Notable quotes, excerpts, and profound lines.

[MickeyC]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

.....This means, in some sense, that what happens to us automatically affects things instantaneously in distant corners of the universe, since our wave functions were probably entangled at the beginning of time. In some sense there is a web of entanglement that connects distant corners of the universe, including us.
..........— Michio Kaku (1947 - ), [/B][/I].

Excellent...and excellent book as well.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by cassidym

Excellent...and excellent book as well.

Yes it was!

[WT Sharpe]

.....I have often said, and oftener think, that this world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.
..........— Horace Walpole, 4th Earl of Oxford (1717-1797), English politician, author. Letter to Sir Horace Mann (December 31, 1769).

[BenG]

Some quotes from musician and author Kinky Friedman.
(Kinky is not one to let a good line go unused so most of these turn up in multiple books, speeches, and interviews)


I've always said money may buy you a fine dog, but only love can make it wag its tail.

It was a nice neighborhood. If you liked neighborhoods.
Friedman, Kinky (1993), A Case of Lone Star.

I rarely meddled in the cat's personal affairs and she rarely meddled in mine. Neither of us was foolish enough to attribute human emotions to our pets.
Friedman, Kinky (1993), Greenwich Killing Time.

I knew I wasn't as stupid as I looked. No one was.
Friedman, Kinky (1993), Greenwich Killing Time

"Well, I hate to be the one to take the flyswatter to Tinker Bell, but..."

You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but you can’t wipe your friends off on your saddle.

Courtesy is owed. Respect is earned. Love is given.

We knew with the true certainty of the arrogance of youth that we could have been anything, we could have done anything, except maybe get older.

A fool and his money are soon elected.

[poohbear_nc]

I rarely meddled in the cat's personal affairs and she rarely meddled in mine. Neither of us was foolish enough to attribute human emotions to our pets.
Friedman, Kinky (1993), Greenwich Killing Time.

This should be an embroidered sampler on every cat lovers' wall!

[WT Sharpe]

.....This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a "posthuman" stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation.
..........— Nick Bostrom (born Niklas Boström) (1973 - ), Swedish philosopher, Professor of Applied Ethics at Oxford University, Director of the Oxford Future of Humanity Institute. From "Are You Living In A Computer Simulation?", published in Philosophical Quarterly (2003), Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255. The entire paper can be found in PDF format at http://www.simulation-argument.com. Nick Bostrom's homepage is http://www.nickbostrom.com/.

.....All things considered, Bostrom says, the probability that you're living in a simulation is "close to unity". "I think the argument is watertight," he says.
..........— New Scientist, 27 July 2002, "Life's a sim and then you're deleted", located at http://www.newscientist.com/article/...e-deleted.html.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

.....This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a "posthuman" stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation.
..........— Nick Bostrom (born Niklas Boström) (1973 - ), Swedish philosopher, Professor of Applied Ethics at Oxford University, Director of the Oxford Future of Humanity Institute. From "Are You Living In A Computer Simulation?", published in Philosophical Quarterly (2003), Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255. The entire paper can be found in PDF format at http://www.simulation-argument.com. Nick Bostrom's homepage is http://www.nickbostrom.com/.

.....All things considered, Bostrom says, the probability that you're living in a simulation is "close to unity". "I think the argument is watertight," he says.
..........— New Scientist, 27 July 2002, "Life's a sim and then you're deleted", located at http://www.newscientist.com/article/...e-deleted.html.

What? and he believes this? This is verging on the philosophy/religion threads. So if we are a simulation, what of those running the simulation?

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

What? and he believes this? This is verging on the philosophy/religion threads. So if we are a simulation, what of those running the simulation?

Like Bishop Berkeley did with his philosophical idealism, Bostrom makes a strong case for his simulation proposition. That he may be right is not inconceivable, nor is it inconceivable on the other hand that some intellect may come along to play the role of Samuel Johnson to his Berkeley, kick the stone, and say, "I refute it thus!"

