on the internet i keep bumping into people who are extremely insistent that our universe could be a simulation.
while i think it may, in the future, be possible to simulate a high fidelity universe - i don’t think we should confuse the ability to model a universe with the ability to actually build a universe.. .
for example, we can model weather patterns inside a computer.
I assume you've read about Bostrom's trilemma, which a lot of recent discussion about simulation has been based upon.
http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
I can't think of a good answer to his trilemma, except that the pessimist in me suspects that option 1 may be a good explanation.
People have also used this trilemma to invoke solutions involving a deity of course.
one sentence answers only.. here's mine:.
jws exist because people want an escape from the modern world and are willing to give up intellectual freedom to get it..
JWs exist because WW1 happened to begin in 1914.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
Fisherman I think Kenneth Gergen explains it excellently in the video above. The bottle in itself is not anything. It is only something in relation to how it's constructed for various purposes. Strip things of all contexts and webs of meaning and nothing can be said about them. True for a bottle, the earth or anything. It's not so much that the phrase "the earth is a sphere" may be wrong, but that it only makes sense within a context, And other statements about the same object may make sense under different constructions.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
Kenneth Gergen explaining why constructionism is world changing, and why a bottle is not aimply a bottle. Likely to excite or make you want to pull your hair out depending.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
Never a JW I can say what books influenced me and gave me an initially favourable view of poststructuralism and its impact.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Postmodernism-Historians-INF-Callum-Brown/dp/0582506042/
Earlier edition of this book:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Invitation-Social-Construction-Kenneth-Gergen/dp/1446296482/
The latter book in particular argues for a strong constructionist conception of truth to which scientific discourse is not immune.
Then there is The Order of Things by Foucault and Archaeology of Knowledge, Mythologies by Roland Barthes and Contingency, Irony and Solidarity by Richard Rorty, How to Read Derrida by Penelope Deutscher.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
What do the 20th century philosophical schools have done to improve our world or our understanding of it? Will they matter in the future?
Poststructuralism challenged essentialism in all its forms is the main one.
Pragmatism challenged the idea that the pursuit of truth and platonic forms should be the goal.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
We could do a Skype conference
What happened to the dastardly dog?
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
Your statement that OutLaw's friend is imaginary, is that a fact or an opinion? Since you have posted threads declaring the importance of this distinction.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
I don't know about the broader context, but in this exchange between Cofty and OutLaw it seems to me the insults began with the phrase "imaginary buddy", not before or after. So it's a bit rich for Cofty to pin the blame on OutLaw.
sbf you annoyed me enough to deserve this.. gad saad's comments on the nonsensical gibberish of jacques derrida, michel foucault, and jacques lacan.
charlatanism of the highest order.
.... the first quote from derrida starts as 2:50.
You're always searching for progress, is that the Whig in you?
