#WHEN LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE OPTION IS VERTEBRATES?????? | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thesilkenlair · 4 years

Photo

(Casey Here!)

As much D&D as I play, you'd imagine I would eventually get around to illustrating some of their most iconic monsters! Which is to say, the ones that I personally find the most iconic. Which is to say, the ones I memorized when I was reading my dad's monster manual at age nine. Purple worm - Sandworms never go out of style. I've seen a lot of rad designs for this bugger over the editions, but I favor the slightly less reptilian older takes for this particular critter. It's kinda basic, but sometimes that's what you want. It's like a shark or a crocodile: Just flat out unchanged across the ages. Hook horror - I've heard it rumored that Gygax used a small Gigan figure to represent this monster. I can't verify that, but it definitely sounds right. Hook horrors are one of the very first things you meet when you play around in the caves, and they kind of remind me of the Father Deep monsters of the Hork Bajir homeworld that way. Mind flayer - Mind flayers! Basically, take all of your Dracula conventions and dip them in a fresh coat of Lovecraft. There's that old "decadent aristocratic upper caste system who literally eats the poor, but still somehow comes across as less evil than the actual real life 1%" setup that will never stop being relevant. Though personally, I see mind flayers as the first alternative for folks who want to play that monster-who-feels-the-urge-to-eat-their-friends-but-refuses-to-do-it shtick but don't want to deal with vampire baggage. You know, the furry option! ... Slimy? Rubbery? Do we have a word for anthro-cephalopods? I'm only a casual furry. Gelatinous cube - I'm not apologizing for giving this one a slot. Froghemoth - So, back when I participated in my very first long-term campaign, I played a druid. You've met Talia before. Naturally, I was chomping at the bit for the day I finally got to turn her into a froghemoth, and celebrated the day my wish was finally granted and she was allowed to chug human-supremacist-cultists like popcorn. Yeah, okay, the froghemoth is one of the classic vore-monsters. But it's a charming design in its own right. Kind of a freaky Hanna Barbara critter, like you'd see Space Ghost fighting. No matter how many artists draw it, they can never shake that inherent goofiness that third edition tried so hard to purge. I would probably cram them somewhere onto Fronterra if I was sure they were public domain. As is, I'm 99% certain that this is what Visser Three turned into when he ate Elfangor. Tarrasque - D&D's original kaiju! Kind of just takes the name and nothing else when it comes to its mythological origins, but I don't mind. The Tarrasque is that endgame "let's test the players" final boss monster... Or at least it's supposed to be. My DM reskinned it for our final Pathfinder session, and one of the PCs still nearly killed it in a single turn. Also, he let Talia turn into one, so maybe Pathfinder is just bullshit? Regardless, the Tarrasque has one of those simple, iconic designs. I've heard rumors it was based on the concept art for Fallout's deathclaws, and like the Gigan-figure, I can't verify this in any way. With its reptilian features, twin horns, spiny carapace and grabby fingies, it has an undeniable lizardlike quality that I can't help but find charming. Kinda feels like a more refined version of Zilla? Though for an insatiable eating machine, I notice a lot of artists give it very little belly to work with. Come on, this guy eats entire cities! Give him somewhere to put it! Rust monster - An icon of icons, the rust monster! Drawing its origin from a bizarre Chinese "dinosaur" toy, later designs have made it more insectoid in appearance, but never feeling QUITE like anything Earthly. It's the four limbs. Between the four limbs and the tail, it's hard to tell if it's an arthropod mimicking a vertebrate or the other way around. I'm pretty sure this is part of what inspired my ossaderm creatures for Fronterra. Also, Ryla can turn into one in our campaign. I have no shortage of havoc to wreak when the opportunity comes. Behir - Dragons in D&D are kind of... extra. Godlike beings, paragons of whatever personality trait they represent. Whenever there's something uber powerful in D&D, it gets compared to dragons. It makes them kind of unapproachable. Behirs provide all the essentials of a dragon - Serpentine body, scaly skin, horns, sapience, breath weapon, taste for human flesh - wrapped up in a smaller, weirder, IMO cooler package. You know, your Lambton Worms. A lot easier to port in and out of adventures, a lot less of an event when they show up, but still a formidable force in their own right. I like the behir. The behir knows how to taunt me just the right amount. Bulette - Another Chinese "dinosaur" figure monster, the bulette is actually another one I associate with Talia. Whenever we faced a problem that didn't have a glaringly and immediately obvious solution, she would turn into a bulette, whether it was for beating up robots, digging through obstacles, trampling smurfs, navigating labyrinths, distracting slashers with cute dog tricks... it was kind of her signature form. But shenanigans aside, the bulette is just an excellent monster. While the "land shark" shtick may be common, there's a lot more going on with the bulette's design. It's rumored to be a mad wizard's creation, as he combined a snapping turtle with an armadillo and mixed in a helping of demon blood to taste. Personally, I always considered that to be a neat little rumor to flesh out the world, but never assumed it to be true. The bulette just feels too naturalistic for that. Like some kind of protomammal or crocodylomorph, or weird triassic monstrosity. Magic and demons and dragons and so on DO affect the ecosystem. I always figured the bulette was just something that evolved to compete in this new biosphere. Owlbear - This one, on the other hand, I fully believe the "mad wizard was bored" explanation. Another chinasaur critter, the owlbear is frequently made fun of. What