This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ๐ Aria ๐ฎ
Pages: 1 ... 230231232 233234 ... 352
6931
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:33:07 AM »
i think it makes sense that a better version of an old game would be worth more
i'm the last person to defend the market on anything, but that's pretty fair tbh
Not that; the fact that people wanted a remake so that the game would be more accessible And now, because of the price point, it's still just as accessible as it was ten years ago.
6932
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:31:42 AM »
Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
Thanksgiving was a celebration by Puritans, a way of "celebrating God's bountiful offerings as a sign of their eternal salvation".
6933
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:26:22 AM »
Ocarina of Time is like, $50 for me. I ended up just borrowing it from a friend.
Isn't it just peachy that the 3DS remake is about the same price as the original, if not more expensive?
6934
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:20:23 AM »
Marty's overrated though
faggot detected
Not bad, just overrated.
6935
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:18:47 AM »
I wouldn't say that has anything to do with being right or wrong, anyway; it's a question that is directly about your perceptions and interpretations. Right. Which only leaves one thing, really.
Spoiler Whose interpretation is better?
or maybe Spoiler Your garden is overgrown and your cucumbers are soft
6936
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:16:52 AM »
No, but I have stopped playing games on their final bosses and not picked it back up until years later.
6937
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:14:21 AM »
Depends how literally you take it. "I" in a basic sense would be the brain. Everything you see yourself as is exclusive to that organ, along with your consciousness and sentience. But if you take the statement literally, the first option would make more sense. You wouldn't be you if you were suddenly a quadriplegic.
I think the question is asking which is the more honest answer; whether you believe that "I" means the brain itself and its thought, or yourself as a whole.
Yeah, I definitely interpret "I" as meaning "my brain."
I don't personally identify with my body at all.
I wouldn't say that has anything to do with being right or wrong, anyway; it's a question that is directly about your perceptions and interpretations.
6938
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:12:18 AM »
I realize it, though. The fact that eight year old me was me implies that there's a root-connection. ...Does it, though? Like, necessarily?
You used the word "idea" in your Bowflex analogy, and I think that's a good word to use--if you recognize your "idea" (not even your consciousness--just your... idea--the BROADEST motherfucking way to describe your ever-changing individuality), then... that's sort of what I'm getting at, I guess. Again, I'd simply opt to use the word "me" to describe the "idea" or "concept" of myself instead. It kinda clears up a lot of confusion automatically.
We're getting super abstract now.
Well in relation to the OP, I'd say "I" refers to myself as a person-- not just my capability of awareness on the part of my brain.
6939
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:10:33 AM »
Depends how literally you take it. "I" in a basic sense would be the brain. Everything you see yourself as is exclusive to that organ, along with your consciousness and sentience. But if you take the statement literally, the first option would make more sense. You wouldn't be you if you were suddenly a quadriplegic.
I think the question is asking which is the more honest answer; whether you believe that "I" means the brain itself and its thought, or yourself as a whole.
6940
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:05:25 AM »
More like the latter, but not exactly the same. Even though I've obviously changed physically since I was 8, I was still roughly the same in reference to the average; I was still short, for instance, compared to other 8 year olds.
I wouldn't be a different person overnight but there would be a change initially, starting with doing things that I can now do as a tall person (to refer back, playing basketball).
Okay. Well, that makes a lot more sense.
I just disagree with the semantics of it. I don't like you describe it, because it implies that there is no root of your self. The root of yourself is your consciousness, minus all the environmental crap--that's what I would argue.
You simply don't recognize that at all, and I guess that's all that's left to clear up.
I realize it, though. The fact that eight year old me was me implies that there's a root-connection. But that doesn't mean the bowflex sold today is the same one sold in the late 90s. It's evolved as an idea, and despite the fact that it's rooted in the 90s version, that doesn't mean it's the same piece of equipment. A connection doesn't mean sameness, only similarity.
6941
« on: October 12, 2015, 01:02:22 AM »
Columbus wasn't the first to discover America (in terms of Western civilization, which we usually use as a reference point in the West), but he was the first to discover America and make it back to his civilization to tell everyone about it. Three or four times actually, to be more exact.
