Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Imagine if you will, a sugar cube...

Recreation of the "Puny God" scene from the Avengers.

Nothing. Bubbles Honor Code will prevent her from disintegrating her.

She lets Faye go to town on her chassis.

"It's a small world aaaaaa-fter all!..."

Tuned into a waffle maker.

Space Ham?

Purple Monkey AI-run Dishwasher!

...Yes, I'm a Patreon subscriber, why do you ask?

[BenRG]

To me, the point of panel 3 is that Creepybot did mess with Bubbles' head. It's just that it was in a good way with a good outcome. Bubbles felt that she had needed a metaphorical slap upside the head for a while now; it just took an emergent grey god to do it for her to get the point! Bubbles just want to believe that this revelation about having friends and how they value her can only be a good thing.

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

No-one is forced to believe anything. Ultimately, we must choose to accept things that cannot be directly sensed and only inferred from its outcomes. However, we can choose not to do so by rejecting the reasoning chain.

[Cheesefondue]

As I said, I like this arc. And to those who didn't like it, would it have made you appreciate it more if you knew it was ultimately building up towards a failure? A Deus ex Machina that didn't work?

[Morituri]

Given the forces involved wouldn't "Splatter" be more appropriate than "Bouncer?"

Only steal from the best, eh?

Darn straight.  Rest Sir Terry's Soul.

I suppose Bubbles could also work to correct Corpse Witch's personality using retrophrenology.

[Tova]

Belief without proof" is a common definition of "faith." But when one is exhorted to "have faith," that isn't an exhortation to believe. It's an exhortation to trust.

And one can choose to trust.

[BenRG]

I've got to say that I'm going to be taking quite some time thinking about the meaning of Bubbles' subtle little smile in panel 4.

[jwhouk]

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice..."

[Thrillho]

Elephant in the room.

It but does get easier. I promise.

Does that not sound horribly un-natural to anyone else?

No. I have said exactly that to people more than once.

[Akima]

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

I don't think you can do anything else.

[Method of Madness]

Elephant in the room.

It but does get easier. I promise.

Does that not sound horribly un-natural to anyone else?

No. I have said exactly that to people more than once.

Pretty sure they were referring to "it but".

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice..."

Probably my least favorite Rush song. You either have free will or you don't, it's not a choice. I could respond to each of the other ones, but I think we have a thread for this stuff. I'll find it later.

[cesium133]

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice..."

I'm now imagining an end to Ghostbusters in which Gozer says that in response to the Ghostbusters' attempt not to choose a form of the Destructor. The Ghostbusters then live the rest of their lives in fear of accidentally making a choice. It could be worse. They could be gods. 

[JWoodrell]

Or a more twisted fate.  CW ends up as a tamagotchi on someones keyring just lying on the counter...  it buzzes and beeps, someone picks it up and says "oohh it looks angry, i wonder if its hungry",  cut to pixelized CW face frowning on the little screen making angry motions

[Gyrre]

Belief without proof" is a common definition of "faith." But when one is exhorted to "have faith," that isn't an exhortation to believe. It's an exhortation to trust.

And one can choose to trust.

In this case, yes very much so.

However, for those made uncomfortable by the word faith, vid.
The video's title refers to a quote Albert Einstein is credited with and his refusal to accept the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

If you don't want to watch the vid, that's fine. Just look into Gödell's Proof.

[Gyrre]

"I choose to have faith" never made sense to me. The idea that you could choose what you believe in.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice..."

But that's literally how faith works. You either believe something or you choose not to.
When you dig down to the deepest, most bare bones aspects of a thing, there's going to be some stuff that you just have to take on faith (these are termed as 'axioms' or 'proofs').
1+1=2 because 1+1=2

faith ≠ religion

Faith is the foundation of religion and the starting point of science.

[Method of Madness]

But that's literally how faith works. You either believe something or you choose not to.

I'd make a small but significant change. You either believe something or you don't. How is not believing in something an active choice? I've never chosen to not believe in something, but there is plenty I don't believe in.

[BenRG]

But that's literally how faith works. You either believe something or you choose not to.

I'd make a small but significant change. You either believe something or you don't. How is not believing in something an active choice? I've never chosen to not believe in something, but there is plenty I don't believe in.

Because you look into something, consider the arguments and say: "No, I choose not to believe this; if there is any evidence in its favour, it is misleading or falsified." Or you could say: "Having looked into this matter, I consider it worthy of belief, even though the evidence is equivocal or only circumstantial as I consider the overall scenario presented more compelling."