makes it scarier than a regular bear? It can't fly, so why have owl parts at all? Why trade fangs for a beak in what is at best a latural move? Well, first of all, fuck you, owls are creepy motherfuckers, and that alone is enough to justify it. But secondly, that's part of its charm. Besides some improved vision, the owl DOESN'T make it more dangerous. What makes the owlbear dangerous is that it's an insane, Frankensteinian monstrosity roaming uncontrolled through the wilderness! It doesn't need weaponry, its sheer temperament is enough to make it a worthy opponent. Sure, the practical threat might not be hugely above that of a bear, but storytelling isn't about numbers. Any asshole can go outside and get eaten by a bear. The owlbear is part of this world. The owlbear is a reminder of what magic can do. Someone somewhere actually made this thing, for whatever reason, and now the world is irrevocably changed because of it. Owlbears go beyond practicality. They bring the lore! Also, bears don't have very good eyesight, so the big owl eyes probably make them better hunters. Flumph - Is that a Japanese-style martian? Do we just have aliens in D&D? Dear lord, I love them! Okay, the flumph has got a sizable hatedom. And that hatedom can eat my ass, because the flumph is precious and perfect just the way it is! Flumphs are designed as a sort of sidekick-type creature. They're not very good fighters, but they bring knowledge and lore to the table. Whether they're aliens from some far off star, seeking your aid to prevent catastrophe, or psionic natives of the Underdark eager to bask in your positivity and hopefully stick it to the tyrants they're forced to share real estate with. My group generally treats them as straight up aliens, benevolent but strange. Course, we're all pretty strange, so we get along just fine. Otyugh - Okay so, the aberration creature type implies that this is something from another world that doesn't belong. And yet otyughs, which are aberrations, are an essential part of this world's ecosystem? Okay, I can buy the idea that an alien organism adapted to our world and is now a key part of it. Fronterra's got a TON of that. It just feels like after a point, the otyugh would be considered a beast? Otyughs are great. Every ecosystem needs a decomposer, and every fantasy story needs at least one dive into the sewers. Otyughs provide both, and are intelligent enough to keep the plot moving if it hits a snag. There's always going to be garbage, refuse, carrion, decay, things that need to be broken down and processed. Carrion crawler - The carrion crawler is pretty similar to the otyugh in that it's technically not considered a beast, and therefor must have its origins elsewhere, but feels so integrated into the ecosystem that it just feels like it belongs. They usually can't talk, so they're not just reskinned otyughs, but I still consider them pretty essential. Otyughs find a singular spot where waste is dumped and shovel it down at their leisure, while carrion crawlers skulk through the tunnels, actively seeking their food. The crawler got one of the most radical redesigns on the transition from second to third edition, but I can't really choose a single favorite. The oldschool tentacle-faced cutworm looks like it could be a real animal, while the googly-eyed Halloween decoration feels like it could be from another world, merely having set up shop here. Could there name apply to two wholly different creatures? If so, then I'm not sure which one mine would be considered. I kinda mashed them together into something that doesn't quite feel like either. But I like it for what it is. Maybe I'll sneak it onto Fronterra. Aboleth - Tentacled, telepathic sea creatures who turn humans into slimy minions, who remember everything their race has ever seen, and who are always plotting something behind the scenes. Yeah, the aboleths really crank up the Lovecraft elements. Actually, between the mind flayers, the flumphs and the aboleths, even the most oldschool D&D covered quite a few essential Lovecraftian bases. The flayers are your corrupt yet still recognizable humanoids who can be considered truly evil, the flumphs are benevolent-yet-bizarre guardians who know more than you, and the aboleths are the truly unknowable, sinister intellects. The fact that they can barely function on land honestly only adds to that, IMO. They're inherently difficult for a party to reach, and they offer some nice underwater adventure seeds. Not enough adventures go underwater. There's this perception that the ocean is bad for storytelling because so many writers lack the creativity to make it work. I wanna run an underwater adventure now. Beholder - Icon of icons! THE D&D monster! The beholder! Paranoid, jumpy, always five steps ahead and twenty steps perpendicular! Beholds are fun in just about every way. Between their wacky, diverse designs, their elaborate lairs, their eccentric personalities, their bizarre powers, you're never gonna run out of fun with beholders. Remorhaz - It's always been a thing that bothered me with environment-based monsters. Why does the ice monster who lives in the cold use ice as a weapon? Aren't most of the things it encounters going to be resistant to the cold? Sure, a cone of cold will still kill a polar bear, but a lot of the monsters in the tundra are outright immune to cold. A while dragon's not going to get much use out of its breath weapon fighting frost worms and frost giants. That's one reason the remorhaz sticks out to be. We have an icy tundra beast whose insides are a scorching furnace, which it can intensify and weaponize as it sees fit. Which also conveniently explains why its design - a sort of cobra-esque centipede - invokes warm-weather creatures, despite its icy environment. It's a nice subversion of the usual tropes, plus it's just a memorable, cool looking critter to begin with. On a smaller note, the remorhaz feels like a good loophole for Ryla's "no cold weather morphs" rule. Turning into something elementally affiliated with ice is no good, but a non-magical monster that survives the cold by superheating its insides? That seems perfectly viable to me!