In history, Columbus' discovery of the Americas is considered one of the most impactful events of Western Civilization, and the most impactful event of American Civilization. He did a lot of shitty things, but that doesn't change the tremendous nature of his discovery. That's why it's Columbus day, and why it'll stay Columbus day.
6942
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:58:05 AM »
That's my entire rational here; same != similar. If I had a different body, I might be similar, but I wouldn't be the same. Okay, I think I have a grasp of what you're saying now, but I just have a question.
Say you take the body of that basketball player. You wake up, and you are now (among other things) a foot taller, making you more than eligible to join whatever basketball team you want.
Are you saying you'd become a different person immediately?
A gradual transition, like how you don't consider your eight-year-old self "you" anymore?
Is that the same line of thinking?
More like the latter, but not exactly the same. Even though I've obviously changed physically since I was 8, I was still roughly the same in reference to the average; I was still short, for instance, compared to other 8 year olds. I wouldn't be a different person overnight but there would be a change initially, starting with doing things that I can now do as a tall person (to refer back, playing basketball).
6943
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:52:45 AM »
Are we talking about Mamba Rivet? Because if so, that supports my point: nobody considered you to be Verb until you were revealed to be you. You didn't act like Verb, you didn't look like Verb, you denied being Verb.
And until those few with suspicions (which were a result of you not making the experiment start more naturally and just jumping straight into coup) were confirmed, Mamba Rivet wasn't Verb. Even then, that only half works; you were still you (in terms of your thoughts and processes), you were just more selective in which ones you showed. I'm not talking about just posting more bitchily, I'm talking permenent brain-damage, personality change different.
What I was getting at was more that none of us are omniscient. If you were, you would have been able to discern me right away from whoever I was trying to be. It's only because we're over the Internet that it becomes so easy to be somebody else--but pretending to be Roseanne Barr does not make you Roseanne Barr. I know you're not trying to say that, but I mean, I could totally use your logic to imply that I could.
If I was omniscient, and I knew everything about someone else's life, and I had the means and ability to pose as them, could I become them? Is that all it takes?
Or, in reality, am I still just Jacob Potila, and one of my personality traits is that I like to pretend to be other people?
No, because ultimately, you don't look like Roseanne Barr. My analogy was that new account = different appearance, posting-style/topics = personality. You can change one, not both, and still be the same in a way; I just also hols that looking different also entails a different thought process. It's not exactly a topic I think about a lot, so my thoughts and views on it are admittedly a bit scatterbrained. But in terms of the OP, I still believe that I'm a sum of my parts. I am me in that I refer to my whole person as myself and not just one organ.
6944
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:51:03 AM »
Are you really going to base the entire difference between us, the entire uniqueness of your existence, on the fact that you're having a conversation with someone who holds a different opinion? going up a level in abstraction, people talking to other people is not unique at all, everyone who can do so, does. Now while the specifics change from place to place and from time to time, the very nature of it all is just the same thing happening again and again. Think of it like molecules of water, regardless of whether or not it's in a cloud or a frozen comet or a pig's liver, it's always just two hydrogen's bonded to and oxygen. As long as you're a human, you're not terribly different from me or anyone else, and the differences that do exist are mostly superfluous.
The key part of your description is "not terribly different"; that implies that there is a difference regardless of the size. People can act so similar that, just over text, it would be hard to distinguish them. Hatd, but possible, that is. If you add in the physical element, that completely changes the situation; you could tell two people who act a lot alike by simply seeing that they aren't the same person. "You" are the combination of memorable traits, whether they be physical or not. A combination, not one or the other. That's why we aren't the same person. Even if we looked exactly the same, there are discrepancies in our personalities that can be seen in common situations such as this debate. If we had the same personality, we'd still be different people; we don't look the same. That's my entire rational here; same != similar. If I had a different body, I might be similar, but I wouldn't be the same.
