/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3210897]

ITT we admire the beauty of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3210926]

Get a load of the star clusters on that system! Damn!

[Anonymous No.3210947]

look at all the pretty colors *drools bends neck and flaps hand against chest*

meanwhile, in reality, HIVAIDS and little kids dying slow painful deaths.

pfft, beauty in the universe

[rimz !!mP/3/9/BIcp No.3210956]

>>3210947

if you can't see the beauty of aids, you're fucked in the head

[Anonymous No.3210960]

[Anonymous No.3210969]

>>3210947
>implying the ills of our insignificant planet can taint the majesty of the universe

[Anonymous No.3210979]

>>3210969
>implying the universe has majesty outside your subjective skull

[mtp !3kpEawSzyI!!yriY/sg56+1 No.3210984]

[Anonymous No.3210989]

>>3210979

to god, of course

[Anonymous No.3210996]

[Anonymous No.3211009]

>>3210979
by that logic, HIV/AIDS does not exist outside of my subject skull either. Therefore, neither is of any merit. fucking solipsism...that shit is the middleschool tool of philosophy

[Anonymous No.3211011]

>>3211009
notsureiftrollorjustverystupid.jpg

[Anonymous No.3211039]

[Anonymous No.3211060]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awYVlAv6Cek

[None !!8BEO8FNz13y No.3211092]

>>3210897
>Implying the whole universe looks like that.

[Anonymous No.3211104]

>>3211092
> Implying

[Anonymous No.3211291]

>>3210947
We are working on curing HIV, and only a minuscule fraction of children die within their childhood, much less slowly and painfully.

No one is denying that natural evil exists, but what we must acknowledge is that the universe is beautiful, enormous, but almost uniformly beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3211312]

>>3210979
a lot of the universe exhibits characteristics we've evolved to view as majestic: scale, symmetry, vibrancy, contrast, etc.

so why deny the existence of majesty within it, or the existence of majesty as a phenomenon within the physical universe?

[Anonymous No.3211350]

>>3210947
Being a cynical asshole doesn't mean you "see the world for what it is," and it doesn't make you righter than everyone else.
>>3211291
What ^he^ said.

[Anonymous No.3211369]

>>3211092
a lot of it looks like that.

leave it to /sci/ to shit all over what could have been a decent space picture thread.

[Anonymous No.3211379]

>>3210979
The universe with majesty? Of course that doesn't exist independent of the mind. majesty is a value inscribed by our thoughts.

but the universe alone? Well that is there whether we are part of it or not.

[Anonymous No.3211385]

God really is incredible

[Anonymous No.3211395]

>>3211291
i'm impressed with the fact that a small portion of humanity figured out so much about the universe, but the universe also put billions of sentient organisms through hundreds of millions of years of horrendous shit for what has so far amounted to nothing more than a super-eccentric race of apes that can barely function to clean up the mess that evolution created. the scales of beauty to hideousness seem massively tilted towards hideousness based on the fact, especially considering that there's no guarantee that we'll even be able to fix the problems in the long run.

>>3211350
making accusations of my character or motives doesn't constitute an actual argument nor does it impress anybody that you can point to somebody else's post

[Anonymous No.3211409]

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html
there's a new picture daily, i check it every morning.

[Anonymous No.3211431]

You now realise that most nasa images are digitally doctered to look better and appeal to the average viewer.

[Anonymous No.3211453]

>>3211395

the universe is fucking fantastic <span class="math">brah[/spoiler]
just think about magnets (but don't ask a scientist)

[Anonymous No.3211456]

>>3211379
Really, though, nothing exists wholly independently of our minds.
>>3211395
You see hideousness because you have a dim and cold worldview and you're looking for hideousness.

"Barely function?" You're using a computer right now, aren't you? Do you know how advanced we as a species had to become to do what we have done?

[Anonymous No.3211457]

>>3211431
and to hide aliens

[Anonymous No.3211458]

>>3211431
Obviously. Without false-color how else would we be able to effectively perceive electromagnetic radiation from astronomical bodies that are not in the tiny sliver of visible light.

[Anonymous No.3211466]

>my face whenever I go and visit my dad living in a small town and sit on his deck looking at the night sky, untainted by light pollution.

