Okay, I scanned through the Phaedo text, searching for instances of the word "soul". I was unable to find a definition of the word soul, only a very long discussion about death and the body and soul. The very first instance of the word is in this section:
"Then is it not the release of the soul from the body? And this is death, the body being released apart from the soul by itself, and the soul apart is released from the body by itself? Then is death anything else but this?"
It appears that the existence of a soul is an assumption, upon which this great volume of text has been stacked. Did I miss the definition in this text?
All metaphysical investigations are not "evidence-based" in the sense that they are subjectable to the scientific method, but they are still "reasonable", perhaps even "logical".
When talking about a "soul", it must first be agreed upon what this word actually means. It's like Scientology and their entire religion which is based upon thetans and the like. You can have a wonderful metaphysical investigation of these thetans which one might consider reasonable and logical, but what's the point? We may as well be discussing the finer points of the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
And trust me -- those who believe in the soul in this day and age have spent more than a little ammount of time reconciling their belief with science. You're not going ot get any of them to change their mind with a half-witted claim to parsimony.
Clearly not, as your reply amply shows. As to the half-witted part, I don't think you know me well enough to make such a rude determination.
Oh, and as the best scientific evidence shows no room for a physical soul of any weight, the soul cannot be said to exist anywhere physically. It is a spiritual object, and as a spiritual object it exists in all parts of the body and no part of the body, so long as the body can be controled by or in turn influence the will of the soul.
You're ignoring the much simpler explanation that it simply doesn't exist... which more than adequately explains the "no room for a physical soul of any weight [mass]".
When does someone stop being human [...] What of the soul?
Perhaps you can first provide a concrete, evidence-based definition of what a soul is, then we can have an intelligent discussion about whatever it is.
One interesting point is that you don't call customer service. They call you. Bruce
Don't you mean "We call you"? From the recent article on software patents:
"Bruce Perens may be best known as the creator of the Open Source Definition, the manifesto of Open Source and the canonical rule set for Open Source licensing. He is currently a vice president of Sourcelabs."
If this is true, I would certainly have expected a disclaimer in the interests of full disclosure.
I am just saying that if your desire is to seperate church and state, then create a movement to seperate the two. Don't create a movement to get people to abandon religion. That is just subversive.
Churches have special classes for kids where they teach a watered down puppies and ponies version of religion that is palatable to young, impressionable children. That's quite subversive in my book. And I'm sure I could go on about other subversive religious attempts... "Intelligent Design" anyone?
Nah... now, not only do we have articles duped by the editors, but now we also have our comments duped as well.
As an aside, it looks like they're making use of this part of the TOS:
In each such case, the submitting user grants OSTG the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, and display such Content (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed, all subject to the terms of any applicable license.
So OSTG can make a "Dumbest Quotes on Slashdot" book and you've already given permission.
Maybe they just put down any BS answer they can so they get to ship the system off to your company under some "too difficult" escape clause. As long as what you charge Best Buy is less than what the customer pays Best Buy, they'll continue to offload work to you. It might even be more profitable for them.
My question is; is it possible for a piece of information to be completely destroyed?
Can you reconstruct the entirety of history in perfect detail? No? Then information has been completely lost unless you know something nobody else does.
... and check that there aren't any funny adaptor-like things attached to the keyboard port. Is that *just* a PS/2 <--> USB adaptor? Or does it have extra functionality that you'd never know?
Further, if it were not for Linux, BSD probably would not have developed to a state where it could have been used for such a purpose since Linux caused such a massive explosion in software development. The old pace of BSD development was kicked into gear by Linux. So, even the use of BSD would imply a dependence upon the existence of Linux.
Sounds like revisionist history to me. You might want to read up on BSD history and Linux history. Where was Linux in 1983 when 4.3BSD had implemented the first TCP/IP stack? It wouldn't be another 8 years until Linus made his first announcement about wanting people to send in a wishlist for his little OS project he's been dabbling with. Linux was made possible because it was transmitted on a network likely powered by a lot of BSD code. So Linux's existence is dependent on BSD, not the other way around.