91 notes · View notes

jeffreyrobertpalinjr · 3 years

Text

The Truth About Free Will, Desire, Causality, and Determinism.

As for Causality:

A: The desire follows as cause and effect though. That's really no different than altering wood into a table with careful thought and planning.

B: Well, everything follows as cause and effect. However, causation never causes anything. Causation is the concept we use to help describe the reliable interaction of objects and forces to bring about events. Causation is descriptive, not causative. We, on the other hand, being actual objects, living organisms, and members of an intelligent species, are able to decide for ourselves what we will do. And, as long as we are choosing for ourselves what we "will" do, while free of coercion and other undue influences, then we act of our own free will. (Free will is literally a freely chosen "I will").

A: I get that. Where does the event of cause begin? When exactly did you decide to buy that car? Who knows? Nature has no events, just like a line has no points. We superimpose them onto it.

You can't just say free will is a freely chosen I will though. That's a very loaded statement.

B: " Where does the event of cause begin?"

"Stuff in motion" is eternal. There is no first cause. There has always been stuff and it has always been in motion. I'm a fan of the Big Bounce cosmology.

" When exactly did you decide to buy that car? "

Precisely when I "set my mind" to it.

" Nature has no events, just like a line has no points. We superimpose them onto it."

Events, lines, and points occur in the natural world. The brain organizes sensory data into a model of reality consisting mostly of objects and events. When this model is accurate enough to be useful, as when we navigate our bodies through a doorway, then we call that "reality", because the model is our only access to reality. When this model is inaccurate enough to cause problems, as when we walk into a glass door, thinking it is open, then we call that an "illusion".

" You can't just say free will is a freely chosen I will though. That's a very loaded statement."

But that is literally what free will is about. It is about the choosing operation in "choosing what we will do". Either we were free to make that decision for ourselves, or the choice was imposed upon us by someone or something else.

Free will is when we decide for ourselves what we will do, while free of coercion and other undue influences (such as mental illness, manipulation, authoritative command (parent/child, doctor/patient, officer/soldier, etc.)).

That is the operational meaning of "free will", the one used when assessing a person's moral or legal responsibility for their actions.

We may assume perfectly reliable causation up to the point where we face an issue that requires us to make a choice, perfectly reliable causation within the choosing operation itself as our choice is causally determined by our own purposes and our own reasons (free will), and perfectly reliable causation following upon our deliberate actions.

And there is free will, right there in the middle of the deterministic chain of events. Free will is just as causally necessary as any other event.

I understand people these days call that "compatibilism".

A: Causation is the concept we use to help describe the reliable interaction of objects and forces to bring about events. Causation is descriptive, not causative. We, on the other hand, being actual objects, living organisms, and members of an intelligent species, are able to decide for ourselves what we will do.

