/jp/ - Otaku Culture

If there was nothing you wouldn't be here asking this question

The nothing is someplace else.

so we can read heinigger

There's a parallel universe out there where you're asking why there's qwerxpltk, and how anyone could ever live in a universe without qwerrxpltk (or without immortality or fewer than eight spatial dimensions, etc.).

People just like to look at what happened and say, "Boy, this is convenient! Therefore, someone made us!"
Of course this isn't the case. It isn't convenient at all. We wouldn't be around questioning this if it didn't happen, and the extra-dimensional, incorporeal thoughtforms that might have evolved instead would be wondering the exact same thing.

There is no God. Get over it. Stop being lazy and pick up a real book or watch something to feed your brain instead of polluting it. I recommend starting with "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins and "Cosmos" by #based Carl Sagan.

>picture of me 5 in space.jpg

For some reason this filename makes me smile.

>>11623343
Is Carl Sagan that fat black guy?
Sorry, I don't read books written by niggers.

There was a lot of nothing, we don't know about it because we can only know when the something created is to see something.

>>11623293
>Why is there something

The answer to “Why is there Something rather than Nothing?” is that there is only Nothing, and all processes take place “from Nothing through Nothing to Nothing.” However, this nothing is not the Oriental or mystical Void of eternal peace, but the nothingness of a pure gap (antagonism, tension, “contradiction”), the pure form of dislocation ontologically preceding any dislocated content.

>>11623359
now people are posting this shit on /jp/

What the fuck? How did you find this place you pissant? Take your le epic maymay shit back to reddit or s4s.

>>11623351
No that's the other guy
Carl Sagan is white. I think he has blue eyes too
His Cosmos series is very much worth watching, as it's the ultimate take it easy series.

>>11623370
why are you so angry? it's just a picture of a funny dog.

>>11623399
yfw jp made doge wat doge is

>>11623370
People have been posting doge on /jp/ since 2012, even before doge was even "doge".

Someone post the reluctant Japanese dog on a leash image.

>>11623408

Something and something can make up nothing

1 + (-1) = 0

deep man. maybe our universe is just a perfect balance that amounts to nothing.

>>11623423

You're joking here, but it's an actual scientific theory that half the matter in the universe is antimatter, and if you see a galaxy through a telescope, there's a 50/50 chance it's made from antimatter. There is no way to prove this though because the distance between galaxies is too great.

>>11623423
Isn't that this guy's whole thing?

>>11623304
Did it leave?
Should I be worried about it coming back?

The dragon god wills it.

>>11623293
that question is too far away

we don't know much about this something and/or nothing.

“Where did this whole thing begin? If what we think of as reality is just a pattern that somebody brought Outside, and the universe just popped into bring, then whoever it was is probably still wandering around giving off universes wherever she goes So where did she come from? And what was there before she started doing it? And how did Outside come to exist, for that matter?”
That's Inspace thinking,” said Olhado. “That's the way you conceive of things when you still believe in space and time as absolutes. You think of everything starting and stopping, of things having origins, because that's the way it is in the observable universe. The thing is, Outside there's no rules like that at all. Outside was always there and always will be there. The number of philotes there is infinite, and all of them always existed. No mater how many of them you pull out and put into organized universes, there'll be just as many left as there always were”
But somebody had to start making universes.”
Why?” asked Olhado.

>>11623888
Because-because I-“
Nobody ever started. It's always been going on. I mean, if it weren’t already going on, it couldn’t start. Outside where there weren’t any patterns, it would be impossible to conceive of a pattern. They can’t act, by definition, because they literally can’t even find themselves.”
But how could it have always been going on?”
Think of it as this moment in time, the reality we live in at this moment, this condition of the entire universe-of all the universes-”
You mean now.”
Right. Think of it as if now were the surface of a sphere. Time is moving forward through the chaos of Outside like the surface of an expanding sphere, a balloon inflating. On the outside, chaos. On the inside, reality. Always growing-like you said, Valentine. Popping up new universes all the time.”
But where did this balloon come from?”
OK, you’ve got the balloon. The expanding sphere. Only now think of it as a sphere with an infinite radius.”
Valentine tried to think of what that would mean. “The surface would be completely flat.”
That’s right”
And you could never go all the way around it”
That’s right, too. Infinitely large. Impossible even to count all the universes that exist on the reality side. And now, starting from the edge, you get on a starship and start heading inward toward the center. The farther in you go, the older everything is. All the old universes back and back. When do you get to the first one?”
You don’t” said Valentine. “Not it you’re traveling at a finate rate.”
You don’t reach the center of a sphere on infinite radius, if you’re starting at the surface, because no matter how far you go, no matter how quickly, the center, the beginning, is always infinitely far away.”
And that’s where the universe began.”

