« on: December 19, 2014, 08:36:47 pm »
C in physics, B- in cell.
I WILL KILL A MOTHERFUCKER.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I will say this though. Aside from Microbiology, Cell was my favorite, and I really, really liked my professor. I had a bit of a grade dip that corresponded with my friend's untimely death, but it was a really interesting course, and the professor was probably the most approachable one I've ever had, to the point where she said my coat was awesome, brought up Doctor Who because of my tee shirt, and mentioned the Necronomicon in passing during lecture while saying "looking over in that part of the room" to which I later responded, "Awesome HP Lovecraft reference" and she said, "Oh, you had to get all classy, I was talking about Evil Dead"
She sounds awesome, and Cell sounds awesome! What book did you use? I wish I'd taken lower-division Cell & Micro to help prep me for upper-division work, but I was out of electives. I think it would have REALLY helped though.
I hate public speaking, and the smaller the audience, the more I hate it.
Took my Cell Bio final today. Felt pretty confident about that. There were a couple of enzymatic pathways that I was shaky on in the sense of what the enzymes and proteins were actually named, but I was able to describe what was happening.
Still no word on the physics grade. Which has me bummedcited, for lack of a better word. It's like the anticipation you feel with Christmas when you're a very young child and have no concept of time and December is very long, but with a sense of impending doom.
I hope it all ends up being good news!
Note, limitations doesn't mean inability, but at least unwillingness. That's not necessarily an argument against omnipotence. Maybe God could create a paradox where he could make a rock he couldn't move, but why would he? Maybe he abhors paradoxes.
He abhors smartasses. We're all fucked.
and since neither Dok Howl nor LMNO nor Twid nor I agree on the definition of God,
You guys should stop being wrong. All I'm sayin'.
I have seen similar kinds of things in my chat logs....I cannot create a post without saying something stupid, can I? Damn.And now it's fairly moot, since evidently people can think without thought.
People can think without language. To be clear. I am assuming that this is just a slip o'the tongue, so to speak, but just to make sure...
That's another interesting thing about the mind and language. Sometimes the mind just jumps the sentence and knocks over a word or two in the process. Happens all the time, even to the most deliberate communicator.
The funny thing is, when two people are on the same wavelength, the other person might not even notice because they were anticipating, and therefore heard, what the other person MEANT to say, rather than what they actually said.
I've noticed that in written communication when you revisit the conversation. You don't notice the errors at the time, but when you go back it's like, wait, ohh... right. How did I not catch that before? It's like catching your own autocorrect errors after the fact, except someone else made them
It's disturbing to find out first-hand how inscrutable your own thought process is to others.
Ahem. Back on the topic that I sorta started? I was defining God as Mind preceding Matter. By God, I meant the Creator implied by Creationism and the Finely-Tuned Universe, the opponent to militant atheists like Dawkins. God exists before the Big Bang in this scenario, and thus probably precedes matter. I suppose the question, put better, was how a Mind could exist without a social context.
Nigel has noted that I almost implied God needs an evolutionary context to emerge from. Well, now I state it outright: I am not sure how you can have a mind WITHOUT a social context to emerge from. The organizers of raw primordial soup that you see in polytheistic myths (including the pluralistic take on Elohim) strike me as closer to early humans founding civilization than to watchmakers building their watches. A watchmaker implies a whole culture outside himself. I was using language as a short-hand for the need for other people: I speak because I expect others to listen. As has been noted, time-binding can explain language just fine.A god needs nothing. A theology does. And a human language to express the concept. I'm still not exactly sure what you mean by God, even within a monotheistic model. Is it omnipotent? Omniscient? Omnipresent? Benevolent? Eternal? Has personhood? Has complicated system of ethics? Intervenes in the affairs of a quirk species on a random planet? Promises immorality after biological death? I used to worship the Irish gods. Mythologically speaking, I was at any point in my life perfectly able to kill one of them if I had a whim to do so and they were physically present before me.
Now...does the definition of Monotheist God as Mind preceding Matter hold water? How wrong is it to assume the first Mind needed to be one of many?