Well…I applaud you! (with one hand)
Edit to ponder the unthinkable
Is that anything like wading with one leg?
1 Like
Only if no one hears it, duh.
Is it possible for someone to masturbate too much? Cause I don’t know where the time went. I took a trip to Costco and filled up on half a grands worth of Kleenex. And now I’m totally out and I think I might have broken something. How long was I gone for? And what’s that smell in here? Smells like something died.
1 Like
Come on Ratty, how many strokes does it take to make a volcano, and if you have one stroke less is it not a volcano? No wait! That’s not it. Oh, yeah… How many hairs do you have to lose before too much is too much? And if you replace one hair, does that make it not too much?
1 Like
Is that volcano “active”?
Hmm. Perspective is everything. What is “too much”? Too much time; focus; money?
Surely there is never enough of the product. It’s the investment. How much are you willing to invest in the endeavour before your wife starts to notice something’s wrong in the bedroom - or - god forbid - checks your browsing history?
(I have a wife btw 
)
Oh I think not, one’s perspective can be easily deceived. One should constantly and critically scrutinise one’s own perspective, and measure it against objective reality. if of course one cares what is true, and what not.
1 Like
Oh fuck! Let’s throw out all of science and just rely on perspective. Wait! That makes the Christians right!. (Perspective is everything my monkey butt!)
2 Likes
That’s just your perspective. Now if only we had some methods that helped remove subjective bias from our perspectives, then perspective would not be everything. So methods like science and logic would help us understand when our perspective was deceiving us.
Parenthetically if we use only our perspective we’d have to believe that David Copperfield could literally perform magic.
2 Likes
I think we are limited by our technology and there is actually an event horizon to our knowledge unless we can figure a way to surpass that.
An example would be knowing that our scientific equipment and the like are all comprised of atoms that in turn we can’t really see much past the atomic scale no more than our telescopes can’t see past the limits of precieving a macro world that may or may not be forever out of reach, due to our limitations.
Answering to a seven month old question is kind of old hat, but…yes, there are things we cannot ever know due to pure physical limitations. Like all the digits of Graham’s number. Even if we write one digit in each Planck volume in the known universe, we would not be able to write all the digits. We couldn’t even write the number of digits in Graham’s number. Or the number of digits in the number of digits in Graham’s number:
But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham’s number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus Graham’s number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form a b c ⋅ ⋅ ⋅
.
And there are other numbers representable by mathematics that are massively larger than Graham’s number. Like TREE(3). So there you have it. Physical limitations limit our knowledge.
I find that a bit arbitrary. We arbitrarily define “points” in space. We define “straight lines”. And we define the “connections between points via straight lines.”
But, well. We can’t “know” how fast a magical invisible bunny traverses outer space. Point being that the concept of knowledge breaks down at a certain point where everything becomes hypothetical.
However, I did ask the question. And your answer makes sense. I’ve shifted positions to the point where experiential knowledge kind of exists in a certain domain where, after a general amount of that so called “knowledge” has been obtained, the authenticity of knowing becomes irrelevant.
And that point of breakdown is not the same as everything is nothing hypothetical. You don’t step off the balcony of the 10th-floor apartment for a good fucking reason. There is nothing hypothetical about it. You don’t get to pretend your hypothetical woo woo is the same as physical reality. What you are is a hypocrite. After all, you are only hypothetically using a computer to type to others. You can know nothing. Nothing is real. Your brain may be in a vat bubbling away someplace, and you cannot know.
If you lived your life that way for 10 minutes, you would be dead. You live in a reality that you must accept as real or die. If you are very lucky, someone will catch you before you die and we will lock you away in a rubber room for protection.
And there’s no “knowledge” required on the part of the organism which is necessary to prevent them from doing that. A survival instinct is really all one requires in order to perceive that doing such a thing would entail pain and death. But sure, if you want to cal it knowledge, why not? Learned behaviour sounds more appropriate to me, on the other hand.
I do accept it as real. That has nothing to do with what I consider “knowledge”.
Oh. That’s appropriate, isn’t it? Lock the schizophrenic away in a rubber room? Can I have a free lobotomy which my free accommodations?
I started counting to infinity a few years ago. Not quite there yet, but I think I’m making pretty good progress. (The trick is to count REALLY-REALLY fast.)
Ratty, unless you purchase the Deluxe Package, I’m afraid the lobotomy actually costs extra. On the plus side, though, the comfy white Hug-myself jacket comes standard with the room, along with a rather sporty looking noggin protector. C’mon, be honest, what more could a person on a budget want?
Well, not to butt in or anything, but Frankly (or Earnestly), I would prefer to have this bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy…
Edit (I would like to have a mauve hug-myself jacket if available)
LOL… No one mentions to him that ‘infinity’ is not a number, and he will never get there. It already takes him 30 minutes to cite a single number. I’m betting in 10 years he will be a zombie standing in a corner, and using a full 24-hour day, just to say one number.
Does the room have an electrical outlet? For my mini fridge?
1 Like
Surely, you must be joking.