6945
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:42:40 AM »
I went back and clarified that; "me" is a Gestalt of physical and personality traits. You can change one and be the same person, but not both.
But when you phrase it like that, it brings up other thoughts. I wouldn't say that I am the same as 8 year old me; I wouldn't be expected to act like, or necessarily look like, my eight year old self. 8 year old me was me at one point, but not anymore. That's a really troubling mentality, not gonna lie. I don't look at a photo of myself from years past and say, "That used to be me." No, it is me--just younger. Dumber.
It's difficult to grasp right now because... buried within all this personal crap, like my vocabulary, and my mannerisms, and all that other shit that I consider my own, there is a tree trunk to which all those branches and leaves are attached. You know what I'm saying? That tree trunk is you.
What you're telling me is that there is no trunk. There's just a big pile of leaves, right?
A full grown tree might resemble a sapling, in some ways that carried through its life but I wouldn't say they sway the same, or honestly look that much alike. I think that example is more an issue of language influencing thought, though; the word "was" implies something in the past, but nothing about now and the future. It's not progressive; what's past is past, it isn't current. If I spoke a language that used tense differently, maybe that wouldn't even have been a consideration. Regardless, that wasn't me explaining my thoughts; just musing on something that popped up as I was responding.
6946
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:38:13 AM »
If I became a total bitch right now and subsequently was banned from every forum ever, I'd still be [whatever username I'm using]; If I turned into a total bitch and used a different account (in the sense that you wouldn't be able to look at my profile/posting style and say "Oh, that's Prime"), I wouldn't be viewed the same. I would be NotPrime. Ehhhhhhh. This example doesn't really work, and you know exactly why.
Are we talking about Mamba Rivet? Because if so, that supports my point: nobody considered you to be Verb until you were revealed to be you. You didn't act like Verb, you didn't look like Verb, you denied being Verb. And until those few with suspicions (which were a result of you not making the experiment start more naturally and just jumping straight into coup) were confirmed, Mamba Rivet wasn't Verb. Even then, that only half works; you were still you (in terms of your thoughts and processes), you were just more selective in which ones you showed. I'm not talking about just posting more bitchily, I'm talking permenent brain-damage, personality change different.
6947
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:33:58 AM »
While it's nice to theorize there's absolutely no way to know for sure whether or not you would be the same person if you found yourself in a different body without actually transferring yourself to a different body.
I could quite easily claim that everyone who swaps over to a different body acquires the personality of a professional snooker player, but I have nothing to back that up.
Nobody is saying that you'd suddenly know how to play the flute and walk on your hands; you just wouldn't have the same perceptions ad you previously did, thereby irrevocably changing your outlook and, to that end, personality.
I'm aware of that, what I was getting at is that this discussion is kind of like discussing what happens if you mix hypothetical chemical A with hypothetical chemical B without anyone involved in the discussion even being a chemist. Nobody has a clue about the workings of things that don't exist, and swapping bodies is one of those things.
โโ--
Though while I'm at it, If we consider a human who is a blank slate (you can imagine this to be another potential incarnation of yourself), for the purposes of their survival there are certain behaviors that are quite beneficial , such as not eating your own shit or rolling around in it, so regardless of who you are, or what time period you live in, there are certain aspects of your personality that never change, because they aren't unique to anyone.
Now adapting to the culture you live in is just as important for survival, so any blank slate that lives in an English speaking country would be expected to learn English - this applies for any language - if we go further we'd expect this person to align themselves with the cultural trends of the time, and acquire any skills that the society of the time deems necessary (which is why everyone learns how to drive but not how to plow fields). The only case in which this blank slate would differ from the society it finds itself in is if that were significantly more beneficial than assimilating, which is probably rare.
So tl;dr while we can't answer the question in any meaningful way, you and everyone else probably wouldn't be too different in a different body because everyone tends to be pretty similar to everyone else anyway.
Genetically we're all very similar as well; that doesn't mean we all look the same, or are the same person. We are differentiated by our memorable features, whether they be physical or not. You'd still be Cadenza if you changed one, but not both. That's why I say that you're more than just a brain.
