Hello There, Guest! Register

Moving back to Rizon
Linkzelda Offline
>MFW Image Streaming
Registered

Posts: 1,991
Threads: 31
Joined: Oct 2012
All Accounts Posts: 2,049
#11
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
(05-05-2015, 03:28 AM)Shi Wrote: Until you can debate using regular language I will not participate in one with you.

Not a debate, just seeking clarification on whether or not metaphysics and science can have any reconciliation, is all.

Quote:I presented, and can continue to present my argument in easy to understand terms and if you will not then I see no reason to continue. A valid argument is measured in points and the validity of said points, not who can use more big words.

Oh, I never had the thought of using big words as tools for debating. I was merely seeing contradictions in what you were saying, but if it's not the case, then I'll agree to disagree.

Quote:Science and philosophy are different, this is a fact. Science and metaphysics are different, this is also a fact, they cannot be combined. Science seeks to explain something through scientific trials, experiments, provable data and eventually reach a conclusion that is universal. Metaphysics seeks to answer vague, subjective questions as broadly as they can.

I see. I usually just see Metaphysics in speculations as to what is reality, and what is truth. And how methods of Science can be utilized to at least create plausible conceptions to supplement with that. Usage of certain knowledge to arrive to certain concepts would involve a mix of those concepts (e.g. metaphysics, ontology, epistemology). I figured that those words would be things that others would be aware about (as I see it's prevalent in other media pertaining to scientific endeavors and such), but if they're big words that don't seem to resonate at all with that, then I see no point in utilizing scientific standpoints, so my apologies.

To say the least, if there's encouragement of speculating what tulpas are without utilizing epistemology, ontology, and other common words related to Science and Philosophy, I guess it's just idea playing we're doing while feigning as if there's any scholarly spirit going on "for science."

But I'm interested in seeing some resources I can look at that shows facts that Science and Philosophy, and even metaphysical stances cannot be reconciled whatsoever rather than just having a benefit of the doubt with what you're saying.


(This post was last modified: 05-05-2015, 03:54 AM by Linkzelda.)
05-05-2015, 03:53 AM
Find Reply
Darcmanish Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 74
Threads: 3
Joined: Jan 2015
#12
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
Philoshophy is spiritual science. You think analyze a data form a machine is diffrent then analyzing your own thoughts? The diffrent is that a machine seems to be objectively while a human is always subjectively. But the machine is produced by the subject and can always give wrong information. Science history proofed that science is often wrong. However everytime a scientist want to proof something he has to create a hypothesis which is always theoretically. With data and experiments he try to confirm his theory. Until he reached that point he is basicly just philosophical. The problem with philoshophy is that most philosophic topics can´t be explained with science yet because they are no tools to proof it . But still the concept is the same and i think philosophy is needed in science to expand your horizon.

Anyway i just think why should i trust a book with data i don´t understand rather then my own mind?

Hmm sorry i guess this is very off-topic but i liked to join Shi´s and Linkzelda`s discussion. Smile

Lacie(my tulpa for my everydaylife and also my best friend)

Noah together with Lynn are my spirituell tulpa´s im using for meditation

Darcmanish Me

Lacie´s and my progress report.
05-05-2015, 10:24 AM
Find Reply
sushi Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 874
Threads: 14
Joined: May 2014
#13
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
(05-05-2015, 03:28 AM)Shi Wrote: Science and philosophy are different, this is a fact. Science and metaphysics are different, this is also a fact, they cannot be combined.

Wikipedia:
Quote:Ever since classical antiquity, science as a type of knowledge has been closely linked to philosophy. In the West during the early modern period the words "science" and "philosophy of nature" were sometimes used interchangeably, and until the 19th century natural philosophy (which is today called "natural science") was considered a branch of philosophy.

Wikipedia:
Quote:Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy

Pick any article on Wikipedia, and click the first link that isn't in italics or parentheses. Keep doing that for the next article, and the next, and the next. You will almost always end at Philosophy. Because ...
Wikipedia:
Quote:As a noun, the term 'philosophy' can refer to any body of knowledge.

Also, we're really off topic. How does this relate to IRC?

(Well, I guess knowing what network the IRC is on is a body of knowledge, and thus philosphy.)

