Ryan Gosling: Women are "stronger, more evolved than men"

[redbreegull]

I don't know what the veracity of this is, but I have a friend who is very interested in American Indian culture, and she always talks about how the concept of the Great Spirit is actually a Western perversion of an idea more accurately expressed as the Great Mystery... I mean that's pretty much life, yeah?

I'm done now, goodnight

[redbreegull]

thanks that's my time

[slunken]

that's not your time

[yo soy el mejor]

make-up your own posts, rbg

[slunken]

meh i didn't make that up to be fair

[slunken]

[vixnix]

Hey slunken, I also enjoyed Lost River. I thought it was pretty good, actually. A solid debut.

[slunken]

cool.

weird movie for sure. feels like a dream. plus a great soundtrack.

[vixnix]

This was one of the most terrifying ideas I had ever come across, in a movie. Actually, that whole place was grimly fascinating.

OR

Fascinatingly grim.

Am I over 100 words yet?

[slunken]

It was weird for me because prior to the movie I had just discovered the Jack Scott version of "cool water" as well as the Suicide demo of "tell me"

but yea that whole face peeling stuff was very wild

[slunken]

I read an interview where when they had the main girl sing "tell me" she had to sing it alone with a blanket over her head with no one around to create a very intimate setting because she wasn't comfortable or trained to sing in front of people. that really opens up the vulnerability of the track to me.

[slunken]

[slunken]

[Elphenor]

Kind of want to see this movie now

[reprise85]

Originally Posted by redbreegull

I was introduced to the idea of determinism when I was 20 and rejected it outright at first. However, the more I thought about it, the more I came to accept its probability. I've been thinking a lot about it recently so I keep bringing it up, but it's a "truth" that I have been living with as a probably permanent part of my worldview for years now.

Certainly science and logic are not the only meaningful lenses to look at the universe through, but if you are talking about those lenses, all evidence points to hard determinism IMHO. I don't really understand the idea that determinism is correct but doesn't affect things as small as our planet. All matter and energy obey the same laws and I'm not sure it makes sense to me that at a certain point of magnification things go over some kind of event horizon into a random indeterminant state while having no effect on the larger movement of systems. If everything is bouncing off of everything else in a purely mathematical fashion, what is the reasoning that 2+2 no longer has to equal 4 if the units of measure are small enough? More importantly, there is no science behind this unless we are talking about the subatomic level and that gets into some really far out territory which as far as we can tell, does not influence the macro world.

Nothing personal obviously, but I think people reject hard determinism because it feels like some sort of violation of our humanity. I certainly experienced this emotional reaction to the idea at first. Ultimately I don't know if "truth" is the most important philosophical question or not... I generally think people not hurting each other is the most primary thing we should be focusing on. But if we are talking about the way human bodies and minds operate within the physical universe, hard determinism seems likely.

I think if you think about it mathmatically, like I brought up before: .9999 repeating equals 1. They are the same thing. And yet, they are different numbers. So it's not that 1 + 1 doesn't equal 2 anymore, but that .9999 repeating + 1 equals 2, also. In theory - I'm not saying there's anything to say it does work this way - if the universe is playing out in a hard deterministic fashion, switching out 1s for .999 repeating wouldn't change anything. Does that make sense? It's a loophole, basically is what I'm saying. Somehow it gives me some hope or something, I'm not sure.

I do agree most of the time that hard determinism is very likely. But since we can't live as if our actions do not matter and we have no control over them, I don't find the concept very meaningful to pursue.

I also have something that goes on with me because I underwent mind control tactics, which is severe derealization. Most of the time, the vast majority of the time, I feel as if reality doesn't exist and the world doesn't exist and nothing exists. Now, obviously "I think therefore I am" so SOMETHING must exist for me to be experiencing. But I feel very solipsistic about existance to a large degree, and not just in theory or not in theory at all in the way we talk about determinism - this is not a philosophical exercise for me. I experience reality as not having substance. Yet I exist the same way, because I have to assume reality is real and there are other people, or I would probably go into a catatonic stupor. So it is what most would call a delusion I guess, that I've learned to live with. I think if we could feel the weight of what it actually would mean that everything is deteministic and we have no real choices, it would feel similar. It's a very uncomfortable feeling.

[teh b0lly!!1]

331 words

[slunken]

message board, not essay board

[reprise85]

why are we counting words today

[Cool As Ice Cream]

Originally Posted by reprise85

.9999 repeating equals 1. They are the same thing. And yet, they are different numbers. So it's not that 1 + 1 doesn't equal 2 anymore, but that .9999 repeating + 1 equals 2, also.

how are they different numbers? what does that mean?
is it because they look different? (1 vs. a lot of nines.)
or is there another reason to decide they're different numbers?

i'd say they're the same, mathematically, as they represent the same value.

[reprise85]

hmmm, that's a good point and I think you're right

[duovamp]

If you had to shoot Harambe or Ryan Gosling, who do you shoot? Keep in mind Gosling's parents were negligent.

[duovamp]

Originally Posted by Cool As Ice Cream

how are they different numbers? what does that mean?
is it because they look different? (1 vs. a lot of nines.)
or is there another reason to decide they're different numbers?

i'd say they're the same, mathematically, as they represent the same value.

Originally Posted by reprise85

hmmm, that's a good point and I think you're right

X = .999999 repeating
10x = 9.99999 repeating

10x - x = 9.999999 repeating - .999999 repeating
9x = 9
9x / 9 = 9 / 9
X=1

God that was infuriating to type on my phone.

[Cool As Ice Cream]

yeah, we both knew that.

[duovamp]

I don't think you did.

[Cool As Ice Cream]

it's what we were talking about.

[duovamp]

Originally Posted by Cool As Ice Cream

yeah, we both knew that.

If you both knew it, why was there any discussion, smart ass?

[duovamp]

And neither of you actually used math to demonstrate what you were talking about.

[Cool As Ice Cream]

Originally Posted by duovamp

If you both knew it, why was there any discussion, smart ass?

i can't tell if you're being (half) serious or not.
did you read the posts?

[Cool As Ice Cream]

.999... = 1 was the premise.

reprise said that these "different numbers" were "the same thing".
i wondered why they were considered "different numbers" then.

we wouldn't have had this discussion if we didn't already know the maths behind .999... = 1.
q.e.d.

[duovamp]

Not buying it.