For more information, please see http://www.armchair.mb.ca/~dave
Next stop: Wiki:DaveVoorhis
I am particularly fond of a contiguous region equidistant between "serious" and "not serious." Determination of the proportion of irony to surrealism is left as an exercise for the reader. -- DV
Your RoadRage is too funny. -- ElizabethWiethoff
I'm sorry you found it excessively, i.e., "too" funny. Next time, I'll endeavour to make it funny enough, but not too funny. BTW, more recipes from you would be nice. I like them. In return, I will provide a recipe for The Best Chili Ever and several other things, once I determine how I make these things and in what specific proportions I divvy the ingredients. -- DV
Humor should never be too funny; someone might split a gut. Food should never be too tasty; someone might split a gut. But I often violate the tasty food rule. I'm glad you like the recipes. I need to write up several Indian recipes for my sister, and I'll post them here, too. I shall look forward to your chili and whatever else you whip up. -- Eliz
I sure hope I suck at psychoanalysis, 'cause I think it's a load of old bollocks. My psyche, by the way, is as opaque to me as it is to you, if not more so. -- DV
That would be the case if you're using all these defense mechanisms. Thank you for that revelation. -- RK
You're welcome! Always glad to help.
Years ago, I asked a psychologist friend of mine how he did his job. "How do you determine whether someone is mentally ill or not?"
"That's relatively easy," he said, "Mentally ill folks can't help but express their illness; they're unable to restrain themselves. They convey it in what they say and what they do."
"Ah," I responded, "But don't you ever get someone that has such effective defense mechanisms that he seems okay, but keeps his disturbed thoughts to himself?"
My friend smiled. "If someone can do that all the time," he said, "Then it isn't mental illness. That's how we define 'healthy.'"
Take that for what you will.
-- DV
I believe in the possibility of intelligent extraterrestrial life, and would argue that there is a high probability of it existing somewhere in the 125,000,000,000 or more galaxies in the universe. However, given the absence of any verified evidence of its existence, I must emphasise that I do not believe it exists. I believe in the possibility that it exists. The distinction is significant. -- DV
Would the winning of a supersuperlottery be a good analogy in your case? To me, that means you do believe that they exist or existed. -- EricLawson
I'm not sure how "the winning of a supersuperlottery" is intended to be a good analogy, and I don't know why you've concluded that I believe intelligent extraterrestrial life exists when I've specifically written that I do not. A better analogy would be that I believe in the possibility of winning a lottery, but I do not believe I have won a lottery.
Belief in the possibility of an event or thing is not the same as belief in the possibility of an event or thing. For example, I believe in the possibility that I will have lunch with a friend next week. I do not believe I have had lunch with a friend next week, because it hasn't happened yet, and I might not have lunch with a friend next week. -- DV
Yes, I think we are on the same boat. Only need to make it more clear. The lottery analogy is: you have possibility to win, but you did not win, you are not winning and you will not win. I think that interpreted your use of "possibility". But my extension to the meaning of this "possibility" is that we do recognize that there is(are) always somebody who will win. About intelligent aliens, they have possibility to exist. But they either extincted, or they have not shown yet. If they existed now, we have not found them yet. I think that may again interpret your use of "possibility". But, to put all these together, I would still conclude that if SETI heard something, you will not be surprised, if they did not hear anything, you will be disappointed. In other words, you do expect their existence. Am I right? -- EricLawson
I would say there is a high probability that in 125+ gigagalaxies, intelligent extraterrestrial life exists. However, I don't "expect" the existence of intelligent ETs per se -- "expect" is not the right word, as it implies a degree of belief that is not accurate. Again, I must reiterate that I believe in the possibility of intelligent ETs; I do not believe that intelligent ETs exist.
If SETI heard something, I would be delighted (as, I am sure, would much of humanity), but 125+ gigagalaxies is a vast search space -- I don't hold out a lot of expectation that it will return results within my lifetime. -- DaveVoorhis
Thanks. I would make a shaky definition on the word "expect": something which "should" have a higher probability to happen. I am OK if you said you do not "expect". But you said you "believe". How do you define the word "believe" then. (I do wish my symbolic logic were good enough to formulate these statements. But, it won't be a long wait. It is not that hard). -- EricLawson
A belief is that which you hold to be a fact, i.e., that which you regard to be indubitably true. -- DV
Well defined. How about one step further: a belief is a fact "to come"? Does it make any difference? -- EricLawson
It makes no difference. A belief is that which you hold to be true, regardless of whether it is in the past, present, or future. -- DV
If EarleMartin will allow the SharkBot to patrol these waters, I'll consider it. -- DV
![[Home]](/adjunct/adjunct.png)