Interestingly, the ancient Greek word from where we derive the modern concept of 'faith' is an economic term referring to a promissory note or bill of sale for an item not yet delivered to us. You have paid for this item, although you have not yet taken possession, because you believe that the person making the sale will deliver. You choose to have faith in them.

In some scenarios, a conscious choice of disbelief can be as much a matter of faith as a conscious choice of belief.

[Method of Madness]

That's fascinating. I guess just because it's not a choice for me doesn't mean it's not a choice for others. I envy those people.

[Case]

Belief without proof" is a common definition of "faith." But when one is exhorted to "have faith," that isn't an exhortation to believe. It's an exhortation to trust.

And one can choose to trust.

In this case, yes very much so.

However, for those made uncomfortable by the word faith, vid.

I think there's a much better Einstein-quote that is sadly less famous, despite being far more fundamental to faith and science both:

"Raffiniert ist der Herrgott, aber boshaft ist er nicht"

"Subtle is the Lord, but not malicious" is the most common translation. Einstein clarified to Princton's Prof. Veblen that he meant that "Nature conceals herself by sublimity, not trickery" (*), so a more accurate translation might by:
 
"Subtle is the Lord, but not (maliciously) deceptive" (my translation)

It means that 'God' doesn't flit around the Universe pretending to us that order exists, while the Universe is really chaotic and unordered - which would make the scientific Endeavour futile - this order that science tries to understand (ever more accurately) really does exist.

It's every scientists faith - really in the sense of 'faith' that you mean. The faith that the Universe is ordered, and ordered in a fashion accessible to rational study/enquiry, or 'the scientific method'. You cannot do science without either having that faith ... or engaging in some weird, Orwellian double-think. (More on Gödel (one 'l') and the uncertainty principle later ... there's some stuff that needs having done science to it)

EDIT: Found a beautiful little lecture titled 'Does God play Dice?' by none other than Stephen Hawking himself. No equations, 'just' philosophy.

(*)  Einstein could be described as pantheist, so it's probably accurate to say that for him, there was little difference between "God", "Universe", "Nature" and "Nature's Laws"

[Morituri]

I have occasionally found it worthwhile to place faith in people whom I do not trust.

That is, someone whom I know is end-of-the-rope broke offers me a promise like, "I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

Do I really expect to be paid tuesday?  I figure, maybe, it's about 40% likely.  At best.

Do I really want this guy to go hungry?  Nope.  Will he accept the burger as charity without the self-respect and dignity of intending to pay?  Nope.  So I accept his promise.  I hand him the burger on faith, thinking of it as just plain altruism or being nice to people.

But then on Tuesday he actually comes around and pays, and he remembers a good turn, and when he's employed again and back on his feet, we go out for a pizza together.  A little bit of faith, and suddenly I've made a friend who'll turn around and do the same for me if and when I need help.

[sitnspin]

In those instances, I don't have any faith that I'll be paid back, but I'll give the money anyway. If it makes them feel better to say they will, fine, but I have no expectation of being reimbursed.

[Morituri]

I think you're saying 'faith' when you mean something like 'expectation' or 'belief.'  They're not the same.

Faith means trusting something, being willing to act as though it were true even if it's merely possible.  Belief means thinking it's true.

As my (Unitarian) minister says, 'you can have belief, when you're a child or if you don't think about it very much; but as an adult with knowledge and critical thought, one can only have faith.'

To put it another way, choosing what to believe is a gray area, reserved for those of us who are willing to re-evaluate a question about whether our belief *about* our belief is correct.  I do this sometimes.  I think I believe something but then I notice that I'm feeling or reacting in ways contrary to that belief and seriously evaluate based on this new evidence whether or not I actually believe something else.   This is something that my older brother, and lots of other people, just profoundly doesn't get.  The idea that someone could actually be mistaken *about* their own beliefs rather than just *in* their own beliefs seems impossible to them.

But choosing what to have faith in is much simpler.  That's a question of what principles you want guiding your actions.  If one of your principles is that other people are worthwhile, you'll have faith in them a bit more often than you believe them.

[Kugai]

Sometimes, you have to have faith in something or someone.

[Method of Madness]

What you believe or have faith in could change based on what you observe, but I still don't see how the faith or belief themselves are active choices.

[A small perverse otter]

What you believe or have faith in could change based on what you observe, but I still don't see how the faith or belief themselves are active choices.

I think that this is one of the best examples of 'choosing to have faith'.

Bubbles didn't need to trust them; she could have rejected their offer. In fact, she made it very clear that she knew them to be untrustworthy: "Your price?" She had a choice, and she made that choice in spite of that evidence: she chose to have faith that they were benevolent in this case.

