0836: "Sickness"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
bmonk
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:14 pm UTC
Location: Schitzoed in the OTT between the 2100s and the late 900s. Hoping for singularity.

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby bmonk » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:32 pm UTC

gangle wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:
gangle wrote:Also I don't know that art is a form of "Answers beyond science". Art can explore issues to be sure, and can be a great source of fulfillment. Art can even lead to a certain level of enlightenment. This being said, on a basic level art does not have the answers.


And does science?

As far as I am aware, science never gave and never will give answers; it only gives us a pretty good and sufficiently accurate explanations on how things work so we can handle them better. If science actually gave the answers, then it would never have to constantly revise itself and correct itself, right? Science tries to point towards the Truth, but it's quite a stretch to act as if science actually was the Truth, and people who go around thinking like that are almost always very misguided.

So if science simply points to the Truth, doesn't art do the same thing? Art gives us a lot of questions, but so does science! Art and science are in continuous dialogue and helping each other out, but they are completely separate things. It's not saying art is beyond science as in being "ahead" of it, but they're not in the same ground, and one cannot cover up the other completely. One can't do what the other does, and dismissing one of them is completely dumb.

Randall is not "dismissing" anything completely here, but he is clearly diminishing. Try to strip off the purple prose of the second panel, and what you get is pretty much him saying "No offence, guys, but you are all idiots".

And his fans hold out the "No offence, guys" part and say See? All you haters are COMPLETELY WRONG!

Science gives us functional truths based on verifiable evidence. Art gives allows us to inform our opinions with various viewpoints. No, science hasn't found absolute truth yet, that's a long quest. Despite this science is in the habit of giving answers, even if they are only part of larger answers, and need to be updated based on new data. Art on the other hand, as healthy as it is for the mind, does not provide answers so much as provide reason for introspection. Gigantic difference.


Science cannot provide "absolute truth", because no scientific theory, no matter how well tested and developed, is ever beyond further testing, especially under new conditions. Newton, et.al., provided a very good explanation and prediction of the planetary movements--except for a little matter of Mercury's perihelion--but get more extreme levels of gravity, acceleration and relative velocity and so on, and it no longer looks so good.

No scientific theory will tell you under what conditions it fails--it just can't. That's why it continues to need examination and testing of predictions.

Hence, "absolute truth" is not part of science, and cannot be part of science. If you want absolute truth, you are not doing science.
Last edited by bmonk on Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:26 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Having become a Wizard on n.p. 2183, the Yellow Piggy retroactively appointed his honorable self a Temporal Wizardly Piggy on n.p.1488, not to be effective until n.p. 2183, thereby avoiding a partial temporal paradox. Since he couldn't afford two philosophical PhDs to rule on the title.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:34 pm UTC

I'm not religious, but this is still the worst thing I've ever read on the internet... and I've archive-binged Joy of Tech.

Aside from awkwardly misquoting Shakespeare and engaging in some of the cheesiest purple prose to ever grace the hallowed halls of the internet, Randall then proceeds to have a words-to-panel ratio that would make Tim Buckley blush in order to deliver the same crappy angry atheist argument that 14 year-olds everywhere adore. I mean, is that your go-to answer if people ask you about religion? Awkwardly worded speeches about how they are teh dumiez? Really? That level of overreaction is best saved for Junior High students who's Livejournals are being trolled. Not to mention it reeks rather heavily of capitalizing on his sick family member.

This comic literally made torrents of blood shoot out of my eyeballs.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:41 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:This comic literally made torrents of blood shoot out of my eyeballs.


I figuratively vomit every time someone says something like this.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:43 pm UTC

Singuhilarity wrote:
Kalos wrote:This comic literally made torrents of blood shoot out of my eyeballs.


I figuratively vomit every time someone says something like this.


I literally vomited while cleaning up the blood all over my computer. The torrents of it. It came from my eyeballs.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:49 pm UTC

I literally roll my eyes when people don't understand how to use words properly.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:51 pm UTC

Singuhilarity wrote:I literally roll my eyes when people don't understand how to use words properly.

