of "religion" is based on the Judeo-Christian model, and so your assumptions about religion revolve around it.

For what it's worth there's really nothing ironic about your swings between being extremely religious and extremely atheistic. I've seen that many people who are prone to an extreme in one direction are also prone to be extreme in the opposite direction should they ever change their minds... and interestingly, being extreme doesn't seem to offer any protection from being likely to change their minds.



This is what I find interesting about the nature of religion.  The PARADOX!!  I find myself able to sit between being an atheist on one hand and a polytheist on the other.  This is why people are so COOL, and strange, we are able to contain the wierdest contradictions within us and still walk around without our heads exploding.

This also points out why we can never really understand ourselves or anybody else fully.  People are just really bizarre because WE DO GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE OUR BELIEFS.  And these beliefs are never going to be 100% logical or re-inforcing without some subtle interior trickery going on in the unconscious.  Or so it would seem.
Blow my Mind or Blow Me!

Soylent Green

Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 06:40:56 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 06:30:49 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 14, 2009, 06:13:30 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 05:45:31 PM
Quote from: Skieth on March 14, 2009, 05:42:44 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 12:43:38 PM
Kevin: "The 2, naturally, already contains the Hidden One, so when it is written '2+2=4', what the formulation actually means is '1+1=4'.  Which, as you can clearly see, means '(1(+1))+(1(+1)) = 4(+1)'.  But these are complex theological discussions which you shouldn't concern yourself with."



Fuck it, I'm gonna become a numerologist and make some money.

I've never understood this "2+2 can =5" stuff.

If you put two apples on a table, then put two more, you don't magically get another apple.

It's because numbers arn't real; however, the apples are. They work by different rules.

I hold up two fingers, then I hold two more up. I don't magically get another finger.

Fingers are real too. Same as apples. Take a math class.

They work the same way, otherwise you couldn't have word-problems in math and math couldn't be applied to anything in the real world. And you wouldn't be able to say "I have two apples" because to get two you need to add 1 and 1 together.

And you wouldn't be able to say "I have two apples" because to get two you need to add 1 and 1 together.

... is this too hard for you?

What on earth are you talking about? I'm saying if math doesn't apply to the real world than that statement wouldn't be valid.

Keep up with the conversation here.

Requia ☣

validity (in the math/logic sense) and the real word have *nothing* to do with each other.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

P3nT4gR4m

Quote from: Nigel on March 14, 2009, 06:08:00 PM

It seems to me that, like many Westerners, your idea of "religion" is based on the Judeo-Christian model, and so your assumptions about religion revolve around it.


Can't be avoided really it's how I was programmed. That said I've never seen any mainstream religion that didn't seem to have devolved into the same "just drink the fucking koolaid and don't ask questions" mentality that I enjoy poking fun at.

I do have a personal vendetta against born-again flavoured christianity, resulting from the time some of the crazy fucks attempted to brainwash me when I was about 12 but for the rest of the religious establishment I simply deride them because I can and they're ridiculous. IMO cheap laughs aren't any less funny than expensive ones.

I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

Urraco

Quote from: Requia on March 14, 2009, 07:42:08 PM
validity (in the math/logic sense) and the real word have *nothing* to do with each other.

It's true.

QuoteWhat on earth are you talking about? I'm saying if math doesn't apply to the real world than that statement wouldn't be valid.

Keep up with the conversation here.

Hm. Not what was implied, my good sir.

Your analogy calls for a real-world analysis of "two apples".
Two apples are REAL things. Not numbers.
TWO is a number. "TWO APPLES" is a thing.

.'. Different rules.
Spørk, børk? Pørk!

P3nT4gR4m

Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 07:49:31 PM
Quote from: Requia on March 14, 2009, 07:42:08 PM
validity (in the math/logic sense) and the real word have *nothing* to do with each other.

It's true.

QuoteWhat on earth are you talking about? I'm saying if math doesn't apply to the real world than that statement wouldn't be valid.

Keep up with the conversation here.

Hm. Not what was implied, my good sir.

Your analogy calls for a real-world analysis of "two apples".
Two apples are REAL things. Not numbers.
TWO is a number. "TWO APPLES" is a thing.

.'. Different rules.

I already covered this by adding 2 white mice to 2 monitor lizards.

Just sayin

I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

Urraco

Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on March 14, 2009, 08:33:16 PM
Quote from: Urraco el Faus aus Mí Luàn on March 14, 2009, 07:49:31 PM
Quote from: Requia on March 14, 2009, 07:42:08 PM
validity (in the math/logic sense) and the real word have *nothing* to do with each other.

It's true.

QuoteWhat on earth are you talking about? I'm saying if math doesn't apply to the real world than that statement wouldn't be valid.

Keep up with the conversation here.

Hm. Not what was implied, my good sir.

Your analogy calls for a real-world analysis of "two apples".
Two apples are REAL things. Not numbers.
TWO is a number. "TWO APPLES" is a thing.

.'. Different rules.

I already covered this by adding 2 white mice to 2 monitor lizards.

Just sayin

So then 2 + 2 = 2?

:lulz:
Spørk, børk? Pørk!

Soylent Green

Then by your logic 2+2=1

I have the other three, but I am only counting the ones I like.

That is stupid IMO.

Urraco

I assumed that the lizards ate the mice. 2 lizards + 2 mice = 2 lizards?
Just joking around. Numbers are a silly thing.

:|
Spørk, børk? Pørk!