IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I prefer 'what is likely and possible?'
If I pondered every 'what if?', I'd be considering every superstition, crackpot conspiracy, religious text and urban myth and I don't have a thousand lifetimes. Instead, I automatically filter based on credibility of source, detached style of argument, consideration of opposing evidence and arguments and explanation of how cause generates effect. I'm the kind of person that notices that explosions don't go 'boom' in space. Next, I apply Occam's Razor. Only then, will I wonder about something that is likely and possible.

In this case, the dream prediction fails at 'consideration of opposing evidence and arguments' and 'how cause generates effect'.
Matthew Greet


But we must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig, cow after cow, village after village, army after army. And they call me an assassin. What do you call it when the assassins accuse the assassin? They lie. They lie and we must be merciful to those who lie.
- Colonol Kurtz, Apocalypse Now.
New 'how cause generates effect'
Heh.. the tacit presumption that "causality" is straightforward.

Volumes have been written on that glimmer of an idea - 'causality'. I tend to lump it with, "action at a distance", in ~~ philosophical 'class'.
(Spin of electrons separated at t=0, now an entire "finite but unbounded" cosmos away? Is spin conserved?? and the like.)

I do not think that word causality gets the scrutiny it deserves, in very many "obvious conclusions" we casually toss off (especially of the either/or kind).



But then, if it were all easy -
Maybe even Econ would work (for relaxed meanings of 'work')
     Anyone interested in the predictive power of dreams? - (SignorMonsanto) - (31)
         dreams can be predictive retrospectally - (boxley)
         Count me in as a believer - (bionerd) - (28)
             Think critically about it. - (pwhysall) - (18)
                 I knew someone would bring that up - (bionerd) - (1)
                     ** applause ** - (drewk)
                 Scientists go bump in the night . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                 You seem to be reality challenged - (ben_tilly) - (9)
                     Eh? - (pwhysall)
                     Ah.. a fav Windmill - (Ashton)
                     Bio*GEEK*? - (bionerd) - (6)
                         Re: Bio*GEEK*? - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                             ICLRPD^3 (new thread) - (Steve Lowe)
                         Gah, sorry. I use nerd/geek interchangeably - (ben_tilly) - (3)
                             Not to worry - (bionerd)
                             Couldn't speak for the east... - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                                 And in the UK, neither have particularly +ve connotations. -NT - (pwhysall)
                 Look at Scott's post in the science forum - (bionerd) - (4)
                     The paranormal suffers from lack of explanation - (warmachine) - (1)
                         Lack of explanation is a non-issue - (ben_tilly)
                     OT: To do a Linky - (Another Scott) - (1)
                         Don't forget option 3 - (ben_tilly)
             You may be ignoring negatives - (warmachine) - (8)
                 Sure, any of those could be true - (bionerd) - (7)
                     I prefer 'what is likely and possible?' - (warmachine) - (1)
                         'how cause generates effect' - (Ashton)
                     Another possibility... - (Steven A S) - (4)
                         OT - your picture - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                             Re: OT - your picture - (Steven A S) - (1)
                                 OT - twiddle the gamma. - (static)
                         This is how memory always works - (ben_tilly)
         I guess I'm a believer - (Nightowl)

You tread upon my patience.
152 ms