But to what extent would I or you or anyone else be different? there's more than 7 billion people alive right now yet I don't honestly believe that there is anywhere near that many unique personalities, or unique circumstances. Sure there's going to be plenty of superficial differences like preferences and relationships, but on a fundamental level there just isn't that much difference between one living thing trying to survive and another one trying to do the exact same thing.
The fact that we can sit here and discuss this-- from opposite sides-- fundamentally proves that different perceptions give way to different thought. We are not the same person, physically or emotionally. Just because we have the potential to be similar does not mean that we are the same. Really, I can boil that down to similar != same.
6948
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:31:29 AM »
Given that it's a hypothetical, I'd feel sage in assuming that he might also suffer a good amount of self-esteem issues afterwards. He might have to downsize his estate, find different work if too much money is tied up in other things; he would find different passions to fill the time previously spent playing and practicing.
He would still look like him; but the person post-accident is not the same person pre-accident. He participates in different activities and has a different perspective of his life/life in general due to his change in circumstance.
We'd be a a failure as a species if we didn't change to new events, for better or worse; having an entirely different body is a huge change. Your perception would not be the same. So not only would you look different, you'd act differently. I can't say with complete honesty whether it'd be a .1% change or a 100% change, but you wouldn't be the same regardless.
And to point it out, I'm not concerned with "staying me"; I just don't think having a different body would still qualify me as the same person.
So you would say that we're basically a different person practically day by day--no, every millisecond of our lives, because we're constantly intaking new information that could potentially change our beliefs or perspectives. Every single day, we wake up as a new person. Is that right?
I still think that's silly, but whatever, at least it's consistent. You're not wrong--I just wouldn't at all phrase it like that.
To you, "me" is shorthand for the gestalt of everything that makes you up, mentally and physically.
I just prefer "me" to remain meaning "me". I don't like adding shit in for the sake of it.
I went back and clarified that; "me" is a Gestalt of physical and personality traits. You can change one and be the same person, but not both. But when you phrase it like that, it brings up other thoughts. I wouldn't say that I am the same as 8 year old me; I wouldn't be expected to act like, or necessarily look like, my eight year old self. 8 year old me was me at one point, but not anymore.
6949
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:24:34 AM »
While it's nice to theorize there's absolutely no way to know for sure whether or not you would be the same person if you found yourself in a different body without actually transferring yourself to a different body.
I could quite easily claim that everyone who swaps over to a different body acquires the personality of a professional snooker player, but I have nothing to back that up.
Nobody is saying that you'd suddenly know how to play the flute and walk on your hands; you just wouldn't have the same perceptions ad you previously did, thereby irrevocably changing your outlook and, to that end, personality.
I'm aware of that, what I was getting at is that this discussion is kind of like discussing what happens if you mix hypothetical chemical A with hypothetical chemical B without anyone involved in the discussion even being a chemist. Nobody has a clue about the workings of things that don't exist, and swapping bodies is one of those things.
โโ--
Though while I'm at it, If we consider a human who is a blank slate (you can imagine this to be another potential incarnation of yourself), for the purposes of their survival there are certain behaviors that are quite beneficial , such as not eating your own shit or rolling around in it, so regardless of who you are, or what time period you live in, there are certain aspects of your personality that never change, because they aren't unique to anyone.
Now adapting to the culture you live in is just as important for survival, so any blank slate that lives in an English speaking country would be expected to learn English - this applies for any language - if we go further we'd expect this person to align themselves with the cultural trends of the time, and acquire any skills that the society of the time deems necessary (which is why everyone learns how to drive but not how to plow fields). The only case in which this blank slate would differ from the society it finds itself in is if that were significantly more beneficial than assimilating, which is probably rare.
So tl;dr while we can't answer the question in any meaningful way, you and everyone else probably wouldn't be too different in a different body because everyone tends to be pretty similar to everyone else anyway.
