1. God Trumps

Comment #288207 by wice on November 21, 2008 at 10:33 am

FYI, the Illuminati card game is based on The Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson.

I like the idea of the game, and even played it once, but because the other players can gang up on the player in turn, spending money to disable him or her to buy a new card, and because everybody took the game too seriously, after three hours we were still nowhere _and_ without money. I had only one gaming experience, that was more frustrating than this, with another Steve Jackson game, Munchkin. The guy has a fine sense of humour, but is a pretty awful game-designer.

On the article: has anybody else gone "AWWWW!" looking at the Zoroastrian guy?

2. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234778 by wice on August 22, 2008 at 2:29 am

83. Steve Zara:
when i said "yes, it's possible", i meant "it's possible for fundamental randomness to exist". (i updated the comment, to avoid misunderstandings.)

3. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234774 by wice on August 22, 2008 at 2:13 am

79. macros_man:
"For myself - my biggest question is whether it is even possible, or sensical, for fundamental randomness to exist - as required by certain interpretations of QM."

yes, it's possible. i think, there are at least two possibilities for this.

1. the many-worlds interpretation
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation)

2. i don't know, if there is a name for this, but the other possibility i can think of is that determinism works backwards in time. that would mean that the future "already happened", past is an illusion, every moment is the deterministic result of the _next_ moment, and there can be many different future states, that result in this present moment. in this case we would sense the past as if it already happened, because there can be exactly one of it, while we can't see the future, because there could be many different futures resulting in this present moment, altough there is only one that actually happened.

i know, these are only speculations, and i have no idea, whether they could be tested.

(i edited my comment, to make it clear, i'm arguing for the possibility of fundamental randomness.)

4. Free Will vs. the Programmed Brain

Comment #234288 by wice on August 21, 2008 at 5:12 am

it seems like the artice suggests, that nondeterminism = free will. that's wrong. even if our decisions were based on some _really_ random processes, it wouldn't mean that _we_ made those decisions, and not the the random processes. on the contrary: if decisions were purely random, there would be _truly_ no use to hold people responsible for their decisions, because the knowledge, that there would be consequences, couldn't affect their behaviour at all. (not that i think that human decisions are either completely deterministic, or completely random. they are more likely a mix of the two, and most of the time we can handle them as deterministic, but must expect some glitches here and there.)

finally: i can't really think of a definition of free will, that wouldn't eliminate itself (that's not to say there cannot be one). if everything is deterministic, then of course there is no free will. if there is at least a tiny indeterminism, then people are capable of making any decision in a yes-or-no situation, but what would make them to choose this or that? if it's completely random, what they will choose, then there is no free will. if not, for example, if they have a "soul", and the "goodness" (or whatever) of this "soul" will decide, which option they make, then they are dteremined by the "goodness" of their "soul", so no free will. if the "goodness" can change based by previous experiences, then they are determined by these experiences, therefore no free will. is there a way out of it?

personally i think, free will is nothing more than a good rule of thumb, like e.g. "human rights". it makes easier to create a well functioning society, if we handle people as if they had free will. that's all to it.

5. Car dealership advert tells atheists to 'shut up'

Comment #185519 by wice on May 28, 2008 at 2:30 am

"None of us at Kieffe & Sons Ford is afraid to speak out."

incredible bravery. those goddamn secularists go after and kill everybody, who offends them. i really fear for kieffe & sons.

6. Atheists are nice people who will roast in hell, says Cardinal

Comment #177932 by wice on May 10, 2008 at 2:05 am

i have a feeling that many of you are not aware of that this article is a joke...

7. Evidence can't shake your faith if your faith excludes it as evidence

Comment #132591 by wice on February 25, 2008 at 2:33 am

this article is yet another sorry attempt to blur the meaning of "evidence" in order to paint science and religion as equally valid explanations of the world. by the standard of the author, physicists could have considered the finding of a green cheese in einstein's refrigerator as evidence for or against general relativity. for some strange reason, they chose the observation of a displaced star as evidence, instead of the green cheese.

the thing is, "evidence" in epistemology is an observation that fits a hypothesis, where a different outcome, that would not fit, is at least imaginable. "evidence" is not something somebody happens to call "evidence", as "creation science" is not science, just because somebody chose to call it that.

8. Fleabytes

Comment #130882 by wice on February 21, 2008 at 12:30 pm

"The point is: regardless of what you believe, such a being is simply impossible, and Dawkins' argument explains why."

no, actually dawkins does not say this, simply because it's not true. it _is_ possible, that a very complex being could exist since forever, because everything is possible. the point dawkins makes is that if you believe in such being, then you cannot use "the universe is so complex that it must have a creator" argument, because then you should explain why you don't use the same argument on your supposed creator, and because you would should explain that why it is more probable that a complex, intelligent being exists since forever than that the universe exists since forever.