[Grief !!J0UsR7GiKB5 No.3211486]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXRYA1dxP_0


Just came back from watching this. A testament to the scope of our cosmos, and the comparative minuteness of our own. Somehow is doesn't attempt to undercut the follies of man. Its imagery is beyond stunning. Trying to make the connection between all scales, colossal and exponentially small, come together into something of a collective whole. If you have a love for the universe, I highly suggest you watch this.

[Anonymous No.3211516]

>>3211456
>You see hideousness because you have a dim and cold worldview and you're looking for hideousness.

I think this is why atheists always are obsessed with calling God a monster with horns and Christians mass murderers. Because they're miserable people and only see misery wherever they look.

[Anonymous No.3211540]

>>3211516

I'm atheist and i've never met anyone with a more positive outlook than me.

[Grief !!J0UsR7GiKB5 No.3211574]

>>3211516
I'm an atheist but I don't feel obliged to undercut anybody for their faith. I don't have any ulterior motives in my personal beliefs. I've never been under the assumption that what I feel should be necessarily applicable to anybody else. I love other people, and other beliefs. So long as people are good natured.

The best we can do sometimes is learn to not take our personal grievances out on one another. See things and take any sorrow we feel inwards rather than outwards. This is how I live, and it keeps me happy. Knowing that much is enough to not worry if anybody else's lifestyle differs. This is life.

[Anonymous No.3211575]

>>3211456
>You see hideousness because you have a dim and cold worldview and you're looking for hideousness.
I see hideousness because I have a rational, let's-not-ignore-things-that-suck worldview and I look at the whole picture instead of playing psychological games with myself.
>"Barely function?" You're using a computer right now, aren't you? Do you know how advanced we as a species had to become to do what we have done?
4% of the planet doesn't use a computer jackass, and that has little to do with my argument. Being able to create and use millions of artifacts doesn't lead to solving problems 99% of the time, it just leads to more eccentric lifestyles, while ignoring everybody else whose lives are shit (including sentient animals other than humans)

[Anonymous No.3211582]

>>3211575
oops, not 4%, 96%

[Anonymous No.3211593]

>>3211575
You can be rational and see majesty in things. You can see unmajestic and terrible things within that majesty but it shouldn't detract from it. Especially when the terrible things are so minuscule compared to the overall thing. Such as HIV/AIDS tainting your view of the entire fucking universe.

[Anonymous No.3211616]

>>3211575
Well >>3211350 applies more than ever, eh?
>>3211575
>doesn't lead to solving problems 99% of the time
What?

We didn't advance as far as we have seeking to ostracize ourselves from the animal kingdom, but we have, and we have sought and found happiness in doing it.

[Anonymous No.3211617]

>>3211593
not just HIVAIDS brah. not sure if troll or just very stupid, so I'll just give you a hint and tell you to look up a list of every known medical and psychological disorder that exists and then try to justify that by talking about your beauty in the universe crap

[Anonymous No.3211622]

>>3211616
>We didn't advance as far as we have seeking to ostracize ourselves from the animal kingdom, but we have, and we have sought and found happiness in doing it.
Made advancements thanks to exactly what portion of the population? 1%, maybe 2% of people who actually solve problems? Also, your assertion that we have sought and found happiness is bullshit for obvious reasons. Amerikkka isn't a very happy nation despite all the technological advancements it has. One shitty problem was just replaced with other shitty problems.

[Anonymous No.3211624]

What advancements? fapping techniques, sex toys and sex change operations.

[Anonymous No.3211627]

>>3211617
>diseases
which, as far as we know, only exist on one planet out of a billion billion.

solid argument, brah

[Anonymous No.3211630]

>>3211627
Also, they're only harmful to a very rare and complicated structures of molecules known to us as "life"

[Anonymous No.3211639]

>>3211627
>thinks that planets without sentient life matter
toostupidtonotbeatroll.jpg

[Anonymous No.3211640]

>>3211622
>Implying that the results of technological advancement don't take time to reach the masses
>Implying that we aren't happier than our distant ancestors
>Implying that the shitty problems of today are not more easily dealt with than they would have been 400 years ago

[Anonymous No.3211643]

>>3211617
Look at how big the universe is. Think long and hard at the size of it. Now think about Earth.. We seem awful small. The problems that plague us are so insignificant in the big picture.

