Quantum Indeterminacy and the Mind of God

If events are random then they will behave probabilistically like random.

If they are ordered, could we determine the mind of god by examining that ordered imposition on random material?

Would that then imply that each given particle is different depending on its divine meaning? Like say god wants to stop that bullet with a miracle, the manifestation of that will would be the macroscopic summation of the indeterminate behavior of that bullet’s subatomic partials in such a manner as its behavior is both a break from the typical laws of physics and an extreme violation of random distribution.

For the record I do not believe in this type of god because the evidence absolutely does not support it.

So, if that type of manipulation occurs, the study of a given particle in an effort to understand all particles is futile. So how do we determine if that is the case? We can’t study masses looking for random, random could be composed of order plus divine will. Indeed, no amount of data is sufficient to show one way or the other.

It’s like the brain in the jar problem. So, in my opinion even if there is a god we should act like there isn’t.

This is reminiscent of Kant’s idea that the past is ultimately not an indicator of the future.

NASA is a Waste of Money. (LMAO)

“Gee lets spend 100bn$ on tang and velcro, d’hur d’hur d’hur.”

Why does someone always say that?

Every dollar invested in NASA generates a 1000% indirect return for the economy, and an immeasurable return to society. Knowledge has infinite shelf life, is almost always useful at some point, takes up virtually no space, and is infinitely reproducible. You’d think greed alone would ensure glowing support for every scientific endeavor.

Virtually every aspect of the physical sciences benefit from research only those in space are in a position to do, from climatology and meteorology, to biology and physics, communications technology, materials science, geology, etc etc

Oh yeah and then there is the (slim given their under funded nature) chance that their orbital diagnostic equipment could save all of our lives by giving us a century of warning of a celestial impact, like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs.

Seriously, people that don’t want to fund space exploration and study are ignorant, plain and simple. Educate yourself.

I mean really, come on people. What part of having WHOLE OTHER PLANETS to exploit for resources does not compute as profitable? Greedy bastards don’t care unless they’ll get a piece. “for your children” just isn’t good enough if it means a slightly smaller SUV today.

I don’t need them to be earth like to be valuable. I mean shit, the Japanese found uranium on the MOON.

Research is profitable, that’s why private organizations pay for it.

“Quit writing and do something” they tell me

Like I’ve never heard that before, and always from the people utterly terrified by my conclusions.

Well writing IS what I do. And like speaking it can have a HUGE impact on the world, especially given that writing is immortal. Candy striping a cancer ward is going to do nothing but make me feel good about myself in the long term. I’m trying to educate people (or learn about it myself via contradiction) on the nature of the system as a whole. And before you assume I don’t engage in your worthless idea of charity, ask yourself which one of us spent Christmas in a nursing home despite the absence of any relatives in a nursing home.

The system is evil, you can’t just go out and help people without helping it. The problem is not that simple. Soup kitchens by and large are run by churches, and I don’t have the funding to start an agnostic one, and I’m not gonna play a game that is corrupt from the start with some kind of bullshit ‘the ends justify the means’ logic just so I can go into moral debt to get out of a fiscal one.

No, there is nothing to be done quickly and easily except exit and educate, and that’s what I am doing.

Parenting

The point is indeed neglect. I’m tired of good parenting being synonymous with restrictions and controls.

I was only formally punished once in my whole life by my parents and that was by making me stay in the house for a day. I have no idea why and it was a big joke really for all concerned.

My parents had long before earned and still to this day retain my deepest respect.

As a result I didn’t merely obey them or mimic them like the trained monkey most parents seem to want.

I listened to what they had to say, I tried to understand their perspective, I learned what it was to be an adult, and to be hip deep in the human condition.

People are like computers, garbage in garbage out, you treat someone badly and they’ll act badly.

This is happening constantly, especially to women. They receive so much external discipline as children because of the collective obsession with their sexuality, and who they give it to, coupled with the stereotypical emotional conditioning, that they develop almost no self discipline until college.

They become impulsive, rash, and sometimes quite brutal.

Typical middle class children in the United States as a whole effectively have two childhoods. One at home and one at college. Isolation, communication control, sheltering, strictness, external discipline, none of these things are conducive to growth as a self actualized person.

Obedience through fear or greed, is not virtue, its victimization.

Society decides what is done with a child, and society places various decisions regarding what is done in the hands of the parents, but not all. Society if it feels you’re not up to the task will take the child from you. If you fail miserably enough it will incarcerate you, or even kill you. You have an illusion of solitary child rearing in your skull that needs to be erased if you wish to reach parity with reality. My position is that children are raised by society as a whole in any case excepting feral children, which are absurdly rare. Parenting these days is largely about who pays for things more then anything else. The Company takes care of the rest, from the message they get at church, to the shows they watch on TV, to the lies taught them at school. Of course The Company convinces you that you’re in charge that way when the children utterly fail at beginning human they can blame you instead of themselves, if they can’t find a profitable use for that failure first.

This system of encouraging psychosis and then profiting from it was in my opinion best exemplified by the SS. The HJ selected young impressionable boys, engineered submission to the group, fostered insecurity and jealousy and then gave them a victim. All that sounds disturbingly familiar.

I don’t care how hard you find it to use your upper abstract reasoning to rule your lower primate brain, it is still required of you if you choose to be a human over a chimp. If you wish to indulge your base animal instincts and feel that their label of natural instinct justifies the resulting horror then go live in the woods, if you can. And leave your kids with the humans.

Debate and Manners

Rude? So whats the flaw here, my honesty?

Why should I pretend to do the impossible just because other people like hearing about themselves?

My perspective is the only one I have 100% authority to discuss.

I will not perpetuate the illusion of selfless action just because you think “honesty” and self interest are rude.

I debate people not to try and change them but to get them to drag positions out of me, I work best in concert with another mind.

Think fencing, it sucks versus a tree.

Fights

It’s quite simple really. No words justify assault barring contrived circumstances. There is nothing I can say to you that makes it ok for you to hit me. If you are an American I’m not surprised that you miss this. America is a country where most children get hit and raised in a religion that assures compliance through bribery and fear. Under those conditions it’s as impossible for you to spontaneously understand as it is for me to spontaneously speak Japanese.

Words are merely thoughts shared. And no thought waives your right to protection from physical assault. Only actions can do that.

Now I’ll grant in many ways writing is an action, thus I grant the possibility that maybe a situation exists where what you write can constitute an action as dangerous as potentially lethal assault, and thus justify a physical response, but in my opinion a situation like that is so unimaginably rare as to be discounted from reality as firmly as the chance of winning the lottery and being struck by lightning every day for a whole year.

I could be a total raving lunatic but that doesn’t change the correctness or incorrectness of any given point.

I wish they taught logic and critical thinking in what passes for school these days.

The fact is, if you think it through and are consistent about the application of your ethics, you probably agree with me.