I was applying literally to a scenario where the cause and effect I said to literally have happened is completely impossible, I assumed that the over-the-top nature of the events that I claimed to literally happen would be enough to allow you to conclude that I was not being serious. This is a common application of written humor, please try to wrap your pitiful mind around it. If you can't, the internet is clearly not a place you should be.

Vehemence
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Vehemence » Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:58 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:
Singuhilarity wrote:I literally roll my eyes when people don't understand how to use words properly.

I was applying literally to a scenario where the cause and effect I said to literally have happened is completely impossible, I assumed that the over-the-top nature of the events that I claimed to literally happen would be enough to allow you to conclude that I was not being serious. This is a common application of written humor, please try to wrap your pitiful mind around it. If you can't, the internet is clearly not a place you should be.

It's a common application of written humor? No, it's and example of what happens when stupid people say things without thinking because they're imitating something they've heard in the past that other people laughed at, even though they don't understand why it was funny to start with, or that, in all likelihood, it was used correctly originally. Using 'literally' incorrectly has never been a funny 'thing' people do.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:04 pm UTC

Vehemence wrote:It's a common application of written humor? No, it's and example of what happens when stupid people say things without thinking because they're imitating something they've heard in the past that other people laughed at, even though they don't understand why it was funny to start with, or that, in all likelihood, it was used correctly originally. Using 'literally' incorrectly has never been a funny 'thing' people do.

Your nerd rage sustains me.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:09 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:Your nerd rage sustains me.


This is funny. The other stuff you said - not so much.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:15 pm UTC

Singuhilarity wrote:
Kalos wrote:Your nerd rage sustains me.


This is funny. The other stuff you said - not so much.


Yeah, jokes are never funny after you explain them. In fact, it's a common problem bad comedians have in general, especially in the realm of webcomics. They try to immediately explain the joke right afterward so that angry fans don't immediately (and literally) burst into flames from their frustration if they didn't get the joke.

In order to fully illustrate this point, I will now bring attention to the "(and literally)" above and point out that it was simply written to attempt to elicit more of the nerd rage that (only figuratively) sustains me.

User avatar
StNowhere
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:24 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby StNowhere » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm UTC

Your witty banter literally makes me want to punch an infant.


PROVE THAT I'M LYING!

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:27 pm UTC

I'd prefer to believe that you aren't.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:27 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:
Singuhilarity wrote:
Kalos wrote:Your nerd rage sustains me.


This is funny. The other stuff you said - not so much.


Yeah, jokes are never funny after you explain them. In fact, it's a common problem bad comedians have in general, especially in the realm of webcomics. They try to immediately explain the joke right afterward so that angry fans don't immediately (and literally) burst into flames from their frustration if they didn't get the joke.

In order to fully illustrate this point, I will now bring attention to the "(and literally)" above and point out that it was simply written to attempt to elicit more of the nerd rage that (only figuratively) sustains me.


Jokes are also never funny when they're just not particularly funny. It might not have anything to do with whether the person writing the joke thinks the person reading the joke understands it.

For example, overuse of hyperbole - like when someone uses the word literally but really means figuratively - tends to lead to unfunny jokes. It's not that what you're saying might not be amusing to you, but that what you're saying becomes so ridiculous that people just stop listening.

Hyperbole and sarcasm are fun - great fun - but only when used in moderation.

Vehemence
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Vehemence » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:30 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:
Vehemence wrote:It's a common application of written humor? No, it's and example of what happens when stupid people say things without thinking because they're imitating something they've heard in the past that other people laughed at, even though they don't understand why it was funny to start with, or that, in all likelihood, it was used correctly originally. Using 'literally' incorrectly has never been a funny 'thing' people do.

Your nerd rage sustains me.

I'm bored at work waiting for more people to post about magic vs. religion. My tasty Kung Pow prevents my nerd rage-o-meter from filling, as each bite drains the gauge some.

I've just honestly never seen someone use 'literally' incorrectly as a joke. Every single time I've ever seen it, it's been the scenario I described. It's akin to a little kid telling a sex joke.

Mooglefrooglian
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:06 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Mooglefrooglian » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:45 pm UTC

This "comic" is terribly arrogant. There's no joke here, just Randall acting smug.

I agree with the premise. I disagree in general with religion. But the way Randall put it makes me cringe.