"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2015, 01:11 PM by sushi.)
05-05-2015, 01:08 PM
Find Reply
Linkzelda Offline
>MFW Image Streaming
Registered

Posts: 1,991
Threads: 31
Joined: Oct 2012
All Accounts Posts: 2,049
#14
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
(05-05-2015, 01:08 PM)sushi Wrote: Also, we're really off topic. How does this relate to IRC?

(Well, I guess knowing what network the IRC is on is a body of knowledge, and thus philosphy.)

The reason I brought it up mostly is the presumed strife that a group of people from the Tulpa.im garnered beliefs that didn’t seem pragmatic for Tulpa.info, which the OP explicitly states:

OP Wrote:Between the Tulpa.info, and the Tulpa.im staff, there is also a conflict of interests, and beliefs. From what we have seen, the Tulpa.im staff holds many "metaphysical", or "magical" views, and incorporates them into their practice, and discussion of tulpas. There is nothing wrong with them believing as they do, but we have seen how—due to their status as network operators—their beliefs have begun to spread across our userbase.

This clearly entails that the tulpa.im staff members that didn’t have beliefs that resonated with pragmatic applications for whatever the userbase in the IRC and forum would favor. In other words, it implies that the shift was a matter of ethics to presumably prevent some kind of epidemic in metaphysical beliefs (that also seems to be an i.e., for magical, or even not, it still seems to imply some kind equivalent lack of merit). In other words, the shift was presumed as a pragmatic mode of ethic to make sure the virtues of the userbase in general were not being compromised.

But that means that either staff members:
- Cannot be allowed to hold any kind of beliefs to the point where it “infects” the userbase, or some kind of magistrate/moderator makes the judgment call. But that raises the question on those who may not just want any beliefs that doesn’t resonate with them to go through whatsoever. So it’s a matter of normative ethics, i.e., how staff “ought” to assess themselves in the event that they profess their personal set of beliefs to others.

- Or if they can hold a personal set of beliefs, it has to be held secretly because the moment any of them profess a belief that may ensue a trend of people criticizing if they’re metaphysical, or not, it’s just another “Oh, no! People have opinions—woah there buddy!”

These points lead to the question on the stance of the members that decided to make the shift that sees that any personal beliefs they have would be sounder than the staff they felt was affecting the user base in some way. It would be interesting to see chat logs as to what metaphysical grounds that seemed so far out there that actually enticed the user base, newcomer or not, to be influenced and forsake any capability of them realizing it’s just opinions, ad hoc claims, and presumptions at best. So it becomes a matter of a group of people feeling said professions of beliefs that affect the user base should not be something to be a part of; it seems to be mostly contingent on what a group of people infer as impractical in spite of how it wasn’t a matter of personal strife (though it seems to an internal turmoil going on).

But I digress, it’s not as much as the list of the events with the discussion with one member, and another, like this:

OP Wrote:"It's like I said before we ever switched; this was supposed to be a tulpa.info network; it was meant for our community like how dreamviews has one."
"It was shortly after the move that Quora annexed the network, split it as "being seperate from tulpa.info" and Quora was established as being in charge of it all."
"I remember when that whole "coup" happened, when Quora essentially annexed the IRC community, made their own split, and I was told "Too bad." when I said "This isn't what I was told we would be doing.""

Because that’s usual things that occur with IRC related experiences to where everyone is just trying to find a fair ground for others to be gregarious with; that’s completely understandable. No body of knowledge of IRC, or trying to create metaphysics and ontology over what makes an IRC, an IRC, ha-ha.


It was more of how personal opinions and beliefs (e.g. people holding metaphysical and such) were utilized as an argument to make the switch because said group of people, or even one person held that was affecting the userbase. I haven’t seen one user, or just a few users that were so influential in their beliefs that merits actions for others to absolve themselves from that, especially the whole userbase.

Which means either the staff of Tulpa.info can actually have what theories of mind/consciousness, and other tools for that can be reducible for discussion for tulpas, and that there’s an explicit stance on either being neutral, or even just inert in opinions, or whatever seems sound for the sake of fostering gregarious interactions in the IRC, and in the forum as well for others to roll ideas back and forth.

