My account of truth in general is a combination of the correspondence and coherence theories of truth. Some statements derive their truth value from comparison with reality, and some statements derive their truth values from other statements. Thor as a fictional character is an interesting case, and I think that because he is a fictional character truths about Thor are established in much the same way as truths about the meaning of words, i.e. through use.
Just as I can develop an idiolect in which "slug" means "verb" (despite both words having different meanings in mainstream English), I can write a comic about a fictional character already referenced in a large body of existing work, change critical aspects of his fictional identity, and insist that identity is preserved. However, in such a case, it is not up to an individual's decision whether identity is in fact preserved. To go back to the word analogy, me using the word "slug" for verb doesn't make everyone else who doesn't wrong in their use of either word, even if I insist that it does. Right and wrong uses of words are established through consensus, or otherwise considered jargon (in cases where specific meanings of general words are stipulated, such as how "object" means something different to a linguist than it does to a philosophy professor).
With Thor it's the same. Marvel can claim that Thor is now a woman, but that doesn't make this new character named Thor identical to the Thor that the Thor comics used to refer to, or the Thor that the poetic Eddas referred to. There is now a new character, created at a specific time by a specific author, who attributes specific properties to this new character, but no matter what the author says about this character, the author's authority doesn't extend beyond the character he's created into the wider world. And so there are some things that will not become true even though the author says they are, in this specific case the combination of that 1) this new Thor is identical to the old Thor ("is the real Thor"), and 2) this new Thor is a woman.
What part of "And this new Thor isn't a temporary female substitute — she's now the one and only Thor, and she is worthy!"" is ambiguous to you? If she is the one and only Thor, and she is a woman, then Thor is now a woman. That's how the transitive relation works.
Making Thor a woman is like making Jesus a woman, Mjolnir a screwdriver, or Huginn and Muninn storks. It's like saying "I carpooled to work today" when you came by yourself on your bike, because you want to reclaim the word "carpooling" to refer to biking to work. You can do it, but that doesn't make what you say true. Thor's gender is such a significant feature of his established identity that to change his gender is to change his identity from Thor into Something-that-is-not-Thor. You can say that this new character is both Thor and a woman, but that doesn't make it true.
I've been thinking about that. I wonder if it's possible to determine what is being typed from the sound of the keystrokes. Surely it's possible that there are minute differences between keystrokes from different keys?
Whenever I saw someone write something retarded on the internet in the past, I just chalked it up to the person in question genuinely being retarded. The idea that a government agency might intentionally be contributing retardation to poison genuine discussion seemed ridiculous on the face of it. Now, every time I read something and think "no one can really be that stupid, can they?" I've begun to wonder. Maybe no one CAN really be that stupid...
Indeed, but there is an important detail in quality of the venue that you've glossed over. Only very rarely has a home viewing of mine been interrupted by shitheads who won't stop talking (or these days, won't stop destroying the darkness with their maglite-like phones), little kids throwing popcorn, or littler kids crying. When you also take into consideration that you can pause, rewind and fast-forward movies on your computer, the cost-benefit analysis of going out vs. staying in gets much more complicated.
Pretty sure bluray and dvd rips have a significantly higher quality than what is commercially available, as they have all the unskippable bullshit stripped out.
That depends on your concept of identity across worlds. Surely the first post in another multiverse cannot be entirely identical to one in this one, as it exists in a different multiverse, not this one. Furthermore, it also differs from "this" post in that it is first in reply to the article posted on Slashdot*, or/.*. It also differs in that it wasn't made by you, but you*, who further differs from you in such a way that allows him to make that first post where you failed. If you're already so different from you* as to fail where he succeeded, it would stand to reason that any post made by you* is sufficiently different from posts made by you that they do not qualify for identity. In which case, there really is no universe in which your post was the first post.
No it's not. A smart phone is more conveniently carried than a laptop. A smart watch is not more convenient than a smart phone. There are also functions that a smart phone can perform that a laptop can't. Please rein in your assholishness until you learn how analogies work.
They demonstrated a novel argument for why there are no hidden variables and that the statistical descriptions of quantum mechanics reflect reality accurately.
A smart watch is a smart phone with less functionality that you have to wear around your wrist. I don't understand the appeal at all. Everything it does a smart phone does better, only a smart phone is not strapped to one of your body parts.
I don't understand how people with such a poor command of meaningful language are able to effectively manage and lead multi-billion dollar corporations.
I suppose it is possible that they are capable, secretly, of conveying meaning by the use of words, but then why would they hide this ability from investors? Surely a CEO who doesn't sound like a retard inspires more confidence than one who does?
Pretty sure it's Vrije Universiteit, because the whole functions as a name. In fact, to distinguish it from the one in Brussels, it should probably be referred to as Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Mod parent up. We need fewer students in university, not more. You really should only go to university if you're passionate about some subject and want to learn more about it, but that's not why most students are there.
If the backwards flow of water is a result of a complex system of causal interactions, they couldn't have come to the conclusion that this would work based on what they already knew. So how did they discover it? Was it an accident? If not, can one of them look into the future? This is a pretty awesome result if it didn't depend on coincidence.
Everything currently run by committee should ideally be run by an AI with limited human oversight in the future. Groups of humans suck at the two things AIs are great at: remembering things and making decisions.
Slashdot Mirror
My account of truth in general is a combination of the correspondence and coherence theories of truth. Some statements derive their truth value from comparison with reality, and some statements derive their truth values from other statements. Thor as a fictional character is an interesting case, and I think that because he is a fictional character truths about Thor are established in much the same way as truths about the meaning of words, i.e. through use.