And when you think about it, diseases are pretty interesting in how they function and how something so small can be so powerful. I'd almost go as far as to call them majestic although what they do is pretty shitty.

It's alright you're so near-sighted and can't get past the horrors we face in life.

[Anonymous No.3211645]

>>3211639
>thinks that there exists more than one planet with sentient life
lolokay.jpg

[Anonymous No.3211651]

>>3211640
Implying that the results of technological advancement don't take time to reach the masses
>Implying that I made any such implication rather than your own brain dead inability to comprehend English
Implying that we aren't happier than our distant ancestors
>Implying that I made any such implication rather than your own brain dead inability to comprehend English
Implying that the shitty problems of today are not more easily dealt with than they would have been 400 years ago
>Implying that I made any such implication rather than your own brain dead inability to comprehend English

[Anonymous No.3211656]

>>3211651
>Implying u mad
>Implying correctly

[Grief !!J0UsR7GiKB5 No.3211658]

>>3211627
I believe there's more depth to the beauty of our universe than what is on the surface. Sometimes people tend to bemoan images which hint at the aweness of it all because they only provide one thin layer of understanding. There's only so much you can absorb from a picture, and people don't take to well to being patronized on the sheer scope.

But to actually comprehend the elements and particles, flurries of movement and chain reactions, and apply them to your own perspective, only then do I believe reality can be sufficiently be done justice in its complexity. Its like reading a poem and being at first enamored by its visuals, only to be wowed yet again as you analyze and take it apart, taking the leap to fully digest it for all its worth. I'm pretty tired so i'm not wording this as well as Id like.

[Anonymous No.3211667]

>>3211645
>thinks there's only one planet with sentient life
wat

[Anonymous No.3211676]

ITT: Carl Sagan brain casualties
<span class="math">\bf{Fact~is~you~wouldn't~give~a~shit~about~the~truth~unless~you~were~spoon~fed~by~a~grinning~stoner}[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3211683]

>>3211676
fact: the most important & only thing that matters is that we do give a shit

[Anonymous No.3211688]

>>3211683
obviously not enough of a shit to be of any significance

[Anonymous No.3211690]

>>3211667
>has never heard of Fermi's Paradox
>NFS 2011

[Anonymous No.3211692]

>>3211676
HOLY SHIT I LOL'D
I like carl though

[Anonymous No.3211700]

>>3211688
he's been a gateway for many aspiring and successful physicists. its not like he did it hurts that a majority of the people that care don't make a difference. fact is that there a a few that chose to play the game because of sagan's very relaxed and inspiring introduction.

[Anonymous No.3211706]

>>3211700
*words

instead of introduction

[Anonymous No.3211716]

>>3211700
>thinks that inspiring people to treat the cosmos spiritually does anything other than to create an entire generation of astronomers who distract people from significant issues on earth to insignificant issues in another planet, solar system or galaxy.

[rimz !!mP/3/9/BIcp No.3211721]

i was serious about the aids.

An almost perfect virus dismantling your body's most intricate defense mechanism and leaving you rendless to every common bug.

how is that not coldly perfect.

[rimz !!mP/3/9/BIcp No.3211722]

>>3211721
>mfw when i make up the word rendless and it's a fucking gr8 word

[Anonymous No.3211726]

>>3211574
See, atheists like Dawkins will try and emphasis as much of the more violent sections of the Bible (plus shit like the Inquisition) as possible because they're projecting their own inner demons onto religious people.

What you put into the Bible is what you'll get out of it. If you're a negative person, you'll see negativity in there. If you're a positive person, well, you see positive things.

[Anonymous No.3211728]

>>3211721
you're a moron

[Anonymous No.3211731]

>>3211726
>What you put into the Bible is what you'll get out of it. If you're a negative person, you'll see negativity in there. If you're a positive person, well, you see positive things.

and if you're a rational person, you'll see both and realize the good doesn't outweigh the bad. I seriously expected better from /sci/ but I've gotten used to disappointment

[Anonymous No.3211742]

>>3211726

Sounds like all books.