9. 'Irrational Atheist' trounces God-deniers

Comment #117960 by wice on January 30, 2008 at 4:34 am

it's interesting to see, that people, who try to depict belief in god(s) as a rational point of view, tend to resort more and more to a style-over-substance tactic. they basically look at what atheists say about religion (backed up with evidence and arguments), remove the evidence and arguments, say the same about atheism, and declare themselves the winners. somehow they seem to think that the whole point of a debate is what you say about your opponent's point of view, and not what you back your claims up with. the same goes for the creationism vs evolution topic.

and i'm afraid there is a huge amount of people, who actually buy this sad attitude.

10. A hole lot of nothing found by astronomers

Comment #65764 by wice on August 26, 2007 at 11:26 am

i'm sure that the universe is actually a four dimensional soap-bubble, and we live on it's three dimensional surface. so, this stuff must be the place where the bubble touches the four dimensional straw with which the giant four dimensional girl blows up the bubble. let's pray to her not to stop it for a while, at least not before the final episode of Lost is aired. it would be quite frustrating not to know how it ends, just because the universe ceased to exist.

11. Scientists Induce Out-of-Body Sensation

Comment #65369 by wice on August 23, 2007 at 11:50 pm

#7 nitrogenase: you are right, just because we can create lightning in the laboratory with two electrically charged metal balls, it doesn't demonstrate that lightning is a natural process, and it is not zeus who throws thunderbolts when he is in a bad mood. it just makes it a little more likely...

12. Intelligent Design and Creationism/Evolution Controversy

Comment #53537 by wice on July 2, 2007 at 1:19 am

i don't really get the use of term "creationism/evolution controversy". it suggests that these are two, equally working theories, which contradict each other. for example, relativity/quantum theory, now, that's a controversy. all we have here is a creationism stupidity.

13. In the name of the Father

Comment #51817 by wice on June 25, 2007 at 5:58 am

does the vaccinations against illnesses prevent you to be run over by a bus? no? well, then it's useless, and even the suggestion is dangerous and harmful! btw, how is that all great thinkers and artists in the human history have experienced some kind of illness? these goddamn doctors try to destroy art and human knowledge.

14. Atheists: Get off of our country!

Comment #45278 by wice on May 27, 2007 at 4:15 am

brilliant logic. saying that "freedom of religion means you have to believe in god" is like saying "freedom of speech means you must twaddle all the time".

15. God help us all - The No. 2 book on Amazon right now is a

Comment #44869 by wice on May 25, 2007 at 12:30 pm

"I'll have two of every type of beer known to man."

:-)))))) nice plan. don't waste your space on hungarian beer though, they are _really_ bad.

16. Apocalypse Of The Honeybees

Comment #39600 by wice on May 11, 2007 at 9:07 am

ok, so we don't know, what causes the honeybee-disease. we fucking don't know it. at all. but it's surely a man-made or man-assisted thing. yeah, of course, what else?

i find the "every bad thing happens because of man" and the "we don't have to care about our environment, because mother nature will fix it for us" mentalities equally annoying.

17. 'The Evolution of Homer' Intro

Comment #28802 by wice on March 31, 2007 at 1:46 am

6. shetlandforpeace:
http://www.babylon.com/definition/plotz/Dutch

18. James Cameron finds grave of Jesus & Son

Comment #23136 by wice on February 26, 2007 at 1:28 pm

9: oh, please... let's be honest. you say you wouldn't laugh your socks off if the grave was genuine? i know i would.

19. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam

Comment #23129 by wice on February 26, 2007 at 1:19 pm

"Al-Jazeera is an Arabic channel, Al-Jazeera English is an English channel."

so aljazeera english has nothing to do with aljazeera? sounds likely.

so aljazeera's staff has no word in the translations given by aljazeera english? even after such a tremendous and widely disputed mistake they say nothing? sounds likely.

or maybe they just don't speak persian (after all aljazeera is an arabic tv). sounds likely.

20. James Cameron finds grave of Jesus & Son

Comment #23122 by wice on February 26, 2007 at 1:01 pm

calm down. it easily could be a hoax. OR a forgery. OR a grave of a family that coincidentally had the same names mentioned in the bible. joseph, mary and jesua were not uncommon names that time. so please, don't take this on trust just because you want it to be true.

21. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam

Comment #23064 by wice on February 26, 2007 at 4:56 am

#15: "The wrong ideas like the lie that Ahmadinejad said he wants to "wipe Israel off the map"?"

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

22. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #21383 by wice on February 9, 2007 at 1:40 am

it could be funny, if it was at least a little bit clever. but...
books are not subjects of the evolutionary process. so "science" cannot give a "full and satisfying explanation" to the existence of "the god delusion" based on it.
nice (if a little bit unoriginal) try, anyway.

23. Blashpemy Challenge Interview

Comment #20212 by wice on February 1, 2007 at 4:48 am

i think the blasphemy challenge could use a faq. for example:

q: why don't you mock muslims and mohammed instead of christians? are you cowards?

a: we don't "mock" anyone. the blasphemy challenge is about proving, that we don't believe in god, afterlife, and hell. it's not about proving, that we don't believe that there are religious zealots, who would happily kill us, if we offended them. actually we are quite sure that there *are* people, who would kill because of an offense to their religious belief, and since we don't believe in afterlife, we think we have only one life, and we try to avoid death as long as possible.

24. Atheists in Jail

Comment #19804 by wice on January 30, 2007 at 2:36 am

i'm agnostic about agnosticism (as well as gnosticism). i don't know whether we can or cannot know if there is or is not one or more god/gods.

or maybe i'm just too lazy to find out.

25. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19663 by wice on January 29, 2007 at 6:27 am

brian, next time someone mentions that "but many people do good things in the name of religion", please ask them "so you mean these people wouldn't do good things if they weren't desperate to get into heaven or afraid of going to hell?".

26. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19626 by wice on January 29, 2007 at 1:33 am

MacGruber: i don't think that a single atheist will ever change the views of the theist. this interview was good because it shoves closet atheists a bit closer to standing up and speak their minds.

oh, btw, the funniest thing was when the interviewer claimed that brian "manipulated" these young people to say such things by promising them a not too expensive, but at least existing dvd, that they could easily buy in a videostore or on amazon. yes, that's "manipulation", unlike the promise of eternal bliss or eternal damnation for doing this or that.

27. Blasphemy Challenge on FOX

Comment #19617 by wice on January 28, 2007 at 11:43 pm

i've heard that fox news was something else, but... omfsm! the reporter can't stop preaching while making the interview, and they cover the kids' eyes as if they were criminals. that's funny.

28. Readers Write: Atheist Sam Harris on Torture and Faith

Comment #17123 by wice on January 11, 2007 at 2:39 am

two simple question:

1. is it moral to kill one innocent to save a thousand innocents?
2. is it moral to kill a thousand innocents to save one innocent?

i guess, most of those, who are against torture in any circumstances, would say, both are immoral. the catch is, that by not killing one to save a thousand you commit case 2: killing a thousand to save one.

not to mention, that things are not black and white most of the time. what if not killing one innocent causes certain death to thousands of innocents, and killing one causes 50% sure death? what about 75%? or 99%? where do you draw the line?

i think these extreme circumstances are outside of morality. none of these decisions are moral or immoral. one should decide on his/her own what to do without the help of a pre-wired moral code.

29. Secret Life of Brian

Comment #16700 by wice on January 8, 2007 at 7:08 am

look at the comment by Albertanator on the youtube page. it's funny that when chistians hear something, that they don't like, there's always at least one who says something along the lines: "why don't you mock muslims, you cowards?". as if doing something that leads to almost certain death is considered to be bravery instead of stupidity.

30. Sam Harris's Faith in Eastern Spirituality and Muslim Torture

Comment #16509 by wice on January 7, 2007 at 3:10 am

i find really strange this kind of interview, where the reporter adds his personal comments to the text _after_ the interview, when the subject cannot react. why didn't he say these things when harris was present?

31. Ancient religion may face extinction

Comment #16508 by wice on January 7, 2007 at 3:05 am

i suppose zoroastrianism isn't getting replaced with atheism. it's getting replaced with islam. so those who say 'good! one religion less!' are missing the point, i think.

32. Ghosts in the Machine

Comment #15715 by wice on January 2, 2007 at 8:19 am

i think it's obvious that people who 'want to believe in ghosts' never really considered the inconvenient consequences of such a phenomenon. for example, that you cannot go to the toilet without being watched. that's why i strongly hope there are no ghosts at all. if there are, i hereby take the opportunity to ask them, leave me some private space in the toilet. and in the bathroom. and in the bedroom. and generally, everywhere. just go away. thank you.