Agreed. Also, consider that some of those lifespans may be talking about dynasties, not individuals. Ancient literary forms do not necessarily adhere to modern conventions. Modern literary forms do not even necessarily do so.
BTW, it was 8 people, not 5. That's a 60% increase in memory capacity.;)
Of course, if they can't spell "college", I wonder.
Seriously, I'm far more likely to toss a resume with lots of misspellings into/dev/null than one with a degree from Podunk State. If a person can't be bothered to proofread his/her resume, I wonder if he/she will take the trouble to do anything else well.
And you miss my point. I am not such a naif as to claim that Pascal or anyone else proved the existence of god or an afterlife. As you point out, diety is not something that ultimately reduces to human logic so much as it relies on human faith.
It is equally a logical fallacy to claim to know better than all those who have gone before, and to say that, because I do not believe, nobody else should, and that, therefore, simulations and games that attempt to capture the richness of human culture should pretend there is no such thing as religion, or caricature it. That a lot of people believe something to be false also has no relevance to the actual truth of it.
Sadly, it seems that discussion about discussion of religion leads to as much waste of words as discussion of religion, so I'll quit.
BTW, I think you'll find that Pascal wasn't so simplistic, either.
Re:Religion IS escapism
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That's only true for those who have concluded that what they do while they are here can only be meaningless unless it serves to placate God.
Who said that life was about placating God? Perhaps some, but certainly not all theists. That's a strawman argument.
If there is no "afterlife", then what you do while you are here is all that has any meaning.
And zero times any value is still zero.
But my reference to Pascal wasn't to prove or disprove God, but to point out that some very smart people have considered (and do consider) it a topic worthy of discussion.
In my experience, there are some very good and some very good theists, and the same is true of atheists. There are also some very smart and very stupid theists and atheists. That speaks to the fundamental nature of humans, but neither proves nor disproves the existence of a god or gods.
Likewise, the fact that the Supreme Being that you stipulated gives you heartburn does not prove or disprove the existence of a Supreme Being, whether of that nature or another.
But the original, on topic point still holds. Just because you don't like religion doesn't mean it isn't an important force in human society, which any simulation or game that claims to be realistic should acknowledge in other than a caricatured way.
Re:Religion IS escapism
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If it doesn't exist, then the believer and the non-believer net out the same, with cessation of existence. And if the believer lived a happier life in the meanwhile, who's to say he/she was wrong? Conversely, what if the afterlife does exist? Then the outcome for the two could be very different. (Pascal's wager).
The fact is that a lot of very intelligent people throughout human history have concluded that the existence of an afterlife is a reasonable conclusion. To sweepingly dismiss all of their philosophy as being simple escapism is rather simplistic.
In any case, the existence or non-existence of a spiritual realm is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not people believe it. The majority do. Given that, it seems reasonable to make it a part of any game world that attempts to capture the richness of the real world.
Sit-down, breathe into this paper bag, you'll be OK in a minute or so. Straight-line extrapolations into the future, whether about l33t or technology, tend to be wildly out of touch with reality.
Think ten as in Mac-OS X. Generation X was, according to some historian, the tenth generation since the founding of the U.S. So the next is indeed Generation XI. Not too catchy, though.
Slashdot Mirror
It's those pesky terrestrial eclipses that bother me, when the Sun goes between the earth and the moon...
Not unbiased, just differently biased...
"iconic female heroine of our time."
As opposed to "iconic male heroine of our time?
I would not consider someone who would refer to Linux as a language, as Mr. Rasmussen did, to be terribly knowledgeable about this things.
Hey! That's my daughter you're leering at!
Agreed. Also, consider that some of those lifespans may be talking about dynasties, not individuals. Ancient literary forms do not necessarily adhere to modern conventions. Modern literary forms do not even necessarily do so.
;)
BTW, it was 8 people, not 5. That's a 60% increase in memory capacity.
Of course, if they can't spell "college", I wonder.
/dev/null than one with a degree from Podunk State. If a person can't be bothered to proofread his/her resume, I wonder if he/she will take the trouble to do anything else well.
Seriously, I'm far more likely to toss a resume with lots of misspellings into
What do violas have to do with it? Did Stradivarius use antimatter to achieve his results?
It's pretty much useless, anyway. It hasn't led to a single arrest, only the inconveniencing of innocent passengers.
Sounds like a protection racket, to me.
And you miss my point. I am not such a naif as to claim that Pascal or anyone else proved the existence of god or an afterlife. As you point out, diety is not something that ultimately reduces to human logic so much as it relies on human faith.
It is equally a logical fallacy to claim to know better than all those who have gone before, and to say that, because I do not believe, nobody else should, and that, therefore, simulations and games that attempt to capture the richness of human culture should pretend there is no such thing as religion, or caricature it. That a lot of people believe something to be false also has no relevance to the actual truth of it.
Sadly, it seems that discussion about discussion of religion leads to as much waste of words as discussion of religion, so I'll quit.
BTW, I think you'll find that Pascal wasn't so simplistic, either.
Who said that life was about placating God? Perhaps some, but certainly not all theists. That's a strawman argument.
And zero times any value is still zero.
But my reference to Pascal wasn't to prove or disprove God, but to point out that some very smart people have considered (and do consider) it a topic worthy of discussion.
In my experience, there are some very good and some very good theists, and the same is true of atheists. There are also some very smart and very stupid theists and atheists. That speaks to the fundamental nature of humans, but neither proves nor disproves the existence of a god or gods.
Likewise, the fact that the Supreme Being that you stipulated gives you heartburn does not prove or disprove the existence of a Supreme Being, whether of that nature or another.
But the original, on topic point still holds. Just because you don't like religion doesn't mean it isn't an important force in human society, which any simulation or game that claims to be realistic should acknowledge in other than a caricatured way.
If it doesn't exist, then the believer and the non-believer net out the same, with cessation of existence. And if the believer lived a happier life in the meanwhile, who's to say he/she was wrong? Conversely, what if the afterlife does exist? Then the outcome for the two could be very different. (Pascal's wager).
The fact is that a lot of very intelligent people throughout human history have concluded that the existence of an afterlife is a reasonable conclusion. To sweepingly dismiss all of their philosophy as being simple escapism is rather simplistic.
In any case, the existence or non-existence of a spiritual realm is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not people believe it. The majority do. Given that, it seems reasonable to make it a part of any game world that attempts to capture the richness of the real world.
Both of these sound suspiciously like folk etymologies--sort of an urban legend--to me.
Sit-down, breathe into this paper bag, you'll be OK in a minute or so. Straight-line extrapolations into the future, whether about l33t or technology, tend to be wildly out of touch with reality.
Would this be IPV4 or IPV6?
Think ten as in Mac-OS X. Generation X was, according to some historian, the tenth generation since the founding of the U.S. So the next is indeed Generation XI. Not too catchy, though.