Hello There, Guest! Register

Found a bad site
Guiomar Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2017
#51
 
RE: Found a bad site
My 2 cents:
Either magic does exist and has an influence on the world as we perceive it, then magic's existence can be proven in a reliable and repeatable way by observing it's influence or it does not exist/has no influence (then there is no point in discussing it).

That's just my opinion though. If it's reliably observable and repeatable I'll believe it until proven wrong.

I'm curious about your opinion regarding soft sciences such as sociology or anthropology.
09-01-2017, 02:22 PM
Find Reply
Myshkin Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 12
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2017
#52
 
RE: Found a bad site
(09-01-2017, 02:22 PM)Guiomar Wrote: My 2 cents:
Either magic does exist and has an influence on the world as we perceive it, then magic's existence can be proven in a reliable and repeatable way by observing it's influence or it does not exist/has no influence (then there is no point in discussing it).

That's just my opinion though. If it's reliably observable and repeatable I'll believe it until proven wrong.

I'm curious about your opinion regarding soft sciences such as sociology or anthropology.

Not necessarily. Consider the luck stat in RPG games: It objectively does have an effect on the game world, but to the characters in the game, no amount of testing could possibly confirm its existence. Every effect of the luck stat could be chalked up to pure chance – to "luck" as in a fortuitous roll of the dice rather than "luck" as a force that affects what the dice land on – or dismissed as confirmation bias.

I'm assuming that by "you" you meant me. The "soft sciences" are sciences in the older sense of a body of knowledge, not in the newer sense of a discipline that seeks to obtain knowledge though the use of the scientific method. I don't really know what you wanted me to say about it so that's all I  got right now.

Anyway I've pretty much said all I had to say on this topic and there are probably better subforums to discuss it in so I'm just gonna call it quits here unless Ido really wants to continue the debate.

In dwelling, be close to the land. 
In meditation, go deep in the heart. 
In dealing with others, be gentle and kind. 
In speech, be true. 
In ruling, be just. 
09-01-2017, 04:28 PM
Find Reply
Guiomar Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 16
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2017
#53
 
RE: Found a bad site
I disagree. For in game characters there are easy statistical tests they could do to demonstrate that whenever they roll a dice the outcome is not truly random. Randomness is in fact quite hard to attain.

On soft sciences I was just curious, thanks for giving me your opinion.
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2017, 08:14 PM by Guiomar.)
09-01-2017, 08:13 PM
Find Reply
KarlYoshimura Offline
Man in the High Castle
Registered

Posts: 184
Threads: 15
Joined: Jun 2012
#54
 
RE: Found a bad site
@TiaAndBlitz:

To be fair, community.tulpa.info could be designated as a "bad" website, seeing as there are/were multitudes herein who created tulpas only for sexual contact and/or dissolved said tulpas under trifling circumstances and rationales.

If you look in the archive/deleted posts of this site, you'll find a similar thread where some of the old guard took the piss out of a web-master that tried to peddle similar wares...

Many have I loved - many times been bitten,
many times I've gazed along the open road.

Many times I've lied - many times I've listened,
many times I've wondered how much there is to know.
09-02-2017, 06:18 PM
Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | Tulpa.Info | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication