Twisted Pharaoh

Actually she told me to stop hijacking frodo's thread with my stories about her, and if I wanted to continue I should go in a separate thread.

But on the other hand she said it was a nice talk

I Ching Wilhelm Translation


So there you go, if you want to talk about it, it's there.

Twisted Pharaoh

So Earth is a sentient being and that explains different things about religion and also about science. The Creationist view and the Evolutionist view.

Jahar Aabye

Cris, I think we may need to amend the disclaimer for PRS to read "do not post while drunk, suffering from food poisoning, on a low carb diet, or after consuming LSD".

__________________
He pulled a Captain Ahab and Jaharpwn'ed her. - Trout

Nibb Tardis

1) You just made this stuff up based on nothing at all.
2) Extraordinary claims require tangible evidence.
3) The creationist view is made-up fiction that does not need explaining.
4) Your hypothesis is not a satisfactory explanation for anything.

Twisted Pharaoh

When you do things randomly you are likely to fail but if you act by following a plan you are likely to succeed.

So it's more reasonable to think that there is a plan than to think there is none.

So the proposition "Earth is living and she has a plan" is more reasonable than the proposition "there is no plan" and the proposition "The God of the Universe has special care about us and has a plan for us".

Well if there is a God of the Universe he certainly leaves Earth deal with us.

Kokoro Fasching

The Earth is not sentient.. but she is a gestalt of all the life forms on and in her. Until all the lifeforms join completely into the gestalt though, there is no hope for sentience.

Twisted Pharaoh

Well for us attaining self-conscious is realizing that we are a part of Earth, so I don't totally disagree. But she has conscious already.

Nibb Tardis

Wrong premise. There is no randomness, there is chaos. Chaos is the action of cause and consequence. There is only a finite number of working consequences for each cause. It is not random at all. There is no need for a "plan" to explain the causes that produced each consequence.

The universe, on the other hand is infinite. As a sentient being capable of observation and questioning, you are the result of a succession of vhaotic events, a process among an infinity of other processes. If the process had worked differently, the result would be different and you might not be there asking yourself those questions. In fact, on an infinity of other worlds, the process produced nothing at all.

In other words, there is no plan. You see a plan, because you see a process that produced a result and you are projecting a judgement, "good" or "bad", on that result. Other processes produce different results, but no single process is better than another.

Nibb Tardis

Prove it.

Twisted Pharaoh

Evolution is a sufficient proof.

The fact that you favor Chaos over Law makes you unable to get it. How can you prove anything if Chaos rules the Universe?

Besides an alien could use your reasoning to judge you as a chaotic mechanism instead of considering that you are sentient.

Nibb Tardis

Evolution is a deterministic chaos, just like the weather. It is neither random nor the will of some sentient being. It happens as the consequence of a series of causes in a complex model.

We can prove the weather, just as we can prove evolution, geology and physics. We can create sophisticated models of their deterministic nature and reasonably predict their outcome. When those predictions fail, the reason is usually that our model is incomplete, not that the outcome was random or that some mysterious conscious entity wanted it to happen.

There is no need for a "plan". Assuming that there is a plan assumes judgement that there is a good and a bad outcome in natural events. There isn't. There is no good or evil in nature.

Twisted Pharaoh

You are deterministic chaos as well then. Where is the difference?

Nibb Tardis

Huh?

I am the result of a evolutionary process, which is the outcome of an extremely complex set of initial conditions, if that's what you're asking.

detrius

Lol, just because your suggestion presumes an application of reason, this doesn't make it the more logical option.

Let's try the creationist version of your argument: "Earth is finite, but God is infinite. Therefore, God's intellect is infinite as well and creationism is infinitely more reasonable than assuming a sentient Earth because it presumes the existence of an infinite mind."


You're simply using the word "reason" in two different contexts here and are playing the same old linguistic tricks as always.

__________________

Twisted Pharaoh

No, how would an exterior observer determine that you are sentient and not a pile of matter evolving after deterministic chaos?

Twisted Pharaoh

Would it be more logical for God to create an intelligent Earth or to care personally about it?

We need some modesty here, we live in the suburbs of a small galaxy.

detrius

The whole point of evolution is that complex life can evolve from simpler lifeforms without a sentient mind to guide it. If you think you can use it as an argument for a sentient planet, then you haven't understood evolution.

Nibb Tardis

That's a rhetorical question, because it would depend on the standards of a the exterior observer. However, you and I are both piles of matter that evolved into a structured organism, because if we hadn't, we would not be here discussing this. Sentience, in our case, is a series of neurological and biochemical reactions in our brain.

It's extremely annoying to have a discussion with you, because you never provide anything tangible to the debate and demand that others answer your meaningless questions. Get to the point already.

How do you determine that the Earth is a sentient being and not a pile of matter that evolved from a deterministic chaos?

You started the debate with an extraordinary hypothesis "The Earth is sentient". Then instead of substantiating your claim, you just ask meaningless questions and redefine them until we agree with you. That's not how a debate works.

I can make the claim "The Earth was created by purple unicorns from Alpha Centauri, because I like the idea" and proceed with the debate by asking you what other color would a unicorn choose to be. I have just as much evidence as you. Why would your hypothesis be any better than mine?

Twisted Pharaoh

When Linden Labs fix a bug or add new features in their viewer, how do you call this? Creation? Deterministic Chaos?

I call it Evolution.

detrius

You really like false dichotomies these days, do you?

The options aren't limited to "God vs. sentient Earth".

Why assume any of these at all?

And no, it would be neither more nor less logical to assume a divine creator because they're the same thing: vaguely defined hypothetical entities with evershifting properties to match your current needs.

Twisted Pharaoh

Because mine is more simple and logical than yours. It also explains a lot of stuff that purple unicorns would not.

eku Zhong

your hypothesis is akin to this beetle telling itself that a the ball of poo is sentient

__________________
Culprit Blog * Culprit Store

detrius

Aaaand we're back to "words mean whatever I want them to mean" again.

I'm so totally not surprised.

Twisted Pharaoh

Do you like Occam's razor? What is the most simple explanation? Deterministic Chaos? the God of the Universe caring of a small planet in the suburbs of the Milky Way? Or is it that Earth is intelligent and takes good care of herself?

If you have something simpler let's hear it but I wouldn't call Chaos Theory simple.

detrius

Adding a planetwide consciousness or a god would be an increase in complexity.



"this world + natural laws + matter + humans + evolution + ... "

is more simple than

"this world + natural laws + matter + humans + evolution + ... + Gaia / God / incredibly complex entity"