Xalder

If you don't treat flu, it will normally last seven days, if you do - it will be over in a week. Regards Wait so which one is the one that only lasts a day? Or two-three days?

1951

It would be interesting to see more study on people who get vaccinated 2 years in a row, but overall vaccinations will severely reduce the amount of people getting the flu. I don't get influenza very often and I can probably attribute that to people around me getting vaccinated for it. On the other hand, when I do get it, it usually doesn't last very long, I'm not sure if I have some sort of natural resistance or what.

Eh, might be funny for him to just lose his memory again. That might actually work out best.

"That makes about as much sense as grounded aviation. Or deep-sea astronomy." -Freeman's Mind

I imagine more that you can travel backwards within your own timeline, but upon reaching your destination you'll automatically enter a divergent universe. Everything from that point will have it's set of differences from the universe you came from, and that is when it will be impossible to jump back forward to your previous timeline. Though that's suggesting a neurological jump where your brain from today and now jumps back to your brain from your destination timeline, rather than stepping into a device which brings your whole body to your target destination. Such a device would probably require the ability to either suppress or calculate and reinvent the universe to include any paradoxes that are created through its use. Now I'm just thinking of the TARDIS so I'll stop there before we get into flat-out Dr. Who referencing. Wait...

I still haven't connected my Youtube and G+ It limits my ability to use youtube, which is very distracting and annoying. I refuse in hopes that staying disconnected while still using youtube will show Google what a dumb thing they're doing. Obviously it's not working.

I'd share some information I learned in my college health class about how vaccinations work about the exact opposite of you describe but I'm sure you'd just handwave it as "bias" or something. I diagnose you with a sore case of PIDOOMA. You should get that checked out.

Get up, get up, get up, why don't you stand up, stand up - It's time to start a fight! I fear most of my references will be lyrics...

You're suggesting a form of "belief in belief" which suggests that people don't necessarily believe in God, but believe in belief of God. The phrase was coined by Daniel Dennett and he puts forth a good lecture on the concept which has been uploaded in . This doesn't necessarily suggest God doesn't exist, merely the reasons people will believe in the belief, even if they don't actually hold the belief themselves. As you suggest that humans cannot co-exist without an ideology, that is one of the points Dennett makes in outlying the reasons for belief. A fear of the collapse of civility and reason among those who are unsure, will try to convince themselves and others with what they think is a lie in order to maintain that structural order.

I believe there's some theory in quantum mechanics involving a supercomputer that would calculate the deterministic values of our universe, but that it would require more energy than that contained within our universe. Such a computer could not exist within this universe, as it could only operate under the power of a different universe. If such a computer were to operate under the power of a different universe, it would not be operating within the same laws of our own universe, thus would lose it's deterministic value. Resultingly, a universe can only operate with a set of unknowns and unknowables. Human free will is potentially one of these unknowables. With enough knowledge, some human choices may be deterministic, however, the other unknowns of the universe prevent the vast amount of deterministic values needed to prevent free will from existing. Of course, this is just to my understanding of a theory I can't recall the name or specific details of, nor can find at the current time. I'll try to look it up again and make any notes on my thoughts expressed here accordingly. EDIT: Laplace's Demon might have some involvement in the theory I'm thinking of. Seems to match up somewhat. I'll give it another look later.

I think it's just our nature. We have the ability to make choices and we act upon them. It's how we've evolved as a species.

It's not even that, it's the fact that if it turned out that God was real and all powerful yadda yadda, what does that mean for us? Do we really have free will, then? For an all-knowing all-powerful being to judge us based on whether or not we worship him seems like a reality I never would want to live in. Yeah we have "free will" but if we exercise it in a way that doesn't satisfy our Oh-So-Benevolent Creator, we get sent to eternal suffering. What kind of choice is that? I don't want to believe in a form of existence where anyone would be set upon eternal suffering. People would rebel against that. Same as we humans rebel against unjust dictators, many people would not be willing to live under such rule. This is why primarily I don't believe in divine intervention. If God or any sort of divine being exists, they will never involve themselves with our universe. The exact cause of the beginning of the universe is anyone's guess. What happens when we die is an unknowable as well. As a result, all we can do is live the life that we have been given. This is where humanism comes into play. People will suggest that lack of theistic values make atheists immoral, which is just not necessarily true. Just like how the presence of theistic values doesn't automatically make people moral. On top of that, humanism isn't restricted to atheists. Humanism is a philosophy which holds that people are able to make moral choices in benefit of others. As such, theists are entirely able to be humanist, though they might attribute their kind acts to "the will of God" rather than to their own ability to be good. This is somewhat frightening in a sense that it implies that such people would perform cruel acts if it wasn't for the fear of punishment / pursuit of an award for after death. If it was possible to prove the non-existence of God (or any divine power) and such a proof did come out, and somehow managed to convince everyone that God isn't real, would Christians automatically become immoral, (more) irrational, and cruel to their fellow humans? I quite imagine that the only ones to turn away from "being good people" would be among the most delusionally fundamental of their faith. As the ones trying so hard to keep people "on the path of good," if it was proved that their path was wrong, the irrationality they already possess will only serve to harm them and potentially cause them to harm others. Bringing everything around full circle, those fundamentalists are already harmful as they already promote irrational thinking. As a result, (bringing everything back to my previous post) humanists generally have a more positive impact on those around them than nosey fundamentalists. Overall, while some people do need faith to help them through their lives, there are plenty of approaches to humanism to fulfil the need for spiritual well being. Approaches that can even include a belief in the Christian God. At least, a much more open-and-humanistic-in-his-own-right type of God. A version of God I might have considered while contemplating my own spiritual beliefs during the process I took to create the set of beliefs I hold today.

1944

I was reading an article about antitheism, and it made some interesting points. I usually identify as agnostic, but I do have some antitheistic principles as well. Basically I find that religion causes much more issues than it solves (compare "belief in belief"), and that as a whole, people would be better off taking a humanist approach to philosophical issues. A humanist will generally have a better impact on those around him than a nosey fundamentalist. Usually I don't care what you believe as long as it doesn't bring harm to others, but it seems that some religions as a whole do a lot more harm than good. Remember that mental, emotional, and spiritual harm can be done to a person as well as physical.

1942

1940

If you shoot a guard he will shoot back at you. Sucks for when you have one of those essential guard and you accidentally shoot him once and he just starts trying to kill you. Then you know you're fucked and have to load your last save.

1938

The results of the choices we make may be deterministic, but the possibility of making them in the first place is within our own power. Opportunities may present themselves to us during the course of our lives, it's up to us to make the choice of taking advantage of them.

Oh man, cookie clicker. xD So many hours wasted on that. Leaving my computer on 24/7 and whatnot. Good times.

Right now in my life, there are many directions I could work towards. My free will allows me to choose which direction I take. People who don't believe in free will expect someone or something else to make such a choice for them. I'm stuck wondering how I'll manage to make the decision for myself. I could wait and hope some form of "fate" will make the choice easier, but unless such a thing happens soon, I'll be stuck having to decide for myself. The chances of each possible choice going poorly in some way or another frighten me. Still, there is some control I have in my life. Difficult or not, it's good to be able to make your own decisions and be accountable for your own actions.

What was the addon?

Well that degenerated quickly.

One thousand nine hundred thirty six posts on this thread.