Genetically we're all very similar as well; that doesn't mean we all look the same, or are the same person. We are differentiated by our memorable features, whether they be physical or not. You'd still be Cadenza if you changed one, but not both. That's why I say that you're more than just a brain.
6950
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:20:42 AM »
From being a foot taller and given time, I've gone from someone curious about Basketball to someone who plays basketball and follows it, along with having a new/different set of friends. I would speak differently, and about different things. Tall me is not short me. Sorry, I... don't quite follow. Let's say your favorite athlete breaks something during a game, and unfortunately, as a result, he'll never play again. He'll be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
Is he a different person now? Because of that (colossal) change? I don't think so.
Given that it's a hypothetical, I'd feel sage in assuming that he might also suffer a good amount of self-esteem issues afterwards. He might have to downsize his estate, find different work if too much money is tied up in other things; he would find different passions to fill the time previously spent playing and practicing. He would still look like him; but the person post-accident is not the same person pre-accident. He participates in different activities and has a different perspective of his life/life in general due to his change in circumstance. We'd be a a failure as a species if we didn't change to new events, for better or worse; having an entirely different body is a huge change. Your perception would not be the same. So not only would you look different, you'd act differently. I can't say with complete honesty whether it'd be a .1% change or a 100% change, but you wouldn't be the same regardless. And to point it out, I'm not concerned with "staying me"; I just don't think having a different body would still qualify me as the same person because I'd both physically and emotionally different from the previous incarnation. If I became a total bitch right now and subsequently was banned from every forum ever, I'd still be [whatever username I'm using]; If I turned into a total bitch and used a different account (in the sense that you wouldn't be able to look at my profile/posting style and say "Oh, that's Prime"), I wouldn't be viewed the same. I would be NotPrime.
6951
« on: October 12, 2015, 12:05:12 AM »
I'm not arguing that my initial thoughts would change, my brain is still my brain afterall; but after the shock wore off, I'd be changed mentally as well. That's what happens when your body changes with just a n alteration of body image; I don't think it's crazy to say it'd be much more drastic with a completely new body.
I would exist, but I wouldn't be me anymore. That's the point I'm making.
You wouldn't have the thing you identify with the very most anymore. I won't deny that, but I think that's all you can say.
I'd say that this back and forth is more about defining the term "me"; I'd say it's a combination of physical traits and personality. From what I gather, you'd say it's the extent of a brain capable of processing information.
I would just one word--consciousness. Your consciousness comprises... you, and nothing else.
You've had your body for almost twenty years, so you're understandably attached to it. I'm quite attached to mine as well. Would I be comfortable switching? No. Would I lose my identity, my thoughts, my opinions, my beliefs, my interests, and everything else that makes me me? No, absolutely not.
And if I did, then clearly, something went wrong--we didn't do the experiment right.
You're trying to say, I think, that the experiment would invariably go wrong, and I have a problem with that.
I am curious about basketball; but alas I'm short, and so that remains curiousity. If I were a foot taller, I'd be playing basketball. If I were more involved in the sport, I would have more/different friends. Given these friends also like basketball, there's a good chance they watch professional basketball. I watch basketball games with my friends, and eventually start following it on my own. Along with a new outlet comes new terms and phrases, meaning a change in vocabulary. From being a foot taller and given time, I've gone from someone curious about Basketball to someone who plays basketball and follows it, along with having a new/different set of friends. I would speak differently, and about different things. Tall me is not short me. I am because of my brain, but I'm me because of my body and my brain.
6952
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:53:32 PM »
I'm not arguing that my initial thoughts would change, my brain is still my brain afterall; but after the shock wore off, I'd be changed mentally as well. That's what happens when your body changes with just a n alteration of body image; I don't think it's crazy to say it'd be much more drastic with a completely new body.
I would exist, but I wouldn't be me anymore. That's the point I'm making.
You wouldn't have the thing you identify with the very most anymore. I won't deny that, but I think that's all you can say.
I'd say that this back and forth is more about defining the term "me"; I'd say it's a combination of physical traits and personality. From what I gather, you'd say it's the extent of a brain capable of processing information.