[Anonymous No.3211771]

>>3211676
>>3211676
>>3211676
>>3211676
>>3211676

[Grief !!J0UsR7GiKB5 No.3211775]

>>3211726
I'm impartial either way. I can take negative and good without it necessarily being a reflection on myself. Some works do offer themselves to interpretation, but it makes little sense to believe ambiguity can be restrained to one view that should be shared by all. This isn't a critique on religions, just on the idea of passing off one's own notions as being any more valid than any other.

I do hold one personal belief, that there exists a plane of objective truth unscathed by the realms of our subjectivity, consequentially nullifying most of what we perceive to be true. It sounds silly to others, but it helps me keep from getting too cocky or self affirmed. I'm open to most concepts because I don't give any notion more merit than another.

[Anonymous No.3211790]

>I have cosmos
>I can't stream it due to low upload speed
if you guys want I can set up a stream anyway, but the chances are it will be jerky as shit.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211794]

>>3211726
Nope. Us anti-religion people simply believe what Steven Weinberg once said: "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion."

[Anonymous No.3211798]

>>3211790
or we could just fucking watch it on hulu
or download it from any of the fifty thousand torrents available on the interbutt

[Anonymous No.3211800]

>>3211794
You appear to have never heard of fascism, communism, or social interaction. Speaking as an antitheist, you don't speak for us.

[Anonymous No.3211804]

>>3211798
the torrents are pretty shit, I wasn't aware it was on hulu.

[Anonymous No.3211806]

>>3211800
stupid to bring up communism, smart to bring up that religion isn't the problem. failed to isolate the problem to general ignorance and stupidity though

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211813]

>>3211800
>You appear to have never heard of fascism, communism, or social interaction.
I might be tempted to argue as Hitchens does that they are a form of religion - suspension of rational belief by a community because of faith and childhood indoctrination, which stands at complete contradiction to the facts.

But really, I agree the Steven Weinberg quote is a bit extreme. Religion is just one source of good men doing evil, not the only. I think it's a significance source though.

[Anonymous No.3211815]

>>3211806
There has never been a successful implementation of communism, and there never will be. All that happens in a communist system is that the strong and manipulative benefit themselves while handicapping others.

[Anonymous No.3211821]

>>3211815
All that happens in a communist system is that the strong and manipulative benefit themselves while handicapping others.
>Implying that it doesn't happen in every other system as well

[Anonymous No.3211822]

>>3211813
I find Hitchens as repulsive as phelps, actually. He is an extremist, and often wrong.
Religion is an explanation people give for doing evil, rarely the source of it. The man who bombs a tube station in london because of his religion is doing it because his religion is against his country being oppressed.

[Anonymous No.3211823]

>>3211821
far, far moreso in communism. In most other systems, people can to some extent fight back.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211825]

>>3211806
One of the problems with religion, perhaps the major problem, is that it is a culture that promotes ignorance and unwillingness to approach the facts with an open mind, and a culture that promotes the value of faith. That is, religion promotes ignorance and obstinace.

[Anonymous No.3211830]

>>3211815
inb4marxists
inb4goodintheory

[Anonymous No.3211831]

>>3211822
fuck yes. Al Qaeda wouldn't give a shit about the USA except for economy/political reasons, which Bin Laden clearly expressed.

[Anonymous No.3211832]

>>3211821
Congratulations! You're an idiot!

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211834]

>>3211822
>Religion is an explanation people give for doing evil, rarely the source of it. The man who bombs a tube station in london because of his religion is doing it because his religion is against his country being oppressed.
I disagree. I feel that the laws against early term abortions, laws against contraception, anti-homosexuality laws, laws banning stem cell research, and so on, all exist because of a patently absurd belief system known as Christianity. If it wasn't for these patently absurd beliefs, then we wouldn't have these evil laws and policies.

[Anonymous No.3211836]

does math count as part of the beauty of the universe?

[Anonymous No.3211839]

>>3211832
Congratulations! You're an idiot!

[Anonymous No.3211844]

>>3211836
I would say that, yes, mathematical beauty certainly exists and can be found within the universe.

[Anonymous No.3211847]

>>3211834
i'm a pro-life atheist.

[Anonymous No.3211849]

>>3211831
not_sure_if_sarcastic.png
>>3211832
harsh.
>>3211834
I don't consider these evils- at least not to the same extent as this which are far less subjectively evil, like bombings or military aggression. I see your point though, religion is definitely a hindrance.
>>3211847
pourquoi?