The one point I agree with you on is that BSD development has stepped up in recent years. Whether that can be attributed to Linux directly, or in 1995 to Berkeley no longer directly developing it and thus spawning the major BSD projects, or a general surge in all open source operating systems alongside the popularity of the internet... is debatable.
Why do you say that? Yahoo runs on FreeBSD. But saying Yahoo would have been impossible without FreeBSD is a load of bull... they could have used Solaris, AIX, Irix, or anything else to achieve their business objectives. Google is no different. That they chose to use a lot of Linux in building out their infrastructure as opposed to another operating system does not imply that they would not exist were it not for Linux.
If possible, please disregard the mindless ranting (not the general point).
Your general point is taken. What I should have said was that this article would be a good indicator of the maturity of the average poster, and left my bias out of it. But I guess it wouldn't be Slashdot if we had everybody saying "Wow, that's really respectable for Buffett to give so much to those in need" without all the bashing thrown in. Nor would it be Slashdot without a few people saying "Wow, you're all a bunch of immature kids.":)
I gotta say it... when I read this, I thought that this story would definitely be the one to highlight the average youth and inexperience of the slashdot membership. And from reading through some of the comments, this has certainly been confirmed.
Slashdot Mirror
See Plato's Phaedo...
Okay, I scanned through the Phaedo text, searching for instances of the word "soul". I was unable to find a definition of the word soul, only a very long discussion about death and the body and soul. The very first instance of the word is in this section:
"Then is it not the release of the soul from the body?
And this is death,
the body being released apart from the soul by itself,
and the soul apart is released from the body by itself?
Then is death anything else but this?"
It appears that the existence of a soul is an assumption, upon which this great volume of text has been stacked. Did I miss the definition in this text?
All metaphysical investigations are not "evidence-based" in the sense that they are subjectable to the scientific method, but they are still "reasonable", perhaps even "logical".
When talking about a "soul", it must first be agreed upon what this word actually means. It's like Scientology and their entire religion which is based upon thetans and the like. You can have a wonderful metaphysical investigation of these thetans which one might consider reasonable and logical, but what's the point? We may as well be discussing the finer points of the Invisible Pink Unicorn.
And trust me -- those who believe in the soul in this day and age have spent more than a little ammount of time reconciling their belief with science. You're not going ot get any of them to change their mind with a half-witted claim to parsimony.
Clearly not, as your reply amply shows. As to the half-witted part, I don't think you know me well enough to make such a rude determination.
As I frequently reword a well known saying, "Lazyness is the mother of invention." :)
And you're so lazy you had to invent a new spelling for laziness?
Oh, and as the best scientific evidence shows no room for a physical soul of any weight, the soul cannot be said to exist anywhere physically. It is a spiritual object, and as a spiritual object it exists in all parts of the body and no part of the body, so long as the body can be controled by or in turn influence the will of the soul.
You're ignoring the much simpler explanation that it simply doesn't exist... which more than adequately explains the "no room for a physical soul of any weight [mass]".
...doesn't that mean that France will loose and we Yanks will have to come to their rescue?
Or maybe the French will teach you how to spell "lose".
I have one word for you: that's two words.
Never seen Reservoir Dogs, I take it?
They should have used Jar Jar Binks and Westly Crusher quotes.
Westly Crusher? Is that a mixture of The Princess Bride and ST:TNG?
Picard: "Mr. Crusher, engage."
Crusher: "As... you... wish..."
When does someone stop being human [...] What of the soul?
Perhaps you can first provide a concrete, evidence-based definition of what a soul is, then we can have an intelligent discussion about whatever it is.
I would have assumed you knew. There was enough press coverage when I took the job.
No, I hadn't heard. In fact, this is the first time I've even heard of Sourcelabs. Of course, this proves the old adage about making assumptions.
Regarding my use of "they", I don't really have anything to do with this product or the people who would call you. I do other stuff at Sourcelabs.
Naturally. I was tongue-in-cheek referring to the "royal we" as you no doubt used what might be called the "royal they".
Cheers.
