morgainefairy
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2000
- Posts
- 161
2 cups down.....
i should be ready for this thread by...oh, say....3pm or so.
i should be ready for this thread by...oh, say....3pm or so.
A ridiculous question
- Thread starter Slut_boy
- Start date
Silverlily
Kitty Mama - East Coast
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
- Posts
- 13,101
Look what you have done, Slut_boy. You've got us all wearing white panties and guzzling coffee. Tsk-tsk.
morgainefairy
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2000
- Posts
- 161
panties...panties....SHIT!
i knew i forgot something.
i knew i forgot something.
Silverlily
Kitty Mama - East Coast
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
- Posts
- 13,101
morgainefairy said:panties...panties....SHIT!
i knew i forgot something.
LMAO!! Oh honey, don't shit your panties.
Anybody need a coffee refill?
Thumper
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2000
- Posts
- 4,184
Somebody lookin' for a wise ass...
..weeeeell too bad ya got me instead.
Early birds...my cat usually get's em...I think the worms have him on their payroll. Seriously if I get up early I ain't eatin' worms...
Di-? what kinda birds Laurel? Been to plenty of urinals before and never seen any birds before...maybe in the womens restroom? Nope that doesn't wash...no bird would be in there with all those pussies..
"I think, therefore I am!" Then it would be safe to say that I cease to exist when I am infatuated with a female...as all intelligent thought processes cease. Or on this BB...
For that matter why are there people on the Jerry Springer show....surely they can't exist because I don't think any of them even have a brain...
Too much damn stuff to think about...gonna stop for awhile.
Anybody calls me..I don't exist!
******POOF******
..weeeeell too bad ya got me instead.
Early birds...my cat usually get's em...I think the worms have him on their payroll. Seriously if I get up early I ain't eatin' worms...
Di-? what kinda birds Laurel? Been to plenty of urinals before and never seen any birds before...maybe in the womens restroom? Nope that doesn't wash...no bird would be in there with all those pussies..
"I think, therefore I am!" Then it would be safe to say that I cease to exist when I am infatuated with a female...as all intelligent thought processes cease. Or on this BB...
For that matter why are there people on the Jerry Springer show....surely they can't exist because I don't think any of them even have a brain...
Too much damn stuff to think about...gonna stop for awhile.
Anybody calls me..I don't exist!
******POOF******
I agree with Merelan. If the phrase "I think therefore I am" is a certainty, than to say "I think that I think therefore I think that I am" is no different...this is because anything following the words "I think" are obsolete because according to Descartes, it will automatically result in the end "therefore I am."
Illustrated:
I think (that I think) therefore (I think that) I am. Obsolete words are in parenthesis.
At least that's what I think.
These are really cool, SB! What else have you got for us?
Illustrated:
I think (that I think) therefore (I think that) I am. Obsolete words are in parenthesis.
At least that's what I think.
These are really cool, SB! What else have you got for us?
Never
Come What May
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2000
- Posts
- 23,234
At this point I'd like to point out that while I agree with the statement I don't agree with Descartes.
It's not 'I think therefore I am', it's 'I think therefore I am.' Thinking doesn't create what you are- just who you are. That's how people can exist without thinking.
While we're talking about this; why did Descartes think he was a man thinking he was a man instead of a butterfly who thought he was a man?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe we just aren't?
It's not 'I think therefore I am', it's 'I think therefore I am.' Thinking doesn't create what you are- just who you are. That's how people can exist without thinking.
While we're talking about this; why did Descartes think he was a man thinking he was a man instead of a butterfly who thought he was a man?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Maybe we just aren't?
lethal_heartbreaker
Experienced
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2000
- Posts
- 57
ok i dont get it
is it like the saying " Which came first the chicken or the egg ??
is it like the saying " Which came first the chicken or the egg ??
Silverlily
Kitty Mama - East Coast
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
- Posts
- 13,101
I'm hurt
Hey, that was taken out of context!
ShyGuy68 said:
Hey, that was taken out of context!
Merelan, you sexy babe. You were spot on first time. I also liked your idea about coming to class in just your lil' white panties. *mind wonders off* What a beautiful thought. *rubs .... er .... pinches himself*
And also spot on, I thought were Morgaine (eventhough she forgot het panties - next time you forget we will have to spank you) and Angelique, who said it with absolute logic and precision.Kitten, I love the idea of you in your panties *down boy*
And then, of course, something else exciting (apart from all the correct answers and white panties) also came of this thread. The return of a long lost poster. Great to see Ravenloft again. Jeez, but you sure did climb out of the woodwork buddy.