Why can't he just keep doing those five minute comic things? They were the funniest things he did in months.

I don't want to be preached about the evils of religion or about how useful science is. I'm well aware of both things already, which is why I am reading xkcd in the first place.

U_E
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:28 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby U_E » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:59 pm UTC

I don't want to be preached about the evils of religion or about how useful science is. I'm well aware of both things already, which is why I am reading xkcd in the first place.


Summed up my thoughts exactly. I don't need to be preached to by some dude that writes comics for a living. I come to this website for entertainment, not terribly-written monologues.

Vehemence
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Vehemence » Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:59 pm UTC

U_E wrote:
I don't want to be preached about the evils of religion or about how useful science is. I'm well aware of both things already, which is why I am reading xkcd in the first place.


Summed up my thoughts exactly. I don't need to be preached to by some dude that writes comics for a living. I come to this website for entertainment, not terribly-written monologues.

He didn't come to you. You came to him.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:14 pm UTC

Vehemence wrote:He didn't come to you. You came to him.


But he came to him for Kung Pao chicken (Kung Pow is a movie, oh he who rages about improper word usage) and got Moo Goo Gai Pan instead. It may be perfectly good Moo Goo Gai Pan (in this case, it's not) but either way, it's not what he ordered.

U_E wrote:Summed up my thoughts exactly. I don't need to be preached to by some dude that writes comics for a living. I come to this website for entertainment, not terribly-written monologues.

Technically he sells t-shirts with words on them that people think are funny for a living.

You're being preached at by the nerd's version of Hot Topic.

Vehemence
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:54 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Vehemence » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:18 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:(Kung Pow is a movie, oh he who rages about improper word usage)

This dish packs enough of a punch to be called Kung Pow.

U_E
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:28 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby U_E » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:22 pm UTC

He didn't come to you. You came to him.


I came to him for some nerdy, fun humor like I usually do. What did I get? Preaching.

Honestly I've been losing a lot of interest in this comic recently. The five minute comics were the only good ones in the past couple months in my opinion. The humor is getting so niche at this point that half the time I don't even understand the joke.

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Kalos » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:24 pm UTC

Vehemence wrote:
Kalos wrote:(Kung Pow is a movie, oh he who rages about improper word usage)

This dish packs enough of a punch to be called Kung Pow.

And people say my jokes are bad.

Singuhilarity wrote:Jokes are also never funny, blah blah blah, etc...


I wrote that as a throwaway line at the end of my post summing up my feelings of this comic. It's not my fault that you've latched onto it in a misguided attempt to shame me with your understanding of the definition of literally. You are literally taking this way too seriously.

gangle
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:18 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby gangle » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:38 pm UTC

bmonk wrote:
gangle wrote:
SirMustapha wrote:
gangle wrote:Also I don't know that art is a form of "Answers beyond science". Art can explore issues to be sure, and can be a great source of fulfillment. Art can even lead to a certain level of enlightenment. This being said, on a basic level art does not have the answers.


And does science?

As far as I am aware, science never gave and never will give answers; it only gives us a pretty good and sufficiently accurate explanations on how things work so we can handle them better. If science actually gave the answers, then it would never have to constantly revise itself and correct itself, right? Science tries to point towards the Truth, but it's quite a stretch to act as if science actually was the Truth, and people who go around thinking like that are almost always very misguided.

So if science simply points to the Truth, doesn't art do the same thing? Art gives us a lot of questions, but so does science! Art and science are in continuous dialogue and helping each other out, but they are completely separate things. It's not saying art is beyond science as in being "ahead" of it, but they're not in the same ground, and one cannot cover up the other completely. One can't do what the other does, and dismissing one of them is completely dumb.

Randall is not "dismissing" anything completely here, but he is clearly diminishing. Try to strip off the purple prose of the second panel, and what you get is pretty much him saying "No offence, guys, but you are all idiots".

And his fans hold out the "No offence, guys" part and say See? All you haters are COMPLETELY WRONG!

Science gives us functional truths based on verifiable evidence. Art gives allows us to inform our opinions with various viewpoints. No, science hasn't found absolute truth yet, that's a long quest. Despite this science is in the habit of giving answers, even if they are only part of larger answers, and need to be updated based on new data. Art on the other hand, as healthy as it is for the mind, does not provide answers so much as provide reason for introspection. Gigantic difference.