>>11623293
Because we exist to perceive "something".

This thread makes me euphoric about nothing.

Anything with "metaphysics" in it is pseudoscience

>>11623351

>>11623920
>>11623922
>>11623926
Uhmmmmmm like HELLOOO

Did you read >>11623894
>>11623888

>>11623927
Is THAT Carl Sagan?

>>11623935
http://youtu.be/hEhApoSekxE?t=12m29s
Yeah

>>11623606
what a dick

>>11623926
Pseudoscience has to masquerade as science. Meaning it has to pretend it's based on empirical evidence.

Metaphysics isn't science or pseudoscience, it's philosophy. It involves things that, usually, aren't possible to deduce empirically. Or deduce at all.

>>11623958


hard empiricism means a repudiation of logical deductions aswell (since they are merely 'relations of ideas').

of course noone but short-sighted autists unable to deeply comprehend anything seriously advance empiricism as a valid/the only epistemology, since even living in everyday life is contingent on operating under certain assumptions or knowledge of things outside immediate perceptions. and just so, the 'scientific' tradition, as such, could not form hypothesis' or theoretical approaches if empiricism was actually the case.

its similar to (leads to) nominalism in that sense (that sense of course being 'i dont have to use the brainpower i dont have to comprehend greater unions or correspondences because its all contingent/atomistic nyah nyah').

>>11623934
Compared to everything that ever excisted, this post is very close to nothing.

>>11624093
But you liked the quote posted right? Right?!

>>11624056
Empirical was the wrong word to use, what I really meant was the scientific method.

>>11623293
Because in the beginning,God created the universe.

Amen~

"We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever."

>>11624097
Yeah, it's good.

>>11623343
Holy shit, I know /jp/ has some low standards, but why recommend Dawkins?

>>11623343
>>>/v/

>>11624132
The only people who read Dawkins are people who want to be told they're right over and over again.

>>11624140
I don't get it.

>>11624144
/v/ is filled with angry teenagers.
Atheists are angry teenagers.
Therefore, he should go to /v/.

>>11624156
Wait, don't a bunch of their games take place, at least partly, in the Christian hell or one of the usual comics/cartoon versions thereof?

>>11624156
But /v/ hates athiests since the euphoric/fedora jokes, not to mention /jp/ is just as angry and antisocial as /v/.

>>11624173
Yeah, but that doesn't stop them. Like that one time when some dorks tried to have the cathedrals in WoW removed because they were oppresing them with their not-Christianity imagery.

>>11624175
Angry old men in /jp/, not angry teenagers. Why do you think most of /jp/ is so jaded from society?

>>11624175
I wouldent be pissed.

I would be happy at seeing an adorable Yukkuri dressed in a cute costume.

I wish I had a Yukkuri that I could take care of and love them tenderly. Then when they go to sleep I would gently make love with their succulent yukkuri body and lick their yukkuri orifices.

>>11624156
Yup. All of modern science is the result of "angry teenagers" playing vidya. Just shut up before you hurt yourself. Sometimes I forget that 4chan is LITERALLY in some cases a Christian imageboard.

>>11624198
Athiesm has no more to do with modern science than it does chemical engineering.

>>11624198
Of course. I forgot atheists have been behind every advancement of law, technology, medicine and arts. How silly of me.

>>11624210
Because you neither love or worship god nor pursue science.

Why can't I love and worship God and pursue science as well?

>>11624206
>arts
>science

>gregor mendel
>modern

>>11624211
The real reason 4chan is a Christian imageboard is that because all the atheists you find on 4chan tend to act like complete retards.

I believe in a higher power.

>>11624211
>That's Inspace thinking,” “That's the way you conceive of things when you still believe in space and time as absolutes. You think of everything starting and stopping, of things having origins, because that's the way it is in the observable universe.

he is always modern. just like everyone else. we are always are and always will be.

>>11624222
We only pretend to be Christians. Those who actually are Christians rarely discuss their faith in Jesus Christ, who died for our sins, but people do talk about their atheism all the fucking time.

>>11624216
>implying all the Christians on 4chan aren't just as if not more stupid

>>11624217
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1yvQV7J47o

>>11624225
Oh Jesus. Because atheism is--for lack of a better term--an "underdog". Most of the world, and ESPECIALLY most of America is religious, so to flaunt your beliefs would be silliy.

>>11624211
Well, if you want one of the faithful responsible for modern science, there is also Tesla, Pascal and Pasteur.