What he basically argues is that if humans don't destroy themselves first, one day we will have the computing power to run A.I. simulations. In their artificial environment the sims will be unaware that they are sims, and since as time goes on the number of sims will vastly outnumber the number of flesh and blood humans, it stands to reason that the vast majority of conscious entities will be sims; so if you a gambling on whether or not you are a sim, the smart money says odds are that you are.

The paper is not long, and he has since produced a "patch" to the original here. It makes for interesting reading, and if nothing else, is surely thought-provoking and fun to consider. He's currently working on a book on the subject.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Like Bishop Berkeley did with his philosophical idealism, Bostrom makes a strong case for his simulation proposition. That he may be right is not inconceivable, nor is it inconceivable on the other hand that some intellect may come along to play the role of Samuel Johnson to his Berkeley, kick the stone, and say, "I refute it thus!"

What he basically argues is that if humans don't destroy themselves first, one day we will have the computing power to run A.I. simulations. In their artificial environment the sims will be unaware that they are sims, and since as time goes on the number of sims will vastly outnumber the number of flesh and blood humans, it stands to reason that the vast majority of conscious entities will be sims; so if you a gambling on whether or not you are a sim, the smart money says odds are that you are.

The paper is not long, and he has since produced a "patch" to the original here. It makes for interesting reading, and if nothing else, is surely thought-provoking and fun to consider. He's currently working on a book on the subject.

I went to the link and skimmed it quickly......I'm not arguing that he's wrong, it certainly could be, but I'm thinking it's kind of a fruitless concern in that nothing would change if we knew the answer of whether we are in the Matrix or not. As far as his speculation of the future computing power...no doubt and my expectation is that our machines will become our progeny as a species...

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I went to the link and skimmed it quickly......I'm not arguing that he's wrong, it certainly could be, but I'm thinking it's kind of a fruitless concern in that nothing would change if we knew the answer of whether we are in the Matrix or not. As far as his speculation of the future computing power...no doubt and my expectation is that our machines will become our progeny as a species...

Perhaps not, but our prayers might be answered if the creator of the program takes a liking to us.

Of course, if we bore him or her, or if we pester the creator with a lot of trivial and uninteresting BS, we might just get deleted!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Perhaps not, but our prayers might be answered if the creator of the program takes a liking to us.

Of course, if we bore him or her, or if we pester the creator with a lot of trivial and uninteresting BS, we might just get deleted!

I think they call that smiting.

and is it murder if the victim was never living in the first place?

[WT Sharpe]

In my wildest flights of fancy, I've often wondered if all consciousness is singular, and parts are simply divided off temporarily for self-amusement. It would be an interesting solution to the Problem of Evil. In such a solipsistic scenario, "God" would be the ultimate lonely figure, who creates simulated dramas of composed from the Creator's own substance for self amusement in a vain attempt to escape alienation. Because whatever bad things that happened would ultimately be happening to God by choice, the idea of good and evil would be meaningless; it would be no more than a play on a stage in which the Author, Players, and Audience are the same character.

On the other hand, it would bring a whole new meaning to the phrase, "playing with yourself".

[WT Sharpe]

.....Yes, I will pull off that liberal’s halo that he spends such efforts cultivating! The North’s liberals have been for so long pointing accusing fingers at the South and getting away with it that they have fits when they are exposed as the world’s worst hypocrites.
.....I believe my own life mirrors this hypocrisy. I know nothing about the South. I am a creation of the Northern white man and of his hypocritical attitude toward the Negro.
..........— Malcolm X (El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz) (born Malcolm Little, 1925 - 1965), American Muslim minister, public speaker, activist. The Autobiography of Malcolm X (1965) as told to Alex Haley.

[bjones6416]

One of my favorites:

"It was not that he was feckless, more that he had simply not been around the day they handed out feck."

Neil Gaiman, from Anansi Boys

[kennyc]

"Somewhere within all of us there is a wordless center, a part of us that hopes to be immortal in some way, a part that has remained unchanged since we were children, the source of our strength and compassion. This faint confluence of the tangible and the spiritual is where Art comes from. It has no known limits, and once you tap into it you will realize what truly rich choices you have."

Richard Schmid - from Alla Prima Everything I know About Painting