Science cannot provide "absolute truth", because no scientific theory, no matter how well tested and developed, is ever beyond further testing, especially under new conditions. Newton, et.al., provided a very good explanation and prediction of the planetary movements--except for a little matter of Mercury's perihelion--but get more extreme levels of gravity, acceleration and relative velocity and so on, and it no longer looks so good.

No scientific theory will tell you under what conditions it fails--it just can't. That's why it continues to need examination and testing of predictions.

Hence, "absolute truth" is not part of science, and cannot be part of science. If you want absolute truth, you are not doing science.

It cannot in the sense that we will never stop questioning, but truth is indeed a goal. I'm not saying absolute truth can be found our lifespan or even the lifespan of our species, but it stands to reason that given an infinite amount of time to test, verify, apply, update, do the whole scientific method thing, eventually a piece of truth could be found that would just be true. We would of course continue to look for ways that it could not be true, and question it eternally.

I made a clear point of saying that absolute truth hadn't been found yet. I said that what science provides us with is functional truths, which is dramatically different. This being said perhaps I should have left that comment out entirely. I was merely trying to point out the difference between the facts provided by science, and the enlightenment provided by art. Whether or not these answers are absolute, science does indeed provide answers. Art, as I said, provides an opportunity for introspection.

Once again, even all this still fails to explain why art would ever be considered to be beyond science. As I've said it's all quite dissectable. You can understand art through scientific method just fine.

silverkitty
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 7:00 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby silverkitty » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:40 pm UTC

MrCode wrote: but personally I feel that if everything is really predetermined, then it pretty much renders life meaningless. :( Seriously, I don't see how the determinists here can put up with it...


I can't speak for everyone, and I doubt I can assuage your personal feelings, but I know I "put up with it" by dealing with the world at a higher level of abstraction than the predetermined parts. Analogy: a computer operates with perfect digital determinism, but can contain data like like "2+2=5" and Jabberwocky in its memory - so I deal with the things in memory, and don't worry that the mechanism encoding those things may well be deterministic.

Then again, I'm also comfortable with the statement that "life is meaningless - except for the meaning we humans ascribe to it." Which is a philosophical belief, not something derivable from (or even addressable by) science. It's one I personally hold and I know many people disagree with it, and that's fine with me, too. I only mention it now because you expressed doubt that I could put up with it :)

----

Pyrite wrote:
silverkitty wrote:You are not allowed to be on the internet and think "I disagree" is different from "you're an idiot". It's demonstrable from every internet forum in existence that the two are synonymous. See also: American Politics.


So you then think that all of us who disagree with you are idiots, and we must then think that you are an idiot, as you disagree with us? There's no possibility of any kind of useful conversation or communication? May we all then just as well be talking to ourselves, as we'll never ever manage to make anyone else see us as anything but "someone I agree with" or "an idiot"?. What then, may I ask, is the point of any of your posts?


Whatever my point is, you missed it :)

I thought I went over the top enough to make my sarcasm apparent without explanation.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:42 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:I wrote that as a throwaway line at the end of my post summing up my feelings of this comic. It's not my fault that you've latched onto it in a misguided attempt to shame me with your understanding of the definition of literally.


I can assure you, I have no interest in shaming you. I don't know you personally and don't give two shits about you. However, I do hold the misguided belief that if I correct enough people on the internet, then eventually I won't encounter so many annoying and unfunny grammar errors anymore.

You are literally taking this way too seriously.


Quite possibly. I turn off my sarcasm detector when I'm online because I get too many false positives.

User avatar
StNowhere
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:24 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby StNowhere » Tue Dec 21, 2010 8:50 pm UTC

Singuhilarity wrote:However, I do hold the misguided belief that if I correct enough people on the internet, then eventually I won't encounter so many annoying and unfunny grammar errors anymore.


I sympathize - truly, I do - but "misguided" is something of an understatement. You'll be better satisfied if you just give up like I did and start punching infants.

User avatar
Blackjack
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:42 am UTC
Location: Connecticut

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Blackjack » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:35 pm UTC

SirMustapha wrote:P.S.: to some people who are really butthurt


You're right. There is a lot of butthurt in this thread.