If it’s not a personal matter that needs to be addressed, then there’s no need to add that people that caused strife had opinions and beliefs like anyone may have with tulpas. Either strip it away from the OP to where it isn’t personal and non-sequential, and end up sugar-coating it as it not being the case, and fixate more of the seemingly negative disposition with Quora, and how the creator of Tulpa.info reacted.

Then if others want to critique on the behaviors between a user and others, then that seems fair since we would be fixating on the course of action vs. their course of action being solely contingent on their personal beliefs with metaphysical standpoints, or things that seem of “magical” connotations, i.e., a justification sustained by highly emotive reactions and responses.


(This post was last modified: 05-05-2015, 03:42 PM by Linkzelda.)
05-05-2015, 03:23 PM
Find Reply
Sky and Vinyl Offline
Vinyl is best tupper
Registered

Posts: 4
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2012
#15
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
(05-05-2015, 01:32 AM)Reisen Wrote: I mean, I've only been on the IRC for a few days, but for me all that meant was changing my bookmark from irc.tulpa.info to irc.rizon.net. Been on the IRC just fine since this thread was posted. Maybe there's some advanced IRC stuff I'm missing here, but it was the opposite of a problem for me.

Well any owners of chatrooms if the would like to be on the same server as the main tulpa chats will be forced to re-register their channels over on the new server. If people switch from tulpa.im to rizon that means decreased irc members which slowly means that the IRC will die. Thus forcing all established members to transfer over to the new server or face the slow death that happened before. I have been on the IRC since late 2012 (though have taken breaks here and there).
05-05-2015, 07:57 PM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,341
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#16
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
Considering the chats switched from Rizon to tulpa.im in the first place, and it didn't die, I am certain things will be fine. We suffered activity loss due to many people refusing to use the new network (those people we will be largely rejoining), and activity leaking into the network hub channel. We will have neither of those problems, when we switch back. If anything, I believe that—while it might be slow at first—this will lead into even more activity than before.

After all, this was done as we saw it to be in the best interest of our community, in the long run.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2015, 08:32 PM by Kiah.)
05-05-2015, 08:17 PM
Find Reply
Sky and Vinyl Offline
Vinyl is best tupper
Registered

Posts: 4
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2012
#17
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
(05-05-2015, 08:17 PM)Kiahdaj Wrote: Considering the chats switched from Rizon to tulpa.im in the first place, and it didn't die, I am certain things will be fine. We suffered activity loss due to many people refusing to use the new network (those people we will be largely rejoining), and activity leaking into the network hub channel. We will have neither of those problems, when we switch back. If anything, I believe that—while it might be slow at first—this will lead into even more activity than before.

After all, this was done as we saw it to be in the best interest of our community, in the long run.

What I was referring to was that all the Old channels that stayed on rizon died.
05-05-2015, 10:57 PM
Find Reply
Kiah Offline
Sans giraffe
Forum Administrators

Posts: 1,341
Threads: 31
Joined: Aug 2012
#18
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
Oh, I see what you meant. Sorry for misunderstanding.

In that case, I would like to say that we did not mean to cause any harm to the tulpa.im network through our leave. Any damage that is caused there due to it is unfortunate. However, we could not allow the possible consequences on their end keep us from doing what we think is best for our own community.

"If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
05-05-2015, 11:16 PM
Find Reply
Potross Offline
Potross[Rei]
Registered

Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2012
#19
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
I just changed over to the new (old?) servers, I didnt have much trouble, it was pretty quick... umm why are we still arguing?
anyway, can someone list all of the #Channels there are? I only know of #Tulpa.info and #Tulpa.lounge.

Unrelated: first post? only now? 3 years after joining? well whatever
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2015, 07:50 AM by Potross.)
05-07-2015, 07:50 AM
Find Reply
Yuki Offline
Tulpa.info's mom
Registered

Posts: 154
Threads: 16
Joined: Oct 2014
#20
 
RE: Moving back to Rizon
The channels on Rizon are the following:

#tulpa.info
#tulpa.lounge
#tulpa.nsfw
#tulpa.mods

Feel free to ask me anything.
Suffering is self-imposed. Don't let it control you.
05-07-2015, 10:20 AM
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