However, making the question a little bit more complex ... and adding in why that fame really can add to the act -
How does it change your equation if that Policeman who saved the three prostitutes only became a policeman because he was inspired to do so by reading comic books about Superman saving 200 kids?
Inspiring others by your deeds, causing your actions to reflect against the world in a far greater effect than the deeds themselves would, I think, have quite an effect on the equation.
There are a lot more things that people can consider a 'habit' than most people would consider, I would expect. It's easy to think of 'getting up at 5 AM' or 'eating well' or 'exercising' to be a habit. I've witnessed exercise as a habit, to be sure, when I watched my siblings - who were very active in sports - get downright surly if they didn't have time for their morning jog.
But there's a lot of small habits in everything we do, that we don't really notice. Necessary habits. When someone asks you how you are, the habitual answer is 'Fine, thank you,'... (read more)
Continuing other comment:
To take patrissimo's arguments on what makes something useful for self-improvement:
My version: Growth activities are Work, and hence feel like work, not fun"
My version: Growth activities are Work, and hence feel like work, not fun"
I call foul. He tries to claim he's not being puritan, and not saying that growth is never fun, but then proceeds to dismiss fun in that "all use you could get out of it, you've probably already gotten." In essence stating that fun activities only helped you grow in the past, and to move towards the future, you have to be not-fun.
He also com... (read more)
Good day, ladies and gentlemen. I'm still new, still working through the sequences, which is taking me a while because the needs and requirements of accomplishing my goals in life has down-prioritized my reading through Less Wrong. A somewhat appropriate reason for this discussion.
I see an implied assumption in the article, and additionally outright stated in the comments, that Less Wrong needs to create results, that it needs to have more successes, or it should be accomplishing something in its existence.
I disagree. Less Wrong cannot create results, n... (read more)
I am, sadly, too busy this weekend to make it. I would be coming down from Milwaukee, and very much hope to make the next meeting.
For prospective places to meet up, I am afraid that in Illinois, I have little experience. The only place i do know of is Ballydoyle Irish Pub and restaurant which is a nice place with several back rooms for parties which wish to have a more private meal and discussion.
I'd also like anything within easy walking distance of Ogilvie Transportation Center, making it easy to get there via the Metra, though within distance of any of the train stations connected to this would also be nice.
Oh, I quite agree! Thank you very much for the time spent sharing your thoughts. ^_^
I've certainly tried, thank you very much. I think that might be the most satisfying reaction I could have hoped to receive. ^_^ I hope to stick around for a good long time, too... this site's rivaling "TV Tropes" for the ability to completely suck me in for hours at a time without me noticing it.
Every time someone says, "The simplest reading..." about a passage, I really draw back cautiously. I see, usually, two types of people who say "There's only one way to read that passage," on any nonspecific passage. The first is "I know what it means and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong because I know the Will of God," and the second is "I know what it means and it's stupid and there is no God."
I'm not saying you're doing that - quite the opposite, you agree that there are many ways to approach the passage. T... (read more)
Well, thus far, I've mainly seen, "Welcome to LessWrong ... let's poke at the new guy and see what he's thinking!" I don't think we're getting into any real serious philosophy, yet. It's all been fairly light stuff. I've been trying to self-moderate my responses to be polite and answer people, but not get too involved in a huge discussion, because I agree, this wouldn't be the right place. But so far, it's seemed just some curiosity being satisfied about me, specifically, and my theology - not theology as a whole. As such, it certainly seems... (read more)
Oh, no, not at all! I'm quite happy to have people interested in what I have to say, but I'm trying to keep my conversation suitable for the 'Welcome to Less Wrong' thread, and not have it get too big. ^_^
As far as 'If it's logically fallacious, why is it the foundation of your belief?'
Well, it's not the foundation of my belief, it's just a very strong element thereof. It would probably require several months of dedicated effort and perhaps 30,000 words to really hit the whole of my belief with any sort of holistic effort. However, why assume a First... (read more)
Ah, yes. that rather strikes a chord, indeed. Thank you.
Thank you very much, I appreciate that.
however, I'm following from an assumption of a deity that wants to be known and moving forward. It certainly doesn't suffice for showing that a deity figure does exist, because if we follow the assumption of a deity that doesn't want to be known, or a lack of a deity, then any religion which has withstood the test of time is likely the one with the fewest obvious flaws. It's rather like evolution of an idea rather than a creature.