Are you guys up for another philosophy question?
And also spot on, I thought were Morgaine (eventhough she forgot het panties - next time you forget we will have to spank you) and Angelique, who said it with absolute logic and precision.Kitten, I love the idea of you in your panties *down boy*
And then, of course, something else exciting (apart from all the correct answers and white panties) also came of this thread. The return of a long lost poster. Great to see Ravenloft again. Jeez, but you sure did climb out of the woodwork buddy.
Are you guys up for another philosophy question?
Silverlily
Kitty Mama - East Coast
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
- Posts
- 13,101
With baited breath, dear slut_boy.
Oh my, it appears I've lost my virginity to you. *blush*
Oh my, it appears I've lost my virginity to you. *blush*
Silverlily
Kitty Mama - East Coast
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
- Posts
- 13,101
Perhaps an oral report to show what I have learned? Or do I get sent to the office for disrupting class?
(white panties at the ankles, your paddle or mine?)
(white panties at the ankles, your paddle or mine?)
A third philosophical question
Okay, here is another question for you all to ponder over.
Einstein said that the speed of light is the fastest speed that there is. The speed of light is obviously the speed at which light travels. Now, if a star is 100 light years away then that means that the light being given off by that star will take 100 years to reach the Earth. And so, it is possible that even when the star "burns out" we will continue to see it for another 100 years, after it has actually vanished. In fact there is no other way of speeding up this process of knowing because nothing, according to Einstein, can travel faster than the speed of light.
But now consider this: Suppose that we take two identical boxes and put into one of the boxes a diamond. In the other box we put nothing. Suppose then that the boxes are jumbled up and one of them is randomly taken across the universe, some 10 light years away (if that were possible). At this stage we don't know which box is with us and which one has been taken away. Let us now suppose that we open the box that is with us and we find nothing inside. Do we then know from this that the diamond is in the other box. If so, then has knowledge of the other box's contents not travelled to us faster than the speed of light (otherwise that kind of information would have taken 10 years to reach us because the box is 10 light years away). But instead that knowledge reached us immediately.
If this is true, then haven't we possibly just proved that Einstein was wrong in thinking that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light? What are your thoughts?
I can't wait to hear.
Okay, here is another question for you all to ponder over.
Einstein said that the speed of light is the fastest speed that there is. The speed of light is obviously the speed at which light travels. Now, if a star is 100 light years away then that means that the light being given off by that star will take 100 years to reach the Earth. And so, it is possible that even when the star "burns out" we will continue to see it for another 100 years, after it has actually vanished. In fact there is no other way of speeding up this process of knowing because nothing, according to Einstein, can travel faster than the speed of light.
But now consider this: Suppose that we take two identical boxes and put into one of the boxes a diamond. In the other box we put nothing. Suppose then that the boxes are jumbled up and one of them is randomly taken across the universe, some 10 light years away (if that were possible). At this stage we don't know which box is with us and which one has been taken away. Let us now suppose that we open the box that is with us and we find nothing inside. Do we then know from this that the diamond is in the other box. If so, then has knowledge of the other box's contents not travelled to us faster than the speed of light (otherwise that kind of information would have taken 10 years to reach us because the box is 10 light years away). But instead that knowledge reached us immediately.
If this is true, then haven't we possibly just proved that Einstein was wrong in thinking that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light? What are your thoughts?
I can't wait to hear.
Whoa! Hold your horses!
Philosophical Question Number Two - Descartes
Another theory that Descartes put forward was the need for an opposite in order to exist. For example good cannot exist without the existence of bad or dark cannot exist without the existence of light. Now if you were to try and adapt this theory to his theory of existence through consiousness then you will really fuck with your head:
In order for the me to exist there needs to be a me that does not exist. The two are in a symbiotic relationship. Therefore to exist you need to not exist.
My head hurts now.
Philosophical Question Number Two - Descartes
Another theory that Descartes put forward was the need for an opposite in order to exist. For example good cannot exist without the existence of bad or dark cannot exist without the existence of light. Now if you were to try and adapt this theory to his theory of existence through consiousness then you will really fuck with your head:
In order for the me to exist there needs to be a me that does not exist. The two are in a symbiotic relationship. Therefore to exist you need to not exist.
My head hurts now.