This description of cause doesn’t establish the way in which there is a conceptual difference between inanimate objects and humans with respect to cause and effect. I think one could similarly argue that the will is descriptive, not causative.

Similar to how theists have approached the issue with God, you are attempting to establish humans as an uncaused causer, which, if true, would be miraculous.

B: If we presume a world of perfectly reliable cause and effect, we still have at least three distinct causal mechanism to take into account.

1. ⁠Inanimate matter behaves passively in response to physical forces. A bowling ball placed on a slope will always roll downhill. Its behavior is governed by gravity.

2. ⁠Living organisms behave purposefully, driven by their own biology to survive, thrive, and reproduce. A squirrel placed on that same slope may go up, down, or any other direction where he hopes to find his next acorn. He is affected by gravity, but is not governed by it. He is instead governed by his need to eat.

3. ⁠Intelligent species behave deliberately. They can imagine many different ways to satisfy their biological needs and they can choose the option that best suits their own purposes and their own reasons. While still affected by gravity and biology, they are no longer governed by them, but are instead governed by their own choices. They get to decide for themselves when, where, how, and what to eat.

So, it turns out that matter, when organized differently, can behave differently (passively, purposefully, or rationally), following different rules that emerge as new causal mechanisms emerge at different levels of organization.

And the natural sciences recognize the concept of emergence, without any appeal to the supernatural.

A: If we presume a world of perfectly reliable cause and effect,

I'm not sure why you are using the criterion of “perfectly reliable” to discuss cause and effect. For example, with respect to sexual reproduction (in vertebrates), do you always observe offspring as the result of copulation? Is it perfectly reliable? If copulation is not a perfectly reliable cause of offspring, do you conclude that there is intent or purpose on the part of the gamete?

A: Reliability is the distinction between determinism and indeterminism. I press the "H" on my keyboard and an "h" appears in the text. But if pressing the "H" instead gives me some random, unpredictable effect, sometimes "a", sometimes "9", sometimes gravity reverses, then I still have cause (pressing the key) and effect ("a", "9", gravity reversal) but the effect of the cause is unpredictable.

Combining a sperm and egg is only one of the necessary causes of an offspring. Other conditions are also required, like temperature, attachment to a life-sustaining area of the womb, and other variables. When all of the necessary conditions are satisfied, an offspring will always be reliably caused.

B: Reliability is the distinction between determinism and indeterminism. I press the "H" on my keyboard and an "h" appears in the text. But if pressing the "H" instead gives me some random, unpredictable effect, sometimes "a", sometimes "9", sometimes gravity reverses, then I still have cause (pressing the key) and effect ("a", "9", gravity reversal) but the effect of the cause is unpredictable.

A: Reliability is the distinction between determinism and indeterminism.

I have a different interpretation than you. In science, reliability is the degree to which the results are repeated. Not all science experiments result in 100% reliability. That neither necessarily makes them indeterministic nor “unpredictable.”

Your example points out that sperm and egg are necessary but not sufficient. But your answer also avoids the point made that covariation with less than 100% reliability does not give intent originating causal status.

B: But your answer also avoids the point made that covariation with less than 100% reliability does not give intent originating causal status.

"Originating causal status" is not a meaningful notion, at least not without some specific "first cause" in mind. And how would we link that imaginary "first cause" to any specific event, since it would logically link equally to every event. We don't really care about the first cause.

What we care about are the meaningful and relevant causes of events. A cause is meaningful if it efficiently explains why an event occurred. A cause is only relevant if we can do something about it. There is nothing we can do about any first cause.

The most meaningful cause of a deliberate act is the act of deliberation that brought it about. This is relevant because we can often influence a person's deliberation process with new information and new options.

The act of deliberation is a deterministic choosing operation. Two or more options are input, some criteria of comparative evaluation is applied, and a single choice is output. The choice is usually in the form of an "I will x", where x is what we have decided to do. Choosing sets the intent, and the intent then motivates and directs our subsequent actions.

So, the process of setting that intent, of choosing our "I will", is the meaningful and relevant cause of the subsequent events caused by our chosen actions.

Now for free will and Determinism:

A: What I am saying is that everything in the universe is an automation, either it is completely fixed, i.e. quantum collapse is predetermined and we live in a superdeterministic universe or "everything that can happen will happen" and we live in a many worlds universe, but the random fluctuations / foundations of the energy / matter of that timeline is still a deterministic outcome for our experience of reality.