However, the existence of such a religion does provide for the possibility of a deity figure.
Oh, good golly gosh, that gets big fast. Thank you!
Apologies, I'm not as interesting as that. I changed a lot of beliefs about the belief system, but I was nonetheless still raised Christian. I didn't mean to imply otherwise - pre-existing developmental bias is part of the 'basic irrational hunch' part of the sentence.
I agree that religious belief is not generally arrived at through rational thinking, however - whether that religious belief is 'there is a God, and I know who it is!' or 'there is no God'. This is evidenced, for instance, the time I was standing there at church, just before services, and ... (read more)
Wait... he's already saying he believes reality doesn't contain any infinities...
And you say that you can't show proof to the contrary because it's likely reality doesn't contain any infinities...
I don't think I followed you there.
Ah, excellent, so I'm not so far off. Then what's 3^^^3, then?
I actually found it several years ago through an atheist site which was using it as evidence that prayer had only a placebo effect, so I'm afraid I don't have a citation for you just at the moment. I'll see what I can do when I have time. My apologies.
I'm not sure I understand. Part of it is the use of BusyBeaver - I'm familiar with Busy Beaver as an AI state machine, not as a number. Second: So you say you do not believe in infinity ... but only inasmuch as physical infinity? So you believe in conceptual infinity?
A weighty question... At the moment, I'm not entirely able to give you the full response, I'm afraid, but I'll give you the best 'short answer' that I'm able to compile.
1: The universe seems slanted towards Entropy. This suggests a 'start'. Which suggests something to start the universe. This of course has a great many logical fallacies inherent in it, but it's one element.
2: Given a 'something to start the universe', we're left with hypothetical scientific/mathematical constructs or a deity-figure of some sort.
3: Assuming a deity figure (yes, priv... (read more)
I wish I could, but mid-week trips to Madison are difficult for me, given my work hours. Have fun nonetheless! Glad to know WI get-togethers happen!
I think everyone believes in infinite something, even if it's infinite nothingness, or infinite cosmic foam, but I understand your meaning. ^_^
Just because you didn't get the joke doesn't mean he did it wrong. I got the joke, and he was saying it to me, so I believe the joke was performed correctly, given his target audience! ^_^
The problem, I'd say, would be an assumption of shared prior experience - but humor in general tends to make that assumption, whether it's puns which assume a shared experience with lingual quirks, friend in-jokes which are directly about shared experiences, or genre humor which assumes a shared experience in that genre. This was genre humor.
While transparent communica... (read more)
I'm partway through Mysterious Answers to Mysterious Questions, and it's very, very interesting. Much better fodder than I usually see from people misusing those concepts. It's refreshing to see points made in context to their original meaning, and intelligently applied! I'm giving myself some time to let my thoughts simmer, before making a few comments on a couple of them.
I want to know what's true. Even if Christianity wasn't true, I've already found a great deal of Truth in its teachings for how to live life. The Bible, I feel, encourages a rationa... (read more)
( chuckles warmly ) don't worry - I got the joke. ^_^ Although I'm rather in a minority in my view of Hell as something other than torture, but hey, there's plenty of time for that! Thank you for the welcome!
Thank you very much!
A small element of my own personal quirks (which, alas, I keep screwing up) is to avoid using the words 'argue' and 'debate'. Arguing is like trying to 'already be right', and Debate is a test of social ability, not the rightness of your side. I like to discuss - some of the greatest feelings is when I suddenly get that sensation of "OH! I've been wrong, but that makes SO MUCH MORE SENSE!" And some of the scariest feelings are "What? You're changing your mind to agree with me? But what if I'm wrong and I just argued ... (read more)
Greetings, all. Found this site not too long ago, been reading through it in delight. It has truly energized my brain. I've been trying to codify and denote a number of values that I held true to my life and to discussion and to reason and logic, but was having the most difficult time. I was convinced I'd found a wonderful place that could help me when it provided me a link to the Twelve Virtues of Rationality, which neatly and tidily listed out a number of things I'd been striving to enumerate.
My origins in rationality basically originated at a very, ... (read more)