dimreepr

Thanks I'd forgotten about Rush, in my teens I wore out my copy of 2112. Music with a message...

...

Rock 'n' roll at it's self indulgent best...

My apologies bad day. Not with the word computations, the computer analogy, like every analogy, isn't completely accurate, electricity is involved but that's where it ends.

Knowing how to fall without hitting the ground doesn't automatically mean I understand aerodynamics.

No-one explained that to the birds, bats or the fish that stumbled onto the idea.

I really can't be bothered with such a facile argument, when you grow up and learn a thing or two, please get back to me.

Time is an illusion, control is an illusion, knowledge is an illusion but choice is a decision.

I am choosing to answer you.

Yes, but with boundaries. Nope, I do what I want within those boundaries.

Computers don't emote, they do what they're told.

"This counter-criticism is similar to the ideas of Jaakko Hintikka, who offers a non-syllogistic interpretation of cogito ergo sum. He claimed that one simply cannot doubt the proposition "I exist". To be mistaken about the proposition would mean something impossible: I do not exist, but I am still wrong."

Cogito ergo sum For whom the bell tolls We aren't the same but we are all connected.

why, I've told you how I think of karma, I don't know (or care) how others think of it or how it relates to my point, the rest is verbiage. FFS Try reading and replying to my post in full, there's a phrase for people who employ this tactic

Power Monkeys are worth a look, assuming you can.

I didn't say Nietzsche was wrong about "God is dead" when I said "not everything he said was gold", I simply meant I don't think he was right about some of the other things he wrote. I said I believe in the concept of Karma, there is a difference; The actions of a person in this life if negative, has negative consequences, but if positive then so are the consequences; Smile and the world smiles back, frown and the world turns it's back.

Not at all, I'm an atheist and don't believe in god/s pseudo or otherwise but I do see how it helps some people find peace; the reality of god/s is irrelevant when one is content. I'm not suggesting we've discussed Nietzsche, I assumed you were familiar with him and suggested you revisit his work along with our previous discourse. Edit: I'm sorry, I should've been more specific "God is dead", not everything he said was gold. As an aside, I believe in the concept of karma but not reincarnation.

Reincarnation/Karma is a pseudo god, by which I mean it seeks to provide succour to those that don't understand the benefits of forgiveness but are happy to be told. Your atoms can survive physical death but you can't. May I suggest, with all due respect, you revisit our previous correspondence and Nietzsche. Just a hint, when you understand why god is irrelevant, you understand why it's needed.

There's always another choice, with or without evidence.

That's your choice.

Again no, it means there's no assumption to be made.

No, the point is “what ever is lacking evidence ” is null.

When did 'Strange' suggest there was? You've read them all, right, 'disarray', understand Nietzsche, much?

how was Nietzsche wrong when he declared "God is dead"; the idea seems prophetic.

Sorry John but you're also missing my point: How do you know what will inform our future thinking? Religion changes all the time, new factions are always popping up with a new interpretations of the bible; that lacks understanding. No but someone started it.