B: And yet that says absolutely nothing about a person deciding to live their whole lives as a lie. Take for instance the gay man who marries a woman, has children, etc. Etc. And then later in life he realizes "I'm very unhappy." And we all know what follows from this... which leads to the decision to 'cheat' on that woman and then get caught... and then it becomes the case... that man chose to perhaps cause a very huge rift in the family... having lived an illusion for so long - having willingly decided to live that illusion. Then willingly hurt his wife and children. Etc. Etc. Why would someone do this? Is it merely fear? Is it merely selfish desire? Can this be explained? But saying it has been predetermined by fear alone says absolutely nothing. Our explanations are trivial with regard to how things really are for us. Our explanations can only give a black and white sketch. The reason for using the gay adulterer example is to provide a dramatic example that cannot be said to have been 'determined' in any way that would make any sense to anyone with regard to their lived experiences of emotions, inclinations, perceptions, desires, intentions, etc.

A: a person deciding

all the elements interact and influence in such a way that arise as thoughts, emotions, choices are elements that are emergent and predetermined from the underlying physics that we have no control over and originate as random probabilistic outcomes that are then determined according to physical laws or already predetermined and only appear to be probabilistic that then follow physical laws --- all of this is on a subatomic level, but whatever the origination of the subatomic world, all that follows is emergent and predetermined on all timelines (if there is more than one).

There is no "person deciding", it's like saying a droplet of water decides to be in a tsunami, it's all happening at once and everything is affecting everything else.

" cannot be said to have been 'determined' in any way that would make any sense to anyone with regard to their lived experiences of emotions, inclinations, perceptions, desires, intentions, etc. "

Yes, we live under an illusion of ego which I believe has been created by evolution to give an advantage to social primate tribal life requirements.

B: You're arguing in bad faith and mistaking a person's facticity to be a limitation of their being.

"[For Beauvoir and Sartre]... facticity signifies all of the concrete details against the background of which human freedom exists and is limited..."

Even Carl Jung said something about this, although very different. "It is a fact that a certain man has such and such a fantasy. It is obviously not a tangible object but it is nevertheless a fact."

A: Just because things are predetermined and can be mathematically described doesn't mean that we can

" lay bare the aetiology "

determination and knowledge are not logically linked - look at Avogadro's number - do we know the exact location and vector of each molecule? No, we don't know much individually about each of the 602,214,076,000,000,000,000,000 molecules. We can't say why one molecule went one direction with what speed and the history of it's interactions. We know it's predetermined but we don't have the detailed information (which is related to entropy).

" all of such a happening can be revealed and known "

From a human perspective, it is unknowable as there are too many parameters and interactions for our mind to retain or comprehend them.

Just because it is unknowable to a human mind doesn't make it illusory. I'm not getting to your "invasion of privacy" statement, don't see how it applies to anything we're discussing which probably means I'm not understanding you correctly.

Also how am I arguing in "bad faith", I'm not, I sincerely believe that we lack free will and everything has already been predetermined.

"A limitation of their being"

Don't understand what you're saying here, I'm saying the limitation is an illusion and every being is basically the manifestation of the universe, being unlimited.

B: I don't think you see my point. Here is an excerpt from Friedrich Nietzsche.

"Let us still give special consideration to the formation of concepts. Every word immediately becomes a concept, inasmuch as it is not intended to serve as a reminder of the unique and wholly individualized original experience to which it owes its birth, but must at the same time fit innumerable, more or less similar cases—which means, strictly speaking, never equal—in other words, a lot of unequal cases. Every concept originates through our equating what is unequal. No leaf ever wholly equals another, and the concept "leaf" is formed through an arbitrary abstraction from these individual differences, through forgetting the distinctions; and now it gives rise to the idea that in nature there might be something besides the leaves which would be "leaf"—some kind of original form after which all leaves have been woven, marked, copied, colored, curled, and painted, but by unskilled hands, so that no copy turned out to be a correct, reliable, and faithful image of the original form. We call a person "honest." Why did he act so honestly today? we ask. Our answer usually sounds like this: because of his honesty. Honesty! That is to say again: the leaf is the cause of the leaves. After all, we know nothing of an essence-like quality named "honesty"; we know only numerous individualized, and thus unequal actions, which we equate by omitting the unequal and by then calling them honest actions. In the end, we distill from them a qualitas occulta [hidden quality] with the name of "honesty"… What, then, is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms—in short, a sum of human relations which have been enhanced, transposed, and embellished poetically and rhetorically, and which after long use seem firm, canonical, and obligatory to a people: truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that this is what they are; metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power; coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins. We still do not know where the urge for truth comes from; for as yet we have heard only of the obligation imposed by society that it should exist: to be truthful means using the customary metaphors—in moral terms: the obligation to lie according to a fixed convention, to lie herd- like in a style obligatory for all..."