It seems to mostly be coming from you.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:39 pm UTC

Singuhilarity wrote:I turn off my sarcasm detector when I'm online because I get too many false positives.
This is literally the stupidest thing I've read all day, and I've read some doozies...
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
MathGirl
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:31 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby MathGirl » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:40 pm UTC

Mooglefrooglian wrote:This "comic" is terribly arrogant. There's no joke here, just Randall acting smug.



How is he being smug? Not every comic has to make you lol, that certainly hasn't been the case in the history of this site. I imagine this is a reaction to something that has actually been said to him since his recent family illness.

And what an absurd question it is, to ask someone if tragedy has made them turn to the supernatural for answers beyond comfort. It's like asking if you've considered finger painting your cancer away. I appreciate a comic that smartly points out that absurdity.

I'm also surprised at all the people focusing on the word "bitches". Y'all know it's just a saying, right? It's a social tag, bitches!

Ignorancia Selectiva
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:03 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Ignorancia Selectiva » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:47 pm UTC

First time posting.Created a user just to give my opinion about this.
( I cant belive i actually read most of the comments here posted...)

1) THIS is the best of the best ,the creator of this site has outdone himself ( something to print and put as a poster in your room, as someone said a few posts ago)

2) Im not sure this is the place to put it, but and just going to say it...

I CANNOT believe some of the things i read. If they are not trolls...i feel sorry for humanity.

You should have a "troll detected button", in witch, if a lot of users agree that the guy is trolling, he gets kick out.

Pd : greetings from argentina.( thats...south america ).Sorry if i made any spellings mistakes and stuff...english is not my native language...bitches :)


off topic : SirMustapha and company, BE HONEST, are you trolling :D ?

Muffinman42
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:33 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Muffinman42 » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:55 pm UTC

Most of the posts in this thread are just people complaining that they came here for humour and got philosophy.
I would like to point out three key facts:
1: this comic is 100% FREE, you got all of your moneys worth for coming here, a deal where you brought 10 tons of gold for £10 is worse value for money.
2: have you considered that if you don't like the comic it could be because the comic isn't what you expected, many of the comics aren't designed to be funny but instead to present an idea (though i have to agree this one is a bit sensitive)
3: the tag line (A webcomic of Romance, Sarcasm, Math, And language.) Has no mention of humour, so don't expect it.

Just take the comics with a pinch of salt and remember that if you don't get the joke it means your less of a Nerd than anyone who got it.

Not trying to be an arse or force opinions or trying to tell you that your wrong, if you read it as that then please don't reply telling me so because I already know that I'm horrible at presenting emotion in text.

Softfoot
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:11 am UTC
Location: Regional South Australia

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Softfoot » Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:16 pm UTC

gangle wrote:
Softfoot wrote:
davidstarlingm wrote:
tgape wrote:
SerialTroll wrote:Just remember that science also says that you are nothing more than a vat of chemicals and that there is no ultimate purpose to your life. Also remember that science says that there is no such thing as free will that your actions are a combination of your environment and your genetic programming.


"God is omniscient." Where's free will in religion, if God knows all details of the entirety of the future? (Calvinists, I'm asking you.)

"Free will is a myth. It is a myth, not because our actions are beyond our control, but because we will do precisely what we desire most. Our desires are what dictate our actions, not some random or arbitrary 'free will'." (Augustine, translated and heavily paraphrased)

Human beings are not strict decision engines, but we do depend on motivation. No one, no matter how free his will is, will ever choose to do something that goes against his strongest motivations.


I know that this discussion has gone a lot further than this already, but if you're going to paraphrase historic religious persons, I'll see your Augustine, and raise you Paul.
"For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing" - or to paraphrase - I desire to do one thing, but I do the opposite of what I desire.

This is explainable by stronger desires. Eg. A man who does things his employer asks him to do that go against his moral code. His desire to maintain a steady income is merely greater than his desire to feel like a good person. When we have contradictory desires the stronger one wins out.