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211851]

>>3211849
Preventing research into possibly one of the most promising medical research opportunities of the century definitely qualifies. There is the non-trivial potential that stem cell research could have a bigger impact than /vaccines/.

[Anonymous No.3211855]

>>3211851
As far as I can see, only embryonic stem cells are boycotted. Also, the same kinds of counter-productive attitudes are held like particularly secular groups like greenpeace regarding genetic modification.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211859]

>>3211855
>As far as I can see, only embryonic stem cells are boycotted.
Which IIRC is by far the cheapest way to do it, and this is significantly impacting the research.

>Also, the same kinds of counter-productive attitudes are held like particularly secular groups like greenpeace regarding genetic modification.
Non sequitur. No one is trying to argue that religion is the only source of culturally promoted stupidity.

[Anonymous No.3211863]

>>3211834
Well you know, I'm theistic, but I believe that whatever you do in your bedroom is your business, not mine.

[Anonymous No.3211866]

>>3211859
It's not cheaper, it's just easier: Embryonic cells are the only stem cells capable of differentiating into any other cell, where as others are more specified. I think there's an American company extracting them from placenta now, which should be an effective bypass. Not relevant to the argument, but still good.
As for the second bit, I meant it as evidence for my earlier point, that with or without religion people do remarkably dumb things due to their faith in certain ideas

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211870]

>>3211866
>As for the second bit, I meant it as evidence for my earlier point, that with or without religion people do remarkably dumb things due to their faith in certain ideas
Which is why I think we /sci/entists ought to do our best to attack blind idiotic faith in every aspect. Of course, not just blindly. I'm not sure what is the best moral policy to lower faith, but whatever that policy is, we should do it.

[Anonymous No.3211882]

>>3211870
yay, this
The best policy is probably education in logical thought from elementary school level, the removal of religions' tax exemption, and possibly the banning of children under the age of 16 attending religious sects

[Anonymous No.3211885]

>>3211882
Well, that's what they do in some European countries (namely France) and it still hasn't stopped Muslims from overrunning the place.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211890]

>>3211885
>I suggest to do whatever is the most efficacious
>Anon suggests that this did this in France and it didn't work.
Yeah... about that.

[Anonymous No.3211891]

>>3211885
except muslims haven't overrun the place, and the whole muslims overrunning the place thing is as uninformed as religious belief.

[Anonymous No.3211897]

>>3211891
Hadn't you heard about Muslims openly flaunting secularism laws in France that prohibit large-scale public religious gatherings?

[Anonymous No.3211907]

>>3211897
Articles or it didn't happen

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211910]

>>3211897
>>3211907
Non-sequitur. Also possibly irrelevant anyway - you would need citations of the relative rates in the populations. There's people in the US who also flaunt the laws for a variety of reasons.

[Anonymous No.3211918]

>>3211907
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/06/muslims-illegally-occupying-streets-of-paris
-to-pray-muslim-militia-blocks-the-streets.html

Also Google "muslims france street prayers"

They're not supposed to be doing this, but the French authorities are afraid of them.

[Anonymous No.3211926]

>>3211918
>http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/06/muslims-illegally-occupying-streets-of-p
aris
-to-pray-muslim-militia-blocks-the-streets.html
>Rand reference in non-sarcastic manner
>reliable source
>STOP ISLAMISATION OF AMERICA
>advertising book about THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION'S WAR ON AMERICA
>THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE

Fair and balanced viewpoint. I'm sure there'll be no cherrypicking here.

[Anonymous No.3211941]

>>3211870
i see no reason to suspect that faith itself is the underlying cause of anything negative. look at the deists, or the pantheists, or the buddhists. none of them are hurting anything, or impeding the progress of science.

you're just a bigot, man. an anti-faith bigot.

[Anonymous No.3211957]

>>3211941
I see no reason to suspect that war itself is the underlying cause of anything negative. look at the Swiss, or the Australians, or the peace corps. none of them are hurting anything, or impeding the progress of diplomacy.

Also, check some of the wonderful things the dalai lama did prior to being leader of tibet.

you're just a cherry picker, man. an ir-rational cherry picker.