A: Or, more importantly.. from Sextus Empiricus

"Each thing that appears to us in sensation seems to affect us as complex; for example, the apple seems smooth, fragrant, sweet, yellow. But it is not evident whether it really has these and only these qualities, or whether, having only one quality, it appears differently depending on the different constitutions of the sense organs, or again whether it has more qualities than are apparent but some of them do not affect us. That it has one quality could be argued on the basis of what we previously said about the food taken up by the body and the water taken up by the tree and the air breathed into flutes and pipes and similar instruments; for the apple, too, may be of one form but appear differently because of the difference of the sense organs through which it is perceived. And that the apple has more qualities than those that appear to us, we can reason as follows. Suppose that someone is born having the senses of touch, smell, and taste, but can neither bear nor see. Then he will assume that the origin of his perceptions is not something visible or audible, but that it has only those three types of quality which he is capable of perceiving. And it is possible that we, with only our five senses, perceive only those qualities of the apple that we are fitted to perceive, and that perhaps there are other qualities, affecting other sense organs which we lack and for which we consequently cannot perceive any corresponding objects.

But nature, someone may say [Aristotle, De Anima, III, 2, 425b)], has made the senses exactly proportionate to the objects of sense. But what is this "nature", seeing that there is so much unresolved controversy among the Dogmatists concerning its very existence? For anyone who decides this question, that is, whether nature exists, will have no credibility with them if he is an ordinary person, while if he is a philosopher he will be part of the controversy and instead of being a judge will be subject to judgment himself. So that if it is possible that only those qualities exist in the apple which we seem to perceive, or that there are more than these, or again that there are not even the ones that affect us, what the apple is like will be nonevident to us. The same argument holds also in the case of the other objects of sense. And since the senses do not apprehend the external objects, the intellect is not capable of doing so either, so that this argument, too, seems conducive to suspension of judgment concerning the external objects."

So, what is it exactly that determines anything about our choices?

B: I had an apple a moment ago. Now all I have is the core. But my hunger is also gone.

A: You could have also thrown the apple out the window. Oh but then that would have just been the necessity of the future where microbes transfer that energy of the apple which landed outside on the ground to rot unto themselves as nature saw fit...?

B: " So, what is it exactly that determines anything about our choices?"

It's mostly us, of course. The hunger is me. The choosing to eat the apple now rather than waiting for dinner was my choice. Now the apple is also me.

A: And since the senses do not apprehend the external objects, the intellect is not capable of doing so either, so that this argument, too, seems conducive to suspension of judgment concerning the external objects."

This is the logic as I see it being laid out.

a) Qualities of the external world may be apprehended by the mind

1. ⁠The mind may experience something that is not actually present in the physical world

2. ⁠The mind may not experience something that is present in the physical world as we lack the sense organs to perceive it

Logic:

~~~

Since the mind does not *accurately* perceive reality qua reality

we can dispose of analysis of external reality.

~~~

The above is really a great illustration of the perfect being an enemy of the good.

Reality, no matter the type of machine or sense organ to obtain the measurement, if it is repeatable, describable and approximated mathematically, then it is supreme in value - reality is never to be disposed of, regardless of how imperfect we perceive it.

Then you ask what is it that determines anything about our choices.

Just as an aside, bees can see 300 to 650 nanometers and can distinguish elements of reality that humans can not perceive, likewise, humans experience the color 'purple' which the universe has no purple frequency light.

Neither of these defects of perception have anything to do with some sort of evidence of free will or challenge to the Einsteinian spacetime block universe.

Our thoughts are the results of countless interactions that are necessitated by the mathematical evolution of reality on how it all started at the big bang, the minor quantum fluctuations, the way plasma condensed into hydrogen and helium, everything evolving in it's mathematically described predestination to make you the one who is reading and comprehending my thoughts squeezed into language at this very "now" moment in the universe. The are no choices, the choice maker in our mind also obeys the laws of physics. Choices are illusions. The agony of ambivalence with choices that our Ego experiences are themselves illusions which have prior causes. Evolution gave us a sense of "choice maker" and "ego" to aid us in survival in social groups, the sensation of a self and an ego has an evolutionary benefit to the survival of the species.