Nice explanation, but you mentioned attending seminary. I assume you are therefore familiar with Paul, and therefore have some picture of his character as reflected by his writings. Your explanation does very well when taken in a modern context, but when you place it in the context of Paul and his apparent motivations as recorded/reported, it doesn't add up. His experience provides strong motivation to 'do good', and his character indicates that he was strong-willed. Yet still he admits that his actions don't match his desires.

Singuhilarity
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Singuhilarity » Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:32 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Singuhilarity wrote:I turn off my sarcasm detector when I'm online because I get too many false positives.
This is literally the stupidest thing I've read all day, and I've read some doozies...


gmalivuk, on the other hand, turns off his irony detector.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5439
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:36 pm UTC

Softfoot wrote:
gangle wrote:This is explainable by stronger desires. Eg. A man who does things his employer asks him to do that go against his moral code. His desire to maintain a steady income is merely greater than his desire to feel like a good person. When we have contradictory desires the stronger one wins out.

Nice explanation, but you mentioned attending seminary. I assume you are therefore familiar with Paul, and therefore have some picture of his character as reflected by his writings. Your explanation does very well when taken in a modern context, but when you place it in the context of Paul and his apparent motivations as recorded/reported, it doesn't add up. His experience provides strong motivation to 'do good', and his character indicates that he was strong-willed. Yet still he admits that his actions don't match his desires.

I recommend you both ready up on Harry Frankfurt's model of second-order desires. In that model you might say that Paul's actions don't match his automatic first-order desires (the desires to act in a certain way), but that is because his second-order desires (desires about the existence and effectiveness of first-order desires) are effective, i.e. his will is strong, and he is thus able to change what his first-order desires are or whether he acts on him. But that change occurs because he has effective second-order desires for his effective first-order desires to be in line with what he considers good. Paul is talking about his first-order desires, and saying that he is able to make them ineffective (so he does not act on them); but that ability just consists in the effectiveness of his second-order desires.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
J L
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:03 am UTC
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby J L » Wed Dec 22, 2010 12:35 am UTC

This is by far one of the creepiest discussions I've read on this board. How can people actually think Randall had any obligation to live up to their personal set of "standards"? Who cares if you hate a comic or not? And as for being unable to *not* read the comic ... http://www.xkcd.com/386/

User avatar
SirMustapha
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:07 pm UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby SirMustapha » Wed Dec 22, 2010 1:51 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I mean, there are religious people who don't hate this comic; what's your point?


My point is that many people here are taking for granted that the "haters" are religious. Look at what has been said to me:

I honestly believe that God doesn't exist. any claim otherwise is offensive to me. What gives you the right to say my world view is wrong?


Since when did I say I believe in God, for fuck's sake? People are so BLINDED by Randall's dick"genius" that they just overlook some very, very basic points. Geez.

My favorite part is how SirMustapha assumes that no one who agrees with the comic knows the feelings of religious people.


Nope; I'm saying that Randall doesn't. My point is that Randall is a dumbass; it's not my fault if many fans are willing to blindly swallow any crap he puts out, as if he were some sort of "scientific deity".

How is he being smug?


...

... either you've read too little or too much xkcd.

Dictator
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 1:28 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Dictator » Wed Dec 22, 2010 1:52 am UTC

Kain wrote:
quadmaster wrote:My guess is that now that it's break, a bunch more people decided to catch it at midnight, and we crashed his server 8)


This sounds reasonable, and also falsifiable.

Anyways, GooMHR! I was just reading a bit of Hitchens, saw that it was midnight, realized it was Monday, and navigated here. Heh.


My first thought was of Hitchens too. I don't see too many people talking about this angle. I wonder how much of this comic is personal experience and how much is Hitchens.

Anywho...

J L wrote:This is by far one of the creepiest discussions I've read on this board. How can people actually think Randall had any obligation to live up to their personal set of "standards"?


I second this. There are a few people all "butthurt" about this in all the wrong ways. I think it is perfectly fine to discuss the issues contained in the comic, but I think it is unacceptable to attack Randall for the topic or position he brings forth on HIS comic on HIS website. It seems rude to attack Randall as he provides you something free of charge that you chose to indulge in.