[Anonymous No.3211959]

>>3211941
Usually when atheists speak of religion holding science back, they're speaking of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. I don't think there's a lot in Eastern religions an atheist could find fault with.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.3211960]

>>3211941
It's only because their breaks with reality are minimal, and only by luck not harm inducing. I bet you as soon as we find some public policy which is harmed by a belief in reincarnation, you'll change your turn. Any break with reality is potential dangerous. Some breaks with reality are in fact at the present time more dangerous than others.

[Anonymous No.3211976]

>>3211957
i don't give a shit about the dalai lama.
i don't see him commanding his followers to do immoral things, and so long as he doesn't, i could give a fuck what he did in the past.

nothing in your post is substantial. none of it is evidence that faith itself is negative, other than your need to feel intellectually superior to people you don't agree with.

[Anonymous No.3211983]

>>3211959
What about Shinto?


>The creation myth of Shinto is recorded in the ca. 712 Kojiki. It is a depiction of the events leading up to and including the creation of the Japanese Islands. There are many translations of the story with variations of complexity.
>Izanagi-no-Mikoto (male) and Izanami-no-Mikoto (female) were called by all the myriad gods and asked to help each other to create a new land which was to become Japan.
>They were given a spear with which they stirred the water, and when removed water dripped from the end, an island was created in the great nothingness.
>They lived on this island, and created a palace and within was a large pole.
>When they wished to bear offspring, they performed a ritual each rounding a pole, male to the left and female to the right, the female greeting the male first.
>They had 2 children (islands) which turned out badly and they cast them out. They decided that the ritual had been done incorrectly the first time.
They repeated the ritual but according to the correct laws of nature, the male spoke first.
>They then gave birth to the 8 perfect islands of the Japanese archipelago.
>After the islands, they gave birth to the other Kami, Izanami-no-Mikoto dies and Izanagi-no-Mikoto tries to revive her.
> His attempts to deny the laws of life and death have bad consequences.
> The Japanese islands are to be considered a paradise as they were directly created by the gods for the Japanese people, and were ordained by the higher spirits to be created into the Japanese empire. Shinto is the fundamental connection between the power and beauty of nature (the land) and the Japanese people. It is the manifestation of a path to understanding the institution of divine power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto

That's just inaccurate.

[Anonymous No.3211987]

>>3211976
He was a slave trader, and one of the upper class. That's the only reason he's the Dalai lama.
Nothing in your post is substantial. None of it is evidence that faith itself isn't negative, other than your need to feel intellectually superior to people you don't agree with.

[Anonymous No.3211989]

>>3211825
So, when you say "religion," you're really saying "Abrahamic religion."

[Anonymous No.3211992]

>>3211983
Most Japanese probably don't take that literally these days.

[Anonymous No.3212001]

>>3211960
I do not see belief in a god as a "break with reality."
Calling it a "break with reality" equates physicalism with reality. You don't need me to tell you that that's a rather arrogant assumption to make.
I view it as an inclination toward personal explanation as opposed to strictly scientific explanation. It isn't the product of delusion, it isn't tantamount to sanity, it isn't necessarily just wishful thinking, and I'll be damned if I can see what is so contemptible about it.

[Anonymous No.3212013]

>>3212001
At the end of the day, I think atheists are atheists because they're disturbed by the notion of there being a power in the universe greater than them.

[Grothendieck !Topos4qCwc No.3212015]

It expresses a naive certainty which is anathema to creative inquiry.

Instead of wasting your time believing in fairy tales be comfortable expressing your uncertainty and ignorance, the better to overcome them. Or don't.

[Anonymous No.3212017]

>>3212013
What the fuck is this bullshit? We deal with "powers in the universe greater than" us every day, without God. I'm disturbed by God because God is horseshit.

[Anonymous No.3212034]

>>3212015
I would imagine that irreligious individuals who describe themselves as believing in God or gods make no pretense of certitude. Being compelled and being cocksure are two very different states.

[Anonymous No.3212037]

>>3211676

[Anonymous No.3212048]

>>3212037
If you have private convictions that one or more aseistic beings undergird physical reality, and if you aren't bothering anyone or anything because of it, where is the harm? I mean this sincerely.