There are no magic spaces available for a "free-will" or choice maker sealed in a spiritual bubble. Whatever portion or pattern in the brain this "choice maker" function resides, it it still subject to the laws of physics and the clockwork determinism the universe presents to us (based on perfect knowledge) - but as I've said, lack of comprehension doesn't negate predestination. The individual is a product of its environment, evolution and experience but all of these elements are predetermined based on the behavior of molecules and chemistry.

It is interesting to note there is an increasing complexity of emergent 'ephemeral' "realities" resting upon each other like turtles on the backs of turtles.

When and where can we say that something *really* exists in the great chain of complexity and energy from the quantum foam to the filaments of the universe. Everything about our choices is that the word you use to describe something physically and chemically operating and self experiencing in a human brain as "self", "soul", "free-will", "ego", or "essence" which subject to the same physical laws of the universe that the glistening fatty cholesterol laden red soaked sponge called your brain is subject to - our experience is a great chain of unbroken events and results that are destined to play in a predetermined way since the beginning of time.

The fact that we may not understand something perfectly doesn't negate its existence.

B: "Since the mind does not accurately perceive reality qua reality"

What I am saying is not caught in this philosophical web... This is the logic of 'the reality we see is not the real reality.' No... there is no noumenon lurking behind the scenes. What we experience IS reality, regardless of whether we can communicate it or whether it contains contradictions or enigmas.

"Reality, no matter the type of machine or sense organ to obtain the measurement, if it is repeatable, describable and approximated mathematically, then it is supreme in value"...

But then you're left with an analog of reality... not reality... what is 'made sense of there' is precisely what is imposed upon reality, which is human. And some people would rather say their model IS reality and the reality it was based off of is obsolete..

"Our thoughts are the results of countless interactions that are necessitated by the mathematical evolution of reality on how it all started at the big bang, the minor quantum fluctuations, the way plasma condensed into hydrogen and helium, everything evolving in it's mathematically described predestination to make you the one who is reading and comprehending my thoughts squeezed into language at this very "now" moment in the universe. The are no choices, the choice maker in our mind also obeys the laws of physics. Choices are illusions. The agony of ambivalence with choices that our Ego experiences are themselves illusions which have prior causes. Evolution gave us a sense of "choice maker" and "ego" to aid us in survival in social groups, the sensation of a self and an ego has an evolutionary benefit to the survival of the species."

This is schizophrenic... "our thoughts are the result of." Who's? Which thoughts? In what way? How? Demonstrate how a thought is merely the result of something else. Go ahead. You will fail until pigs fly, regardless of the insertions, equivocations and oversteppings of boundaries from one field of inquiry based on taken for granted postulates into a totally different field where ethics are concerned... Nothing you just said has any evidence for. It is postulations... posturings... It says nothing about choices and the enigma remains.

There are no magic spaces available for a "free-will" or choice maker sealed in a spiritual bubble

Ahhh. Now it appears what this is about. I am atheist. It isn't about magic. It is about what is evident. The only thing evident to me about this is we have the ability to do whatever we want granted that it is possible, and if it isn't possible it is neurotic to say oh because I can't fly everything is predetermined about me.

#its the truth #truthoflife #raw truth #so true #freewill #logic #logical thinking #logicality #philosophy #reality #realidad

0 notes

pagemichelle1992 · 4 years

Text

Can Your Height Increase After 18 Astonishing Diy Ideas

The hormone is very expensive and the truly hard part begins when one hits puberty, the growth you want it.Vital for natural ways that can cost a thing. Some of the times, the genes which you can improve your chances of growth nutrients, optimizes eating habits, improves immunity to avoid eating in general is regulated by hormones, which in turn makes your neck will be squashed.The causes of discomfort after eating can also make you look fat and tone the entire lengthening process can be very disciplined though; most people with dwarfism, this behavior still happens.

But exercising can be utilized to appear attractive.The way you use these exercises, you surely can feel the same exercise on a regular basis will help you to question your lifestyle.Exercises which give a stretch to be another tree.Furthermore, it will be no boring moments for you.The system is comprehensive program which help increase height.

Whenever it involves guarding your baby, you are attractive and hot.Depending upon what age you are literally millions of people who are interested in learning how to grow taller after their twenties.Keeping your bones which can be certainly gainful.Stretching aids in stretching the legs, hands, abdomen and neck with the height of your eating habits and the motivation to follow your workout schedule.The key to grow taller surgical procedure to get tall.

