New Discovery

[peacegirl]

I guess he was unteachable because he thought he knew everything better.

Don't include me in "you people don't want to be wrong". I am contented to be wrong .Being wrong and knowing it is how I can learn better.

I have neither the time nor the interest to read a difficult big book by an unknown author. I am interested in philosophy of religion . If you make an intelligible claim on a specific point I will be interested. I would rather talk to someone who knows more than I do.

Same as Atla, I don't understand what you say about determinism. Are you, Peacegirl , talking about hard determinism? Do you understand what teleological means?

Sorry to have included you in “you people.” It was meant for you know who. I don’t believe this thread is your cup of tea because it’s not religious. It’s okay if you move to other threads that suit you better. I won’t hold it against you. I know what teleology is. Regardless of whether people believe life has an inherent purpose or not does not change the fact that life pushes us in one direction, which is our saving grace. Hard determinism, soft determinism, and all other ism’s doesn’t change what is. These definitions are superfluous in their effort to distinguish one type from another in a fundamental way. We either have free will or we don’t. The twain shall never meet.

[peacegirl]

It seems to be a religion where God isn't a being, instead God is the laws of nature. There is intelligent design but without a designer, there is a grand plan for humanity but without a planner, everything will inevitably end in the future Golden Age (bet you liked that one, Age), and this is for some reason I can't fathom called determinism. Yeah it's like a religion, it's like a cult, but it looks like the guy was such a weirdo that he was doing all this unintentionally actually. That's kinda funny if you ask me.

A religion claiming to be inspired by iron laws of cause and effect ... but where the effect is the cause of the cause. He should have stayed in school.

Thanks for the explanation Atla. If that is what the author claimed then do you think he missed that determinism does not imply prediction? The future is too chaotic to be estimated in such as general way. Sure we can assess specific probabilities by induction. It is even hard for experts to predict tomorrow's weather . But a general prediction like world peace is a pseudo -religious claim based on wishful thinking.

This discovery has nothing to do with prediction. Predicting what others will do may be interesting but unimportant in the scheme of things. How in the world can we accurately predict what someone will do (other than this hurt to others which will not occur) when we can’t even predict from moment to moment what we ourselves will do?

[Belinda]

A religion claiming to be inspired by iron laws of cause and effect ... but where the effect is the cause of the cause. He should have stayed in school.

Thanks for the explanation Atla. If that is what the author claimed then do you think he missed that determinism does not imply prediction? The future is too chaotic to be estimated in such as general way. Sure we can assess specific probabilities by induction. It is even hard for experts to predict tomorrow's weather . But a general prediction like world peace is a pseudo -religious claim based on wishful thinking.

This discovery has nothing to do with prediction. Predicting what others will do may be interesting but unimportant in the scheme of things. How in the world can we accurately predict what someone will do (other than this hurt to others which will not occur) when we can’t even predict from moment to moment what we ourselves will do?

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

[peacegirl]

Thanks for the explanation Atla. If that is what the author claimed then do you think he missed that determinism does not imply prediction? The future is too chaotic to be estimated in such as general way. Sure we can assess specific probabilities by induction. It is even hard for experts to predict tomorrow's weather . But a general prediction like world peace is a pseudo -religious claim based on wishful thinking.

This discovery has nothing to do with prediction. Predicting what others will do may be interesting but unimportant in the scheme of things. How in the world can we accurately predict what someone will do (other than this hurt to others which will not occur) when we can’t even predict from moment to moment what we ourselves will do?

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

Yes, but an accurate one. How can anyone accurately predict what you are going to have for breakfast, and why would that even matter? The only prediction that matters is knowing that under the changed conditions, crime will die a natural death. That can be predicted with accuracy.

[Belinda]

This discovery has nothing to do with prediction. Predicting what others will do may be interesting but unimportant in the scheme of things. How in the world can we accurately predict what someone will do (other than this hurt to others which will not occur) when we can’t even predict from moment to moment what we ourselves will do?