Just as I can develop an idiolect in which "slug" means "verb" (despite both words having different meanings in mainstream English), I can write a comic about a fictional character already referenced in a large body of existing work, change critical aspects of his fictional identity, and insist that identity is preserved. However, in such a case, it is not up to an individual's decision whether identity is in fact preserved. To go back to the word analogy, me using the word "slug" for verb doesn't make everyone else who doesn't wrong in their use of either word, even if I insist that it does. Right and wrong uses of words are established through consensus, or otherwise considered jargon (in cases where specific meanings of general words are stipulated, such as how "object" means something different to a linguist than it does to a philosophy professor).
With Thor it's the same. Marvel can claim that Thor is now a woman, but that doesn't make this new character named Thor identical to the Thor that the Thor comics used to refer to, or the Thor that the poetic Eddas referred to. There is now a new character, created at a specific time by a specific author, who attributes specific properties to this new character, but no matter what the author says about this character, the author's authority doesn't extend beyond the character he's created into the wider world. And so there are some things that will not become true even though the author says they are, in this specific case the combination of that 1) this new Thor is identical to the old Thor ("is the real Thor"), and 2) this new Thor is a woman.
What part of "And this new Thor isn't a temporary female substitute — she's now the one and only Thor, and she is worthy!"" is ambiguous to you? If she is the one and only Thor, and she is a woman, then Thor is now a woman. That's how the transitive relation works.
Making Thor a woman is like making Jesus a woman, Mjolnir a screwdriver, or Huginn and Muninn storks. It's like saying "I carpooled to work today" when you came by yourself on your bike, because you want to reclaim the word "carpooling" to refer to biking to work. You can do it, but that doesn't make what you say true. Thor's gender is such a significant feature of his established identity that to change his gender is to change his identity from Thor into Something-that-is-not-Thor. You can say that this new character is both Thor and a woman, but that doesn't make it true.
Magicians train themselves in pencil reading, so that they can tell what you write from the movements of the pencil.
I've been thinking about that. I wonder if it's possible to determine what is being typed from the sound of the keystrokes. Surely it's possible that there are minute differences between keystrokes from different keys?
Whenever I saw someone write something retarded on the internet in the past, I just chalked it up to the person in question genuinely being retarded. The idea that a government agency might intentionally be contributing retardation to poison genuine discussion seemed ridiculous on the face of it. Now, every time I read something and think "no one can really be that stupid, can they?" I've begun to wonder. Maybe no one CAN really be that stupid...
Indeed, but there is an important detail in quality of the venue that you've glossed over. Only very rarely has a home viewing of mine been interrupted by shitheads who won't stop talking (or these days, won't stop destroying the darkness with their maglite-like phones), little kids throwing popcorn, or littler kids crying. When you also take into consideration that you can pause, rewind and fast-forward movies on your computer, the cost-benefit analysis of going out vs. staying in gets much more complicated.
Maybe back in 2003 that approached the truth. We live in the age of the web-dl and screener season now, grandpa.
Pretty sure bluray and dvd rips have a significantly higher quality than what is commercially available, as they have all the unskippable bullshit stripped out.
That depends on your concept of identity across worlds. Surely the first post in another multiverse cannot be entirely identical to one in this one, as it exists in a different multiverse, not this one. Furthermore, it also differs from "this" post in that it is first in reply to the article posted on Slashdot*, or /.*. It also differs in that it wasn't made by you, but you*, who further differs from you in such a way that allows him to make that first post where you failed. If you're already so different from you* as to fail where he succeeded, it would stand to reason that any post made by you* is sufficiently different from posts made by you that they do not qualify for identity. In which case, there really is no universe in which your post was the first post.
No it's not. A smart phone is more conveniently carried than a laptop. A smart watch is not more convenient than a smart phone. There are also functions that a smart phone can perform that a laptop can't. Please rein in your assholishness until you learn how analogies work.
You are legit a crazy person or a smart watch salesman. I see no other possible explanation.
They demonstrated a novel argument for why there are no hidden variables and that the statistical descriptions of quantum mechanics reflect reality accurately.
A smart watch is a smart phone with less functionality that you have to wear around your wrist. I don't understand the appeal at all. Everything it does a smart phone does better, only a smart phone is not strapped to one of your body parts.
I don't understand how people with such a poor command of meaningful language are able to effectively manage and lead multi-billion dollar corporations.
I suppose it is possible that they are capable, secretly, of conveying meaning by the use of words, but then why would they hide this ability from investors? Surely a CEO who doesn't sound like a retard inspires more confidence than one who does?
Pretty sure it's Vrije Universiteit, because the whole functions as a name. In fact, to distinguish it from the one in Brussels, it should probably be referred to as Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Not anything. Magic won't become real, even if a Texas court decrees it.
Mod parent up. We need fewer students in university, not more. You really should only go to university if you're passionate about some subject and want to learn more about it, but that's not why most students are there.
It's called Pelagornis sandersi, and it lived between 25 and 28 million years ago.
As pushing is trivial, and both of your applications can be achieved by pushing, they were already covered before this discovery.
If the backwards flow of water is a result of a complex system of causal interactions, they couldn't have come to the conclusion that this would work based on what they already knew. So how did they discover it? Was it an accident? If not, can one of them look into the future? This is a pretty awesome result if it didn't depend on coincidence.
There, that moped is doing it. That one. That little moped is why 20 million people literally cannot live off the air they breathe.
... in science fiction. I hope you are aware of what "fiction" means, otherwise I fear there are greater threats on your horizon than evil AIs.
That sounds suspiciously like a decision to me, comrade. Do you have documentation signifying that you are 100% pure AI?
Everything currently run by committee should ideally be run by an AI with limited human oversight in the future. Groups of humans suck at the two things AIs are great at: remembering things and making decisions.