Posted by finelinebob on September 16, 2006, at 23:11:46
In reply to Re: The Spiral Downward, posted by shar on September 16, 2006, at 1:26:07
> Hmmm, I wonder if that was why I was railing against the Great God Almighty last night.
I tend to rail against those who would put G-d in such an untenable position. Not you personally, but those who teach us to do so. If G-d gave us free will, then there is no "Plan". If G-d were to step in to intercede on the slightest issue for the most insignificant of us (if there is such a person), that would irrevocably destroy free will. If G-d is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient and infinitely loving (the last part being the only one I believe) then given humanity free will has created a cage for G-d, it's bars made of infinite sorrow. So when someone or some group of people do evil towards others, G-d is the one for whom I feel the most compassion. If G-d is all those "omni's" as well, how much stronger that cage must be.
Well, enough of this before we get a 2000 post redirected to the religion board.
It would be nice to know that no post on 2000 would get redirected to another board unless we old-timers intentionally brought in specific young-whippernsnappers as topics without their ability to respond. Topics? No redirect. Going beyond our cohort? Redirectable.
> I DO like the way you think. Is it all random?
I don't know Chaos Theory. I do know the fundamental tenets of applying probablistic formulae to modeling human behavior. The implication is that without a specific question to ask, then we cannot separate the random from the non-random. Even then, if we cannot find non-randomness, then the question is invalid, inapplicable. Perhaps it means that without a question to ask, it **is** all random.
Turn it on it's head, tho, and you get that the purposeful behavior of a large enough sample, preferably the entire population of humanity gives the verisimilitude of randomness ... but is in essence non-random. The behavior of large enough groups is in no way indicative of the behavior of an individual, only the behavior of the group. We have randomness introduced into our lives all the time from extra-psychological/social/cultural events -- one person, perhaps on a randomly drawn set of numbers chosen by a "quick pick", won 185 million dollars yesterday due to a (possibly second) random pick of numbers.
The fluttering of a butterfly's wings in China may eventually result in a hurricane in the Carribean, and Chaos Theory may explain a chain effect of individually random events that produce a causal relationship between the two ends. But the actions of people are purposeful. The waves of response they produce are causal from the first ripple of the wave, purpose upon purpose. We send the end result that may be an action with roots in multiple purposes, but we cannot see beyond the action, or maybe only to one original purpose.
So when you think it's all random, remember O'Shaughnessey:
"We are the music makers,
And we are the dreamer of dreams,
Wandering by lone sea-breakers,
And sitting by desolate streams;
World-losers and world-forsakers,
On whom the pale moon gleams:
Yet we are the movers and shakers
Of the world for ever, it seems."
> I'm having a BIG problem DOing.
Yeah, navel gazing and babbling have occupied my own time far too much lately. But now that my crisis has passed with a big fizzle, I imagine I'll be wandering off for a while again.
I hope 2000's still here when I need it again.