Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

urbigenous.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 148 posts

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#91

Post by HenryBemis »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #80
mhaberl wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia states that you are not correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct#In_humans

Wikipedia is wrong. Feelings aren't instinct. (Feeling disgusted or sexually aroused or aggressive isn't an instinct.) Instincts, by definition, are complex behavior. (Think birds building nests; nobody teaches them to do that, they are born with that knowledge.)

Sexual arousal is part of the procreation mechanism, and thus I (not a psychologist) will classify it as instinct. I can think of many different feelings as instinct. When I see my gf crying, I don't 'think' to hug her, I instinctively hug her. When your friend walks two steps ahead of you and falls down, you don't stop to think and feel, you instinctively grab them.

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#93

Post by glitchc »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #43

For me, the most powerful passage in this one is; """ The authentic human being is one of us who instinctively knows what he should not do, and, in addition, he will balk at doing it. He will refuse to do it, even if this brings down dread consequences to him and to those whom he loves. This, to me, is the ultimately heroic trait of ordinary people; they say no to the tyrant and they calmly take the consequences of t…

The "authentic human" sounds like the No True Scotman's Fallacy. One person's authentic may not match another's, yet both are equally authentic. As a case in point, consider vegetarians. Are those who eat animals somehow "inauthentic", even if they agree on every other aspect with other authentic individuals?

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#94

Post by winter_blue »

pixl97 wrote: post #81
nonrandomstring wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately history has taught us... the prevailing plenty of people will happily do that which they instinctively know they should not do ... if there is money or authority involved. The authentic human escapes this, for s/he does not care one jot what the "plenty" think, feel or do. Not out of callousness, indifference or individual narcissism/solipsism, or even because authenticity exists despite and outside o…

Would it be impolite to ask if you consider yourself one of these authentic humans? At least to me the entire sentiment seems to fall into 'no true Scotsman' territory under any individual scrutiny. If we take someone's life apart and look at the individual pieces you'll find authentic and inauthentic moments everywhere.

> At least to me the entire sentiment seems to fall into 'no true Scotsman' territory under any individual scrutiny. If we take someone's life apart and look at the individual pieces you'll find authentic and inauthentic moments everywhere.

The Christian theological view[0] is that no human is perfect (or good), and it is essentially impossible to be perfectly good, but God still wants us to try to be as perfect as we can humanly can.

The most relevant verses on the idea that we are not good is likely Romans chapter 3, starting from verse 9:

What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. As it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God.

All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

“Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit.” “The poison of vipers is on their lips.” “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know.”

“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

-- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+3&versio... (starting at v. 9)

The call to be perfect:

Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. -- Jesus, in Matthew 5:48

Our inauthentic self is forgiven via Christ's sacrifice, which permits us to partake of the new life/creation promised. On the New Creation, see Revelation 21.

[0] For disclosure: yes, I'm a believer.

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#95

Post by magicalhippo »

NickM wrote: post #84

I wonder how many of the people commenting on this essay read all the way through. It starts out quite lucid and makes some seemingly insightful points, but as the essay goes on he starts to descend into some strange metaphysical ideas about time not being real and reality being a retelling of parts of the Bible. I’m not familiar with much of PKD’s works or his life story, but I honestly can’t tell if he had mental h…

> I’m not familiar with much of PKD’s works or his life story, but I honestly can’t tell if he had mental health problems

Oh he almost certainly had mental health problems. He experienced hallucinations and delusions[1], including an intelligent pink beam of light. He wrote about some of these in an autobiographical way in VALIS[2].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_K._Dick#Paranormal_expe...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valis_(novel)

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#96

Post by moffkalast »

robertlagrant wrote: post #75
moffkalast wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is probably one of the most heavily chemically driven attractions I would say, even. There is a very high evolutionary demand for stopping people from abandoning their screaming, smelling, sleep depriving child.

If you're including neurochemistry, then doesn't that mean everything is reality according to the OP'd definition?

Well uh.. yeah that's an excellent point. I suppose it would make everything real since otherwise it wouldn't exist at all.

If we make the hard distinction with subjective experiences vs. objective observations, then I suppose love isn't real. But there are still people and animals doing actions that objectively count as love regardless of their subjective experience of it. I suppose it again depends on the definition. Like, if you had a bunch of robots programmed to act with deep affection towards each other, does that qualify? I'm not sure.

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#97

Post by digging »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #29
nonethewiser wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not to get too confrontational but why? The point of reading text by a talented author is to read his/her words in the way they wrote it. Or, you want the information. If so, compressed is better.

> you want the information There is no information. A piece like this by P.K Dick cannot be tokenised and reduced to a minimal takeaway wrap sans the experience . It was written to be read. Sometimes you just have to jump into the rabbit hole and enjoy the fall.

> It was written to be read.

Artists aren't infallible; their intentions don't have to be held sacred. There is nothing wrong with someone not caring for a particular piece of PKD's writing or any of it for that matter.

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#98

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #50
nonrandomstring wrote: post #43

For me, the most powerful passage in this one is; """ The authentic human being is one of us who instinctively knows what he should not do, and, in addition, he will balk at doing it. He will refuse to do it, even if this brings down dread consequences to him and to those whom he loves. This, to me, is the ultimately heroic trait of ordinary people; they say no to the tyrant and they calmly take the consequences of t…

It's the mirror image to "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.". Unfortunately history has taught us that P.K. Dick's view is rarely the prevailing one and that even if plenty of people are exactly like that too many of them are not and they will happily do that which they instinctively know they should not do. Especially if there is money or authority involved.

[deleted]

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#99

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

jacquesm wrote: post #77
nonrandomstring wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately history has taught us... the prevailing plenty of people will happily do that which they instinctively know they should not do ... if there is money or authority involved. The authentic human escapes this, for s/he does not care one jot what the "plenty" think, feel or do. Not out of callousness, indifference or individual narcissism/solipsism, or even because authenticity exists despite and outside o…

My point is: 'authentic humans' are in short supply, we have the real ones instead and that's what we should deal with. How theoretically authentic humans behave in books of SF authors isn't going to make a huge difference if in the real world such role models are few and far between especially if we count on their numbers to make up the difference between their individual powers and those wielded by your average rul…

authentic humans, as defined here, are real, they're just few and far between.

Re: How to build a universe that doesn’t fall apart two days later (1978)

#100

Post by breuleux »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #43

For me, the most powerful passage in this one is; """ The authentic human being is one of us who instinctively knows what he should not do, and, in addition, he will balk at doing it. He will refuse to do it, even if this brings down dread consequences to him and to those whom he loves. This, to me, is the ultimately heroic trait of ordinary people; they say no to the tyrant and they calmly take the consequences of t…

The great organizing Moloch is really just natural selection, when you think about it. It doesn't particularly care about life or happiness, but at the same time life wouldn't exist without it. I wouldn't say it is afraid of anything, even metaphorically, because it is the very process by which anything prevails over anything else. We only call this process Moloch because we have trouble accepting its amorality.
Post reply on HN