Naff
Philosophical Question Number Three - Einstein
I can see how this question is challenging and opens our minds to other possibilities but the fact remains that the question is nonsensical. The knowledge that the other box contains the diamond does not come from the box 10 light years away but from the box we hold in our hand.
Philosophical Question Number Three - Einstein
I can see how this question is challenging and opens our minds to other possibilities but the fact remains that the question is nonsensical. The knowledge that the other box contains the diamond does not come from the box 10 light years away but from the box we hold in our hand.
Firesprite
Vicariously Alive
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2000
- Posts
- 3,141
Re: A third philosophical question
Philosophical Question Number Three - Einstein
I somewhat agree with Flagg.
However the knowledge that the diamond is in the other box would indeed take 10 years to reach us. Until then it is only supposition. It is entirely possible that the diamond fell out or was stolen on its 10 year journey or something else happened to it. The only thing that we know for certain in that situation is that we do not have the diamond.
Just a question in regards to light speed.. How can any particular speed be a barrier? Surely if you run on the hypothesis that space is infinate, that you can continue counting and not come to an end of numbers etc. then you cannot possibly reach a "universal speed limit" ??
Philosophical Question Number Three - Einstein
I somewhat agree with Flagg.
However the knowledge that the diamond is in the other box would indeed take 10 years to reach us. Until then it is only supposition. It is entirely possible that the diamond fell out or was stolen on its 10 year journey or something else happened to it. The only thing that we know for certain in that situation is that we do not have the diamond.
Just a question in regards to light speed.. How can any particular speed be a barrier? Surely if you run on the hypothesis that space is infinate, that you can continue counting and not come to an end of numbers etc. then you cannot possibly reach a "universal speed limit" ??
Okay, so Flagg sees the first issue clearly. That knowledge doesn't come from the distant box at all, but rather from the box held in hand. But the question then, as Firesprite points out, is whether the inference is rightfully knowledge, or just a mere inference. What if we were to suggest that inferences can only be equated to knowledge if two conditions are met: first, the inference must be one drawn from the facts; and second, to be viable, it must be the only inference that can be drawn from those facts. Now, as Firesprite points out, there may be other possibilities which refute the 'truth' that there is a diamond in the distant box.
How would you now respond? Or, do you have any other possible comments on refuting the Einstein theory?
How would you now respond? Or, do you have any other possible comments on refuting the Einstein theory?
Well, I'm going to attempt to explain my thoughts on this without confusing the hell out of anyone.
Let's assume that nothing changes at all and all information remains a constant...the diamond does NOT fall out of the box and everything is perfect, right?
The knowledge does not, in fact, come from the box in your hand, rather it is triggered by opening the box in your hand. The knowledge was already there to begin with. One box with a diamond, one box without...regardless of where the boxes are.
By opening the box in your hand and discovering that there isn't a diamond in the box you've triggered previous knowledge that the box on the other end of the universe contains the diamond. Therefore, wouldn't it be safe to say that the retrieval of previous information from the brain travels faster than the speed of light?
btw, SB, I'm liking you more and more each day...keep 'em coming.
Let's assume that nothing changes at all and all information remains a constant...the diamond does NOT fall out of the box and everything is perfect, right?
The knowledge does not, in fact, come from the box in your hand, rather it is triggered by opening the box in your hand. The knowledge was already there to begin with. One box with a diamond, one box without...regardless of where the boxes are.
By opening the box in your hand and discovering that there isn't a diamond in the box you've triggered previous knowledge that the box on the other end of the universe contains the diamond. Therefore, wouldn't it be safe to say that the retrieval of previous information from the brain travels faster than the speed of light?
btw, SB, I'm liking you more and more each day...keep 'em coming.
If we need confirmation that the diamond is still in the other box then we cannot possibly stipulate anything. To allow the possibilities of loss or theft in to the equation would be effectively allowing theories of chaos to play a role in the problem. For the sake of this question, the knowledge that the diamond is in the other box can be concluded by its absence in the box we hold in our hand. This in turn shows that Einstein's theory is not disproved on this particular occasion.
Rosebud
Little One
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2000
- Posts
- 3,517
the knowledge was already with us when we started...we already knew one had a diamond and one had nothing. when we opened the box and saw nothing then we knew because of the knowledge of the other box was already stored in our brain. For those who think we would not know for so long about the other box...then when we looked down and saw the empty box wouldn't it take the time also to remember why we have the damn box in our hands in the first place?
Similar threads