Atheism, as you know it, is a fairly new phenomenon. It started on the 17th century, and it is certainly not the leading cause for advancement. The printer was.

At least get your facts right.

>>11624222
Did you know that 75% of /jp/ers are Christian?

>>11624231
The vast majority of people on 4chan are not Christian. In fact, most of 4chan is not religious, so flaunting your atheism would be retarded unless you just want to be told how right you are over and over again.

>>11624225
It's all just identity politics anyway, people profess to whatever random thing they think they need to in order to fit in with whichever crowd, but believe in whatever they actually believe to be plain fact.

As it's been for thousands of fucking years. It's bored cultural expression at its finest.

>>11624229

>>11624234
Okay, fine. "All of modern science" was an overstatement.

I never said that atheism was the cause of the scientific revolution. It was, however, a result. What I meant to say--and I realise I worded this poorly--that nearly all of scientists in the modern world are atheist, and those who aren't are not respected in the scientific community. That's because religion is pseudoscience. The fact that most people believe it to be true does not make it any less so.

>>11624258
>That's because religion is pseudoscience.
Religion is not psuedoscience, not any more than literature, philosophy, and mathematics are. Religion is simply NOT science. You're profoundly profoundly retarded.

>>11624244
You are kidding me? /sci/ bursts with religious discussion, /jp/ discusses the benefits of religion and morals from it, /pol/ complains about the growing immorality while waving a cross around, religious imagery all over the damn place.

Where did you come with the idea that atheists overran this place?

>>11624269
Everything is a science.
You being such a complete faggot is a science.

>>11623293
Because the extra-dimensional entities who run our simulation said so.

>>11624270
Everyone from my homeboard /a/ (peace and love to all the boys back home) is an atheist, and so is /v/ and /b/, and they make up the majority of 4chan.

>>11624273
>Everything is a science.
I really don't want to know where you got your scientific education.

>>11624270
/jp/ discusses how great religion is but nobody actually believes except that one Calvinist.

>>11624269
why is math not a science?

Isnt that the most basic form of practical and analytical and scientific thinking?

I always thought math was a part of science even if it was considered it's own field

>>11624281
>I really want to know where you got your scientific education

I have nothing to say to that.

>>11624290
Mathematics does not run on on empirical, testable predictions. It runs on assumptions and logic.

>>11624290
Ask the university bomber about math. Go on.

>>11624290
He said that math wasn't a pseudoscience, not that math wasn't a science.

>>11624286
>Everyone from my homeboard /a/ (peace and love to all the boys back home)

>>11624298
Praise the Lord, we're finally done listening to your spout shit.

>>11624290
The difference is that math can be used to explain things that exist, as well as things that don't, and mathematicians couldn't care less if what they are studying literally cannot be applied to reality in any way.

science however is restricted to observation.

>>11624299
not assumptions, axioms. They don't assume 1+1=2 they _define_ 1, +,=, and 2 so that it is true.

>>11624290
>math
Science is the search for evidence.
Math is not a science.
Math is truth.

>>11624306
One thing I've always hated about theological debates on the internet is that so often they avoid the most central of questions: why do you actually believe in a god? No ad hominem, no offense intended. I want to know.

>>11624308
Axioms are still assumptions because mathematicians work with them without proving that they form a consistent system (which would be impossible).

>>11624314
Why do "atheists" believe so hard that there is no god?

>>11624314
There was a quote somewhere that said some people believe in god because it feels it gives their life purpose or a sense of belonging or a kind of moral crutch they can hang on to when they dont want to be responsible for their actions.

>>11624314
I enjoy believing in the supernatural. This belief, like all others, cannot neither empirically justified nor falsified, so I'll just go with what I like.

I'm only an atheist because I was raised Catholic and I want to rebel against my parents.

It's a juvenile reason and obviously it doesn't represent all atheists, but this is an anonymous board so I don't care.

>>11624337
I dont get it

>>11624330
This. While I wouldn't say I worship or particularly believe in a god (simply, because of power levels), I do like the idea of the supernatural. There's that nagging voice in the back of my head that says it's all nonsense, but I loved believing in ghosts as a child, so I try my hardest to pretend they exist.

I want to be a child again. Everyone said a local school was haunted and I believed them. That was so much fun. Why aren't grown-ups allowed to have fun?

>>11624330
Belief is nothing more than a crutch for people too lazy to keep in their head what the reality of a situation is.

There's no point in all this belief business.. We actually _know_ the answers.
The answer to OP's question for example, given all the knowledge we currently have, is "we don't know". A deity is one possible solution, there are also many many others.

Why do you need to believe something? That's the reality of it, why not just use that since it's correct. Believing a specific possibility is just shortsighted.