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

Yes, but an accurate one. How can anyone accurately predict what you are going to have for breakfast, and why would that even matter? The only prediction that matters is knowing that under the changed conditions, crime will die a natural death. That can be predicted with accuracy.

If only!

[Atla]

Age does it better, she doesn't just proclaim that there will be a Golden Age, but actually hails from that future. You have to act like the Golden Age already happened and you're traveling back in time to the primitive early 21st century humans, to make a statement, to prove a point. There's room for improvement, Age could give you pointers, she could teach you to write stuff like this:

ONCE AGAIN we have PROOF how CLOSED adult human beings were to the TRUTH of the coming GOLDEN AGE, BACK in the OLDEN DAYS when THIS was being WRITTEN!!!

[peacegirl]

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

Yes, but an accurate one. How can anyone accurately predict what you are going to have for breakfast, and why would that even matter? The only prediction that matters is knowing that under the changed conditions, crime will die a natural death. That can be predicted with accuracy.

If only!

It is true.

[peacegirl]

Age does it better, she doesn't just proclaim that there will be a Golden Age, but actually hails from that future. You have to act like the Golden Age already happened and you're traveling back in time to the primitive early 21st century humans, to make a statement, to prove a point. There's room for improvement, Age could give you pointers, she could teach you to write stuff like this:

ONCE AGAIN we have PROOF how CLOSED adult human beings were to the TRUTH of the coming GOLDEN AGE, BACK in the OLDEN DAYS when THIS was being WRITTEN!!!

Thanks but no thanks. He actually wrote a book called: This is An Urgent Message From A Visitor to Your Planet (obviously a fictional setting) showing how they live in peace and how this peace could also be ours. They weren’t living in the future but rather they were far beyond us in their intellectual capabilities and were leading the way.

[Atla]

I asked an AI

Dear God, please tell me which of the following two methods is better at demonstrating how great the inevitable future Golden Age on Earth will be. Method 1: posing as a human time-traveler from Earth's future when the Golden Age has already happened. Method 2: posing as an interstellar alien traveler from a planet where a Golden Age has already happened. Summary only.

Summary:

Method 1 (Human Time-Traveler):
Pros: Relatable, grounded in Earth's own potential, emotionally impactful (“we did it”).
Cons: More skepticism (time travel), may feel less universal.

Method 2 (Alien Visitor):
Pros: Broader perspective, appeals to curiosity, offers an outsider's awe.
Cons: Less personal, may feel disconnected or idealized.

Best for Demonstrating Greatness:
Method 1 — more powerful emotionally and motivationally, since it shows our future success.

Age wins

[peacegirl]

I asked an AI

Dear God, please tell me which of the following two methods is better at demonstrating how great the inevitable future Golden Age on Earth will be. Method 1: posing as a human time-traveler from Earth's future when the Golden Age has already happened. Method 2: posing as an interstellar alien traveler from a planet where a Golden Age has already happened. Summary only.

Summary:

Method 1 (Human Time-Traveler):
Pros: Relatable, grounded in Earth's own potential, emotionally impactful (“we did it”).
Cons: More skepticism (time travel), may feel less universal.

Method 2 (Alien Visitor):
Pros: Broader perspective, appeals to curiosity, offers an outsider's awe.
Cons: Less personal, may feel disconnected or idealized.

Best for Demonstrating Greatness:
Method 1 — more powerful emotionally and motivationally, since it shows our future success.

Age wins

The alien was not from the future. Therefore, he was not time traveling. He was just visiting like in the movie E.T. phone home and saw the destruction going on. He wanted to help by showing how, we too, could become a peaceful species if we learned their ways.

peacegirl wins

[Age]

This discovery has nothing to do with prediction. Predicting what others will do may be interesting but unimportant in the scheme of things. How in the world can we accurately predict what someone will do (other than this hurt to others which will not occur) when we can’t even predict from moment to moment what we ourselves will do?