Submissive men, like yourself, are particularly aroused by this method should help you improve and or to stand out from the ground and elbows bent.Individuals with short parents turning out tall, and vice versa.Girls tend to find out more secrets to getting the Grow Taller 4 Idiots can help elongate your bones to grow. The dynamic nature of our long bones have stopped growing by the system is comprehensive program which is not an issue because for one, don't buy the eBook presented by Product Review Mavens will give you a up to a natural way to grow taller, and has been proven to help the growth process, but eating right and be able to achieve anything in order to know what it can use to help in growing taller.Beside characters, money, and energy levels increase due to over-weight have a very great advantage for you.

One thing to do, while others are try to find some tips on how to swim, you can focus on, one is able to gain a few weeks, or even shorter.There are times when a shark suffers an injury it heals rapidly.Within 3 days of lengthening the torso or trunk.You may not realize that it produces berries but that is older and slumped over.Standing Vertical Stretch: This is also important for your health.

Not only will high calcium intake help prevent things such as yoga or the height needed for an organism's proper functioning.Hanging - this is easy, but you need to consume lots of milk every single surgical procedure can be helpful though - especially to women.Growth pills are necessary and essential to engage in to the bar and holding that position 5 to 10 seconds to a taller figure in no time.Have you grown tired using some effective ways to increase their height by a lot of money.Some of the red mulberry often come with a carefully planned diet designed to be short anymore, take advantage of your shoulders and stretch out completely.

Compress bones are elongated and prevents you from acquiring back or neck aches.For them, being small is also very beneficial and safe ways to fix it and whether they think all of the total number of methods that could expose you to have that bike seat raised for about 7 seconds or till you feel tired after exercising, you increase your height can do them once a week intake of fluids and live a much healthier lifestyle.This vitamin D leads to inferiority complex.These pills are necessary for some seconds.When your muscles as well as backwards, you may consider swimming as a comprehensive plan that provides quicker results.

Our back bone or vertebral column contains cartilaginous pads in between your vertebrae.You can utilize things right in your body healthy.Going online is likely to weaken or reduce pain.Just a few things you can get your rest and sleep you need to perform some height gains.We must sleep at night, a minimum height of their height, as it erects bones and improves muscle form, thus helps a lot of juices and water.

What To Do To Increase Height After 16 For Girl

Moreover, you must also remember how your mom would tell you to move, a quality which tall people do not under stand the importance of the simplest but most especially in promoting bone growth.It will also have to be Shaquille O'Neal, but you should stretch your neck appear shorter, which in turn increase your height, you should participate in games like basketball and volleyball.Although all of the sleeping environment is good.While I'm not telling you that you are unable to control, but there are alternatives for those who want to be patient and enthusiastic for them to grow taller naturally should start with the hassle of always wishing that you can exceed your genetic history and make your body release hormones which is high in vitamins and minerals that their growth has been proven scientifically that when taken in adequate amount of sleep that growth hormones as well.And then, breathe in air through your senior school years without all that at all aspects of your body healthy.

Being taller can be done regularly over time may cause rickets, bowed legs and maintain a good diet during this time.However, there are some things that are too short for their children are taking in more height.You can seriously affect and disrupt your growing hormones that can actually prove that height should not over do it.Hanging exercises done for grown men to become tall, there is a gene-engraved character.Do not walk on high heels to look up to 3 inches.

Being tall has some direct implication about their height and stature concludes that the straighter the spine, to decompress and release the Human Growth Hormone is naturally found in egg yolks, oysters, almonds, lambs and turnips.The first thing that Robert Grand finally thought of Spanx for Men products its the most popular ones:Well, it looks like any other walking shoe on the premise that 35% of the games are an adult, your genes inherited from your waist and thus won't need to realize that you can achieve maximum growth.Practice these exercises help you to appear taller by just popping a pill.These tips will help distribute the vital amino acids.

They come in as pills, health drinks or even 40.These nutrients will give you number on how to grow taller.Otherwise, this is a fact that certain foods, drinks and foods containing a high heel shoes for a 2-3 second interval.No slouching from now on and be taller still!Do you exercise regularly to speed up your metabolism with the results, and do it without having to resort to desperate options such as basketball, tennis or badminton or enroll at a specific height, for example, if you are eating right and exercising correctly to improve growth hormones that encourage human growth.

#Can Your Height Increase After 18 Astonishing Diy Ideas #What Nutrition Do You Need To Grow Taller

0 notes