One interesting point is that you don't call customer service. They call you. Bruce
Don't you mean "We call you"? From the recent article on software patents:
"Bruce Perens may be best known as the creator of the Open Source Definition, the manifesto of Open Source and the canonical rule set for Open Source licensing. He is currently a vice president of Sourcelabs."
If this is true, I would certainly have expected a disclaimer in the interests of full disclosure.
I am just saying that if your desire is to seperate church and state, then create a movement to seperate the two. Don't create a movement to get people to abandon religion. That is just subversive.
Churches have special classes for kids where they teach a watered down puppies and ponies version of religion that is palatable to young, impressionable children. That's quite subversive in my book. And I'm sure I could go on about other subversive religious attempts... "Intelligent Design" anyone?
As an aside, it looks like they're making use of this part of the TOS:So OSTG can make a "Dumbest Quotes on Slashdot" book and you've already given permission.
Maybe they just put down any BS answer they can so they get to ship the system off to your company under some "too difficult" escape clause. As long as what you charge Best Buy is less than what the customer pays Best Buy, they'll continue to offload work to you. It might even be more profitable for them.
My question is; is it possible for a piece of information to be completely destroyed?
Can you reconstruct the entirety of history in perfect detail? No? Then information has been completely lost unless you know something nobody else does.
... and check that there aren't any funny adaptor-like things attached to the keyboard port. Is that *just* a PS/2 <--> USB adaptor? Or does it have extra functionality that you'd never know?
doesn't mention that it can run Linux
Maybe in Soviet Russia it can.
Hell, I'd put $10 towards them *not* running the ad. Anyone with me? If we hit $10,000 first they agree to not post that eyesore?
Further, if it were not for Linux, BSD probably would not have developed to a state where it could have been used for such a purpose since Linux caused such a massive explosion in software development. The old pace of BSD development was kicked into gear by Linux. So, even the use of BSD would imply a dependence upon the existence of Linux.
Sounds like revisionist history to me. You might want to read up on BSD history and Linux history. Where was Linux in 1983 when 4.3BSD had implemented the first TCP/IP stack? It wouldn't be another 8 years until Linus made his first announcement about wanting people to send in a wishlist for his little OS project he's been dabbling with. Linux was made possible because it was transmitted on a network likely powered by a lot of BSD code. So Linux's existence is dependent on BSD, not the other way around.
The one point I agree with you on is that BSD development has stepped up in recent years. Whether that can be attributed to Linux directly, or in 1995 to Berkeley no longer directly developing it and thus spawning the major BSD projects, or a general surge in all open source operating systems alongside the popularity of the internet... is debatable.
Sheesh... http://www.google.com/search?q=open+source+hacking +tools
Looks like I found a new Taquila drinking buddy.
Or perhaps you have too many Tequila buddies already.
It turns out while your a child, you will turn out better if you touch everything and pick your nose and eat your buggers.
While it may be safe to eat those who bug you, you may instead try eating your boogers.
Google would have been impossible without Linux.
Why do you say that? Yahoo runs on FreeBSD. But saying Yahoo would have been impossible without FreeBSD is a load of bull... they could have used Solaris, AIX, Irix, or anything else to achieve their business objectives. Google is no different. That they chose to use a lot of Linux in building out their infrastructure as opposed to another operating system does not imply that they would not exist were it not for Linux.
I use an optical mouse on the table, and the surface of the table has worn off.
So you're down to using the floor? What happens when that wears off?
If possible, please disregard the mindless ranting (not the general point).
:)
Your general point is taken. What I should have said was that this article would be a good indicator of the maturity of the average poster, and left my bias out of it. But I guess it wouldn't be Slashdot if we had everybody saying "Wow, that's really respectable for Buffett to give so much to those in need" without all the bashing thrown in. Nor would it be Slashdot without a few people saying "Wow, you're all a bunch of immature kids."
I gotta say it... when I read this, I thought that this story would definitely be the one to highlight the average youth and inexperience of the slashdot membership. And from reading through some of the comments, this has certainly been confirmed.