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

Yes, but an accurate one. How can anyone accurately predict what you are going to have for breakfast, and why would that even matter? The only prediction that matters is knowing that under the changed conditions, crime will die a natural death. That can be predicted with accuracy.

1. you claim that predicting what others will do is unimportant in the scheme of things. And,

2. we can not accurately predict what someone will do. But,

3. we can accurately predict that every one will not hurt any one. Which,

4. is an accurate prediction. And,

5. that crime will die a natural death when you stop blaming others for what they do.

However, and to prove this absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect 'I' will stop blaming "peacegirl" for all of the Wrong that "peacegirl" does. Yet, "peacegirl" will prove, irrefutably, so that 'this', in and of itself, will not stop "peacegirl" from continually hurting others.

[Age]

Age does it better, she doesn't just proclaim that there will be a Golden Age, but actually hails from that future. You have to act like the Golden Age already happened and you're traveling back in time to the primitive early 21st century humans, to make a statement, to prove a point.

But, absolutely no one 'has to' do 'it' 'that way' to 'prove a point'. There are 'other ways' to 'prove points', of course.

There's room for improvement, Age could give you pointers, she could teach you to write stuff like this:

ONCE AGAIN we have PROOF how CLOSED adult human beings were to the TRUTH of the coming GOLDEN AGE, BACK in the OLDEN DAYS when THIS was being WRITTEN!!!

But, if you, really, want to present some thing like 'this' "atla", then 'I' suggest that 'you' have the actual proof that you could and would then use to back up and support every word, irrefutably.

[Age]

I asked an AI

Dear God, please tell me which of the following two methods is better at demonstrating how great the inevitable future Golden Age on Earth will be. Method 1: posing as a human time-traveler from Earth's future when the Golden Age has already happened. Method 2: posing as an interstellar alien traveler from a planet where a Golden Age has already happened. Summary only.

Summary:

Method 1 (Human Time-Traveler):
Pros: Relatable, grounded in Earth's own potential, emotionally impactful (“we did it”).
Cons: More skepticism (time travel), may feel less universal.

Method 2 (Alien Visitor):
Pros: Broader perspective, appeals to curiosity, offers an outsider's awe.
Cons: Less personal, may feel disconnected or idealized.

Best for Demonstrating Greatness:
Method 1 — more powerful emotionally and motivationally, since it shows our future success.

Age wins

Once again, there is no 'win' nor 'lose' in regards to Life, and living, itself. Yet, as can be clearly seen, here, once more, the adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, actually believed that competition, winning, and losing was what Life, itself, is about and/or is just a part of 'human nature'.

Also, and obviously, wanting to go to 'artificial intelligence' for answers, insight, and/or enlightenment goes to show just how lacking of actual intelligence 'human beings' had become, back when this was written.

Furthermore, and obviously as well, 'artificial intelligence' could only provide those human beings with their already obtained prior information anyway, which obviously could have only come from 'the past', alone. And, 'looking back', only, was a huge tendency of those older human beings, back then, anyway. And, another reason why 'they' took so long to 'catch up' and, finally, arrive HERE.

[Age]

I asked an AI

Dear God, please tell me which of the following two methods is better at demonstrating how great the inevitable future Golden Age on Earth will be. Method 1: posing as a human time-traveler from Earth's future when the Golden Age has already happened. Method 2: posing as an interstellar alien traveler from a planet where a Golden Age has already happened. Summary only.

Summary:

Method 1 (Human Time-Traveler):
Pros: Relatable, grounded in Earth's own potential, emotionally impactful (“we did it”).
Cons: More skepticism (time travel), may feel less universal.

Method 2 (Alien Visitor):
Pros: Broader perspective, appeals to curiosity, offers an outsider's awe.
Cons: Less personal, may feel disconnected or idealized.