6953
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:51:26 PM »
While it's nice to theorize there's absolutely no way to know for sure whether or not you would be the same person if you found yourself in a different body without actually transferring yourself to a different body.
I could quite easily claim that everyone who swaps over to a different body acquires the personality of a professional snooker player, but I have nothing to back that up.
Nobody is saying that you'd suddenly know how to play the flute and walk on your hands; you just wouldn't have the same perceptions ad you previously did, thereby irrevocably changing your outlook and, to that end, personality.
6954
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:49:42 PM »
I don't agree that our bodies are part of us. Our bodies are nothing. You could have a different body, and you'd still be the same person. You could have no body, and you'd still be the same person.
You aren't a different person if you wear a different shirt.
If I had a different body, I'd be taller or shorter; fatter or skinnier (initially); my hands would change, my feet would change, a lot of things would change. These things make a difference psychologically, as in what your body is like (or your perception of it, at least) influences things like your self-esteem and thereby your lifestyle habits.
I would not be me if I had a different body, it's a simple as that.
You would have a reaction on your new body, certainly.
I fail to see how that isn't your own reaction, and not some new individual's.
Do you become a different person every time your brain chemistry changes as a result of all stimuli?
If not, why should a change in body be any different?
I'm not arguing that my initial thoughts would change, my brain is still my brain afterall; but after the shock wore off, I'd be changed mentally as well. That's what happens when your body changes with just a n alteration of body image; I don't think it's crazy to say it'd be much more drastic with a completely new body. I would exist, but I wouldn't be me anymore. That's the point I'm making.
6955
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:40:18 PM »
I don't agree that our bodies are part of us. Our bodies are nothing. You could have a different body, and you'd still be the same person. You could have no body, and you'd still be the same person.
You aren't a different person if you wear a different shirt.
If I had a different body, I'd be taller or shorter; fatter or skinnier (initially); my hands would change, my feet would change, a lot of things would change. These things make a difference psychologically, as in what your body is like (or your perception of it, at least) influences things like your self-esteem and thereby your lifestyle habits. I would not be me if I had a different body, it's a simple as that.
6956
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:26:31 PM »
While this would be a confirmation of my beliefs, he doesn't have much of a case. The most damning thing here, I think, is that he didn't bring this up until now despite the fact that the termination was a month and more than a few pieces of paperwork ago.
I believe first pieces of the case were started a month ago. It's just now going public.
From the article in the OP: The military service reprisal accusation is the only one mentioned in his Sept. 11 dispute notice to the panel. This means he put in a dispute a month ago at the latest; this accusation is more recent.
6957
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:22:31 PM »
While this would be a confirmation of my beliefs, he doesn't have much of a case. The most damning thing here, I think, is that he didn't bring this up until now despite the fact that the termination was a month and more than a few pieces of paperwork ago.
6958
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:19:38 PM »
So wtf is this?
A husk?
Oh and "I have a brain" seems more true imo.... as we are organisms and our bodu itself is a major extension of our personality.
It would be interesting to see what a human brain would do without a body. If it could even perceive the concept of a reality......
If we could somehow interpret what it was "reasoning" it would probably be pretty primal/alien.
There have been babies born with only the brain stem formed. Full body paralysis, no thought, had to be force-fed and frequently stretched so the limbs didn't atrophy. The latest one lived to be 4, iirc.
6959
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:17:50 PM »
I do understand the point in the second option, but I think that my being is a sum of my points. I would not be the same person if I didn't have legs: I couldn't have my job, I couldn't longboard, I couldn't do a lot of shit. I don't say that my legs are my life though, because they are but one part lf what makes me, "me".
I wouldn't "be" without my brain, but I wouldn't be "me" without any major organ or extremity; so if we're talking about what is "me", it's my person and personality in full.
6960
« on: October 11, 2015, 11:12:51 PM »
I'll get it a couple of months after release. A patch or two to fix the biggest problems should be out by then.
Pages: 1 ... 230231232 233234 ... 352
|
Show Posts