/sci/ is usually wrong, but I want to know why it feels this way, other than disdain/invective/dislike/contempt/etc.

[Anonymous No.3212055]

look at this lump of dog shit on the floor, this is seemingly normal to us but in reality it is so elegant and beautiful because it obeys the laws of physics, like quasars, look at this quasar, quasars are so elegant and beautiful, the lorentz transformation is so elegant and beautiful, time is so elegant and beautiful, black holes are so elegant and beautiful, entropy is so elegant and beautiful, mars is so elegant and beautiful, aurora borealis is so elegant and beautiful, special relativity is so elegant and beautiful, electromagnetism is so elegant and beautiful, quantum physics is so elegant and beautiful

im going to eat this elegant and beautiful lump of dog shit now and ingest any expulsions I involuntarily regurgitate because it is all so elegant and beautiful

[Grothendieck !Topos4qCwc No.3212059]

>>3212034
I meant people who take refuge in gods and religion, and I forgot to reference >>3212001

[Anonymous No.3212063]

>>3212055
You are my fucking friend.

[Anonymous No.3212065]

>>3212055
ITT: atheists shitting all over the idea of a beautiful universe
further evidence that most atheists are nihilists

[Anonymous No.3212085]

>>3212065
>doesn't understand the difference between nihilism and objectivism

[Anonymous No.3212101]

>>3212085
beauty can exist in a nihilist worldview, but only as a human construct. correct me if i'm wrong

[Anonymous No.3212112]

>>3212101
meh, it just depends on what nihilist you're asking. everybody always has their own version of everything

[Anonymous No.3212124]

>>3212065
>Implying being nihilist isn't the same as being realist
That doesn't mean I can enjoy life and think shit is beautiful. See >>3212101

[Anonymous No.3212161]

>>3212085
Objectivists do not deny the existence of beauty irrespective of subjectivity, they merely believe that one's idea of beauty is inevitably informed and affected by one's sense of values. One's sense of beauty in Objectivism, therefore, could be considered increasingly accurate as one's values increasingly mirrored reality. They view beauty with an independent, individualistic mindset, but they don't view beauty as nonexistent.

Nihilists, on the other hand, view beauty as something completely nonexistent in the outside world.

See the difference?

[Anonymous No.3212195]

>>3212161
>implying I understood any of that

[Anonymous No.3212208]

>>3212195
>E-mail: nokp
>mfw I have no face

[Anonymous No.3212216]

>>3212161
i never claimed or insinuated otherwise, so I didn't need the explanation

[Anonymous No.3212225]

Needless to say, the human capability of understanding the infinite beauty and possibility of the universe is, as to be expected, limited.

It would take a mind of infinite capacity to appreciate infinite possibility. Unfortunately, Dave, that is something humans are incapable of.

[Anonymous No.3212233]

>>3212225
>thinks robots would actually give a shit about the universe

[Anonymous No.3212254]

>>3212216
My point was that you couldn't confuse one for another.

[Anonymous No.3212261]

>>3212225
>admire
>beauty

>implying robots can have emotions

[Anonymous No.3212266]

>>3212261
Who else agrees that Strong AI is bullshit?

[Anonymous No.3212272]

>>3212266
>thinks brain is majikilz!!111
get back to /x/ you subhuman faggot!
inb4 bullshit trying to cover magic faggotry with semantics.

[Anonymous No.3212275]

The beauty of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3212281]

>>3212233
>hasn't properly considered what causal determinism essential means for the human condition.
We are highly complex robots ourselves bro

[Anonymous No.3212286]

>>3212272
The actual fuck are you on about?

Strong AI is the stuff of science fiction. There's nothing silly about being sceptical of its possibility.

[Anonymous No.3212292]

>>3212286
ummm, you know live streaming video communication was the stuff of science fiction about 10yrs ago too... your point is moot.

[Anonymous No.3212293]

>>3212272
human beings are finite state automatons. that's not semantics, that's just what we are, according to information theory.

functionalism isn't incompatible with strong ai scepticism.

[Anonymous No.3212307]

>>3212292
fsas can't multiply, so i see no reason that strong ai should be possible.

i'm not a material dualist, more of a biological naturalist, but given the rise of the chinese room objection, i see little reason to regard strong ai as an interesting sort of thought experiment, not something that we should expect to create in real life.