User avatar
Patteroast
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Setebos
Contact:

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby Patteroast » Wed Dec 22, 2010 3:03 am UTC

gangle wrote:Just because of this am I supposed to expect every dude I encounter to value God the same way I do? Should I feel my belief system has been devalued every time someone points out that any help I've received on this earth is from people, and God's place in the process was speculative at best? Don't be ridiculous. Believe it or not, there are other belief systems that contradict mine. It's the same as getting pissed off every time a jewish person claims that Jesus was not the son of God, nor is he our personal savior.

Honestly, our culture is too religion oriented to begin with. You can say any number of things, and if it's part of the system of beliefs of the religion to subscribe to, then you're safe. Want to say something innocuous that's part of your own belief system, but contradicts the beliefs of an organized religion? Well too bad. Because your beliefs weren't fed to you by a man in ceremonial garb it's invalid. Sweet shit man, have you checked the year? We've come too far for this. I refuse to treat athiesm, agnosticism, or just differing beliefs from what I practice as somehow offensive. I don't know why you do.


Honestly, this got more of a reaction out of me than the comic. I'm a rather fervently anti-religious atheist, and right now I want to give you a huge high five. If more people had that attitude towards differences in beliefs (among other things!), the world would be a much better place. People get too hung up on being offended nowadays. Pretty much just wanted to say, thank you, this post was one of those little things that reminds me that there really are some nice, sane people out there with whom I can politely disagree with on certain points but still respect. :D

As for the comic itself... yeah, it's nothing innovative or even particularly subtle. It's not really funny. It's simply the thoughts of some guy who scribbles stick figures and posts them on the internet. It personally brought a smile to my face, and a little warm feeling that someone else felt the same way as I did about some things, despite the fact that it usually isn't strictly in-line with the attitude shown in the culture around me.

Does that mean that the only reason I liked it is because he was preaching to the converted? Well... yeah, I can't really deny that. But there's plenty of comics he does about some specific geeky thing that I've never even heard of that leave me cold. I don't expect high art out of the guy... I just keep checking back because I've found plenty here that left a positive impression. When he posts a comic that does nothing for me, I go 'meh' and go do something else. I'm a bit disappointed, but I don't feel like I'm entitled to a steady stream of awesome.

Anyway. Just wanted to make my own comment.

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7572
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby phlip » Wed Dec 22, 2010 3:18 am UTC

Mooglefrooglian wrote:I don't want to be preached about the evils of religion

Well maybe you should avoid things that preach about the evils of religion, and read something else instead. I'd recommend xkcd, since it doesn't do that.

Unless... wait, are you seeing preaching about the evils of religion in place of the xkcd strip? That's very odd... maybe your DNS cache has been poisoned or something, and you're in some kind of man-in-the-middle attack... the real xkcd.com is at 72.26.203.99, if you're being redirected elsewhere, maybe you should make a post in the Help Desk forum so we can figure out what's up with that...

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

User avatar
_infina_
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:55 pm UTC
Location: R'lyeh

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby _infina_ » Wed Dec 22, 2010 3:44 am UTC

Ignorancia Selectiva wrote:You should have a "troll detected button", in witch, if a lot of users agree that the guy is trolling, he gets kick out.

my take on trolls is to foe them and ignore whatever they say.
Ignorancia Selectiva wrote:SirMustapha and company, BE HONEST, are you trolling

I am quite sure this is what he is, and as such, have foe'd him. He just keeps coming back with something else bad to say about each comic whenever he is out of the limelight. It is much worse than spam.

also, another great comic by Randall.
Spoiler:
keozen wrote:It took us exactly 3 pages to turn a discussion of a loved children's book series into smut...
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Only if your friends know what rhino dong smells like.

Malo mbwa mwitu

udrf
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:55 am UTC

Re: 0836: "Sickness"

Postby udrf » Wed Dec 22, 2010 4:02 am UTC

I'm religious and I love this comic, and pretty much every other comic Randall has made.

I haven't read through the comments so I'm probably repeating what others have said. For many religious people science is an integral part of their life and vice versa for scientific people. It's possible to believe in a higher being and a higher purpose and still have both of your feet on the ground.

For those interested here is an article by a physicist about his faith:
http://www.commongroundgroup.net/viewpoints/towards-the-unity-of-science-and-religion-a-personal-journey/


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: speising and 105 guests