[lit-ideas] Re: Here's a new spin on preventative medicine

Responding to Robert Paul first, if one says only statements, etc. exist in a 
true/false context, we eliminate a huge chunk of mindedness, i.e. nearly all of 
life.  A tree has mindedness.  It knows how to turn the sun into 
life, how to grow leaves, how to get water, and on and on.  It lives 
in the same realm of electrical and chemical impulses and communication within 
itself and with its environment that we do, and every bit as sophisticated as 
we are.  And it's far more intelligent, since it doesn't destroy the 
environment it lives in.  To limit truth/falsity to concrete statements 
and concrete things is to say that humans are such a reduced species.
 
As far as VR, VR is electrical and chemical signals as well, only very 
primitive compared to life.  And love needs to be defined, preferably 
obliterated from the language.  Love causes so much trouble because 
it's about the lover, not the lovee.  That's why it exists and 
doesn't exist at the same time.  The chemicals and electrical signals are 
3D, concrete.  What they produce is virtual reality.  And to finish 
off, like is about the likee, the other guy, not the liker, the self.  
It's much more fun to be liked than to be loved.

 
--- On Sun, 6/1/08, David Wright <wright@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: David Wright <wright@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Here's a new spin on preventative medicine
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sunday, June 1, 2008, 12:01 AM


Actually, the perception is that VR exists.  The program and equipment 
that generate the perception may exist, but the 'space' is mere illusion.  
And 'love', well in truth it's nought but the need, or perceieved need, for the 
person we think we love.  It's a desperate cry for validation through 
reciprocal illusion.

Genuine love, if such a thing truly exists, is an appreciation of, or at least 
repect for, the entirety (the sum) of another's qualities, whether (personally 
- selfishly) desirable and undesirable.  We shouldn't need another to love 
us, nor should we need them to behave in a fashion desirable to us, in order to 
feel that love.  And hate, pfft, it's nought but the selfish side of the 
same coin.  If end of the illusion causes us profound emotional pain, it 
is far simpler, though childishly unhealthy, to relegate a person's actions to 
the realm of despicability than to accept that we are equally as flawed...

flawed, but resisting admission,
d.









What about virtual reality?  It exists and doesn't exist at the same 
time.  Therefore, it's true and false at the same time, no?  Or since 
hate sometimes (often, really, it's all so unconscious) masquerades as love, 
love can be true and false at the same time too, no?  For that matter the 
relativity of the word 'truth' can make it true and false at the same 
time.  Yes?
 
 

--- On Sat, 5/31/08, wokshevs@xxxxxx <wokshevs@xxxxxx> wrote:


From: wokshevs@xxxxxx <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Here's a new spin on preventative medicine
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Eric Yost" 
Date: Saturday, May 31, 2008, 5:04 PM

Quoting Eric Yost mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>:

snip

> Simultaneously true and false! 

But not in the same respect - as the Macedonian philosopher was wont to say. No
statement can be both true and false in the same sense, including this one. 



-- 
Mail.com Autos - Powered by Oncars.com: Drive By Today!

Other related posts: