These are more guidelines than laws.
Also most of them are not particularly fun.
Laws of Fun (2009)
21–30 of 50 posts
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#22I’ve thought about this idea of what would make for a desirable utopia, and I can’t avoid the fact that either you would die at some point (which creates suffering due to the anticipation of the event) or live forever, which actually seems more horrific in a way — how could you possibly not go crazy after living trillions of years and thinking about the next trillion? The only real solution is to alter the human brai…
I'm not sure why it is common wisdom that a very long lifespan is supposed to be horrific. It seems to me like our lifespans inform many issues (e.g. lack of long-term planning on all levels of society, because YOLO, people being constantly afraid to "waste their best years" etc.)
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#23> 2. [...] Again, consider Christian Heaven: singing hymns doesn't sound like loads of endless fun, but you're supposed to enjoy praying, so no one can point this out.
Clearly written by someone who's either never been to church, or goes to a boring one :-)
If you've ever been to a fantastic (rock, jazz, whatever) concert, you know the amazing feeling of being caught up with others in the excitement of a shared musical experience. It's fantastic!
Well, worship can be like this too... you may need to shop around to find an exciting church (and yeah, church is supposed to touch all your senses, not just your intellect, so excitement is OK.)
And a ton of our popular ideas of heaven (walking on clouds in white robes playing lyres) doesn't come at all from the biblical account. Go read Revelation... heaven is going to be a city, the inhabitants will have jobs, etc. The biblical heaven looks interesting to me!
See "Heaven" by Randy Alcorn for other interesting myths busted.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article those draw from is a bit more charitable, though not much more so: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pK4HTxuv6mftHXWC3/prolegomen... As a side note, you can support just about anything you want with scripture, so it's not a great basis for an argument.
Certainly, though I personally draw a pretty large difference between "supported by scripture" and either "I can find a verse that helps me justify my opinion" or "I can find some famous idiot in the Bible who made the same mistake, therefore it's okay".
That's brilliant, thanks.
Also there's things "everyone knows" which are "supported by scripture" that are, in fact, nowhere in the Bible.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#25> 2. [...] Again, consider Christian Heaven: singing hymns doesn't sound like loads of endless fun, but you're supposed to enjoy praying, so no one can point this out. Clearly written by someone who's either never been to church, or goes to a boring one :-) If you've ever been to a fantastic (rock, jazz, whatever) concert, you know the amazing feeling of being caught up with others in the excitement of a shared music…
I heard pastor/theologian John Piper recently say something like (this is my paraphrase): "The only way I can possibly be totally satisfied for an eternity, is in the presence of the infinitely good God." One of the biggest influences on my imagination in this regard has been NT Wright's focus on 'the new heavens and the new earth' - the redemption and bringing together of both - I haven't read Alcorn on this but I imagine there's a shared focus on the Bodily reality of things.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#26> 2. [...] Again, consider Christian Heaven: singing hymns doesn't sound like loads of endless fun, but you're supposed to enjoy praying, so no one can point this out. Clearly written by someone who's either never been to church, or goes to a boring one :-) If you've ever been to a fantastic (rock, jazz, whatever) concert, you know the amazing feeling of being caught up with others in the excitement of a shared music…
I heard pastor/theologian John Piper recently say something like (this is my paraphrase): "The only way I can possibly be totally satisfied for an eternity, is in the presence of the infinitely good God." One of the biggest influences on my imagination in this regard has been NT Wright's focus on 'the new heavens and the new earth' - the redemption and bringing together of both - I haven't read Alcorn on this but I i…
Thanks, I keep hearing about NT Wright, I'll have to look into his stuff.
It's hard to imagine a God bigger (in various non-physical dimensions) than us, and that "making God in our image" just is so limiting.
Notably, Kushner's "Why bad things happen to good people" states as a matter of fact, "If God has a plan, I can understand it." All I can say is, he never took higher math :-)
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#27> 23. In general, tampering with brains, minds, emotions, and personalities is way more fraught on every possible level of ethics and difficulty, than tampering with bodies and environments. Always ask what you can do by messing with the environment before you imagine messing with minds. This makes me think of political ideologies that are more focused on how people should act than on changing the shared environment…
This is itself an artifact of human nature. If you determine how people should act, you can start working towards tribal allegiance and unity.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#28> 15. Trying to compete on a single flat playing field with six billion other humans also creates problems. Our ancestors lived in bands of around 50 people. Today the media is constantly bombarding us with news of exceptionally rich and pretty people as if they lived next door to us; and very few people get a chance to be the best at any specialty. This is why I say social media isn't fun, and it has always been a c…
Well, social media may be fun for those who are the worlds most beautiful and rich
Is it though? I’m really not convinced it’s fun even for wealthy and beautiful people.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#29I’ve thought about this idea of what would make for a desirable utopia, and I can’t avoid the fact that either you would die at some point (which creates suffering due to the anticipation of the event) or live forever, which actually seems more horrific in a way — how could you possibly not go crazy after living trillions of years and thinking about the next trillion? The only real solution is to alter the human brai…
> either you would die at some point (which creates suffering due to the anticipation of the event) or live forever, which actually seems more horrible in a way We know death causes suffering, but we don't know if immortality causes suffering. Don't knock it till you've tried it. #FableOfTheDragonTyrant
I've always thought of that trope in fiction of immortal beings wanting to die as being silly. It seems like a case of the fox considering the grapes to be sour because it couldn't reach them, on the part of writers.
Re: Laws of Fun (2009)
#30I’ve thought about this idea of what would make for a desirable utopia, and I can’t avoid the fact that either you would die at some point (which creates suffering due to the anticipation of the event) or live forever, which actually seems more horrific in a way — how could you possibly not go crazy after living trillions of years and thinking about the next trillion? The only real solution is to alter the human brai…
IMHO "creates suffering due to the anticipation of the event" is not an axiom - if you know that the event won't be unwanted and forced upon you by circumstances or others, but will hapen iff and when you're satisfied with that, then the issue that people generally die does not need to invoke suffering.