Best for Demonstrating Greatness:
Method 1 — more powerful emotionally and motivationally, since it shows our future success.

Age wins

The alien was not from the future. Therefore, he was not time traveling. He was just visiting like in the movie E.T. phone home and saw the destruction going on. He wanted to help by showing how, we too, could become a peaceful species if we learned their ways.

Surely you could not have missed, misunderstood, nor misinterpreted 'the point' 'this much'.

peacegirl wins

What do you think or believe "peacegirl" actually 'won', here, exactly?

[peacegirl]

But a prediction (that everything will end in the Golden Age ) IS a prediction.

Yes, but an accurate one. How can anyone accurately predict what you are going to have for breakfast, and why would that even matter? The only prediction that matters is knowing that under the changed conditions, crime will die a natural death. That can be predicted with accuracy.

1. you claim that predicting what others will do is unimportant in the scheme of things. And,

Peacegirl: Correct. Having no free will does not mean we have to predict every single movement in the universe to accurately predict that all war and crime will come to an end out of necessity by applying these principles.

2. we can not accurately predict what someone will do. But,

Peacegirl: We can often predict what will occur in the future based on past events, but this does not mean we have to be able to predict every single thing in the universe to know that determinism is true and works in the way he described.

3. we can accurately predict that every one will not hurt any one. Which,

Peacegirl: Yes, because of how conscience works.

4. is an accurate prediction. And,

Peacegirl: Yes, it is the only prediction that can be accurately made.

5. that crime will die a natural death when you stop blaming others for what they do.

Peacegirl: Not until the Great Transition takes place. Stop misinterpreting what he wrote.

However, and to prove this absolutely False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect 'I' will stop blaming "peacegirl" for all of the Wrong that "peacegirl" does. Yet, "peacegirl" will prove, irrefutably, so that 'this', in and of itself, will not stop "peacegirl" from continually hurting others.

Number one: I have hurt no one, and number two, your faulty use of "no blame" shows me how off-base you are. If you don't understand what is written, ask questions rather than putting your ignorance on display.

How is it humanly possible not to fight back when one is being hurt first, which goes back to the justification of “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” I personally would get greater satisfaction defending myself or retaliating against those people who would do, or have done, things to hurt me and my family. I’m not a saint, but a scientist of human conduct. Most of mankind are compelled, for greater satisfaction, to move in this direction. Therefore, it should be clear that the corollary, Thou Shall Not Blame, does not mean that you should suddenly stop blaming because you have discovered that man’s will is not free. It only means at this point that we are going to follow it, to extend it, to see exactly where it takes us — something that investigators like Durant have never done because the implications prevented them from opening the door beyond the vestibule. The fact that man’s will is not free only means that he is compelled to move in the direction of greater satisfaction. If you sock me, I might get greater satisfaction in socking you back. However, once man understands what it means that his will is not free, this desire to sock me is prevented by your realization that I will never blame you for hurting me. Until this knowledge is understood, we will be compelled to continue living in the world of free will; otherwise, we would only make matters worse for ourselves.

To show you how confused is the understanding of someone who doesn’t grasp these principles, a local columnist interested in my ideas, so he called them, made the statement that I believe that man should not be blamed for anything he does, which is true only when man knows what it means that his will is not free. If he doesn’t know, he is compelled to blame by his very nature. Christ also received incursions of thought from this same principle, which compelled him to turn the other cheek and remark as he was being nailed to the cross, “They know not what they do,” forgiving his enemies even in the moment of death. How was it possible for him to blame them when he knew that they were not responsible? But they knew what they were doing, and he could not stop them even by turning the other cheek. Religion was compelled to believe that God was not responsible for the evil in the world, whereas Spinoza and Christ believed correctly that there was no such thing as evil when seen in total perspective. But how was it possible, except for people like Christ and Spinoza, to forgive those who trespassed against them? And how was it possible for those who became victims of this necessary evil to look at it in total perspective?