[Anonymous No.3212341]

>>3212307
if we geneticall engineer a new life form, that is unique from us yet still survives on it's own. would you consider this AI?

[Anonymous No.3212348]

I think Earth is the most beautiful part of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3212356]

>>3212348

[Anonymous No.3212364]

[Anonymous No.3212370]

[Anonymous No.3212373]

>>3212307
Finite state automata can multiply just fine... up to arbitrary precision. I can trivially make a finite-state automata which can multiply numbers with 2^2^2^2^2^2^2^2^2 digits; find me a human who can do the same and your objection will stand.

Oh, and the Chinese room objection is a.) silly and b.) philosophy. It doesn't say anything about the feasibility of a strong AI which is indistinguishable from a human, only that we shouldn't say such a thing is sentient.

[Anonymous No.3212376]

[Anonymous No.3212377]

<<<Beauty of the universe

[Anonymous No.3212404]

The true beauty of the universe and the meaning of life is........ vagina.

[Anonymous No.3212407]

>>3212404
lol... what's sad is the majority of humanity who actually believes that IS the sole purpose of life.

[Anonymous No.3212413]

>>3212407
It ain't but it's up there high. I guess it'll matter less when you're 65 years old though.

[Anonymous No.3212418]

>>3212407
hardly surprising considering it's hardwired into our brains by evolution

[Anonymous No.3212425]

I think pokemon is the beauty of the universe.

[The Dude !!06w3aA0XfTW No.3212432]

For gods sake, /sci/, just post pictures of things you find beautiful. That's all OP was asking for. You always have to derail every thread you possibly can. Yes, I mad.

This is the kind of shit I find beautiful. It's man-made, but it still exists in the universe.

[Anonymous No.3212437]

>>3212432
I think this is beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3212442]

[Anonymous No.3212446]

>>3212275
I don't know why I can't stop looking at this painting. Who did it?

[Anonymous No.3212448]

fractals are beautiful

[Anonymous No.3212471]

I think racecars are beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3212481]

Nah... THIS is beautiful :)

[Anonymous No.3212505]

>>3212481
>dat mushroom

[Anonymous No.3212511]

>>3212481
Castle Romeo ain't shit.

[Anonymous No.3212534]

>>3212511
>>3212481
You boys are small time. Let me show you how its done...

[Anonymous No.3212601]

[Anonymous No.3212674]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3214823]

Making aesthetic judgements and mixing them with moral statements.

You can't seriously believe people do this.

[Anonymous No.3214927]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3214957]

ITT we admire the beauty of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3214976]

>>3212601
>>3212601
What is it? I want more.

[Anonymous No.3214981]

>>3214957
humanity is but a very tiny and almost unnoticeable part of the cosmos

[Anonymous No.3214994]

ITT we admire the beauty of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3214999]

>>3214981
who gives a fuck what the cosmos thinks (hint: it doesn't think (clue: so the answer is nobody (fact: you're an idiot for thinking from a cosmic perspective because it has no perspective)))

[Anonymous No.3215001]

>>3214994

Wtf is that black shit?

[Science !!V9NwDn3l+KQ No.3215022]

>>3214999
>LISP PROGRAMMER DETECTED

[Anonymous No.3215032]

>>3215022
Lol'd

[Anonymous No.3215040]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]ITT we admire the beauty of the universe.

[Anonymous No.3215110]

>>3212511
LOL - I chose castle romeo because it's photogenic. Yes, Castle Bravo and Tsar Bomba are larger, but the pictures taken of them didnt' come out as nicely...

[Anonymous No.3215350]

>>3212373
What I meant was that finite state automata were limited in processing ability, and that there was no evidence that you could increase their cognitive abilities twofold, or threefold, etc.

And strong AI connotes self-awareness, typically, doesn't it? You're talking about making the robotic equivalent of philosophical zombies, and I suppose that that's possible, but the thing would still be capable exclusively of computation. A human can respond any number of ways when given certain information, a robot cannot.
>>3215022
I prefer Perl

[Anonymous No.3215483]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3215768]

<span class="math">[/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.3215784]

>>3215768
>>3215768
>>3215768
>nothing
*ba dum tss*

[Anonymous No.3215853]

>>3215784