[Carl-E]

As I said, I like this arc. And to those who didn't like it, would it have made you appreciate it more if you knew it was ultimately building up towards a failure? A Deus ex Machina that didn't work?

But it did.  The definition of Deus ex machina is often interpreted as a plot device that resolves an insoluble difficulty, but it doesn't have to be the usual definition of "resolve" as in "complete".  And they don't have to be at the end. 

Our Grey One resolved several issues for Bubbles, and managed, in a week, to move the plot forward a distance that would have taken a year or more without their work. 

If that's not god-like interference from above, I don't know what is! 

[brasca]

As I said, I like this arc. And to those who didn't like it, would it have made you appreciate it more if you knew it was ultimately building up towards a failure? A Deus ex Machina that didn't work?

But it did.  The definition of Deus ex machina is often interpreted as a plot device that resolves an insoluble difficulty, but it doesn't have to be the usual definition of "resolve" as in "complete".  And they don't have to be at the end. 

Our Grey One resolved several issues for Bubbles, and managed, in a week, to move the plot forward a distance that would have taken a year or more without their work. 

If that's not god-like interference from above, I don't know what is!

Normally I would have a problem with deus ex machina resolutions, but in this case it wasn't what I expected.  I really didn't want this problem resolved by either Hannelore's father or mother and their vast resources and it wasn't.  Instead we are introduced to an enigmatic AI who takes it upon themselves to intervene in this one case.  For any other AI this would be far fetched, but Bubbles may be the only one suffering from PTSD.  Perhaps other soldier AIs never had this problem since no one else could help her.  Once they heard about Bubbles predicament they decided to act and while it was ultimately revealed that Bubbles memories were gone the entire time the same outcome would've occurred even if Station succeeded in breaking the encryption.

I know Bubbles likened them to a squid on the aquatic life form food chain, but they put me in mind of one of the First Ones from Babylon 5.  They aren't really gods, but they've evolved to such a level that they're certainly above every other known life form. 

[Is it cold in here?]

Let's revive the DISCUSS thread about whether you can control your beliefs.

Bubbles drew a conclusion from data. Eminence Gris acted in a positive way when there were many other options available to them.

Old joke: a schoolboy is assigned to define "faith" and says "it's believing what you know isn't so".

[Method of Madness]

If that's what faith is, it explains why I've always been incapable. Not unwilling. Incapable.

[shanejayell]

I wonder if we'll ever get a insight into Corpse Witch's motivations? Assuming she has any other than being a smug snake...

[Zebediah]

Power over others, however petty that power may be, is sufficient motivation for a lot of people. The ability to be cruel and arbitrary and get away with it makes them feel important. That's how I've always seen Corpse Witch - a petty tyrant who gets off on cruelty.

[shanejayell]

True, but she seemed sincere in her 'Humans are bad, AI is good' attitude. Tho admittedly that may have been her trying to isolate Bubbles.

[Morituri]

There may be a misfortune in her past that set her upon her criminal career, or damaged her personality to the point where conflict with the established order became inevitable.  That misfortune is likely to involve humans acting in bad faith.  It's not unexpected for her to overgeneralize about humans and reach the conclusion she expressed.

[Kugai]

[osaka]

Is it me or Bubbles is becoming moe at incredible hihg speeds

[Is it cold in here?]

There may be a misfortune in her past that set her upon her criminal career, or damaged her personality to the point where conflict with the established order became inevitable.  That misfortune is likely to involve humans acting in bad faith.  It's not unexpected for her to overgeneralize about humans and reach the conclusion she expressed.

Generalizing from carbon-based female offenders in the real world is a leap, but it's noteworthy that almost all of them wind up behind bars after a chain of events starting with severe abuse.

[Gyrre]

But that's literally how faith works. You either believe something or you choose not to.

I'd make a small but significant change. You either believe something or you don't. How is not believing in something an active choice? I've never chosen to not believe in something, but there is plenty I don't believe in.

An astute and profound question.
That's one of the places psychology and philosophy intersect.
Though, much like an iceberg, most of what's going on in the mind takes place below the surface; in the subconscious.  Faith and belief are largely the result of subconscious choices influenced by one's experiences and background. One of the few conscious choices for faith would be someone choosing to hedge their bets with Pascal's Wadger.

[Method of Madness]

Thank you. Also, Pascal's Wager only makes sense if you absolutely refuse to acknowledge the possibility that there is a god, but it's a completely different one.

[Gyrre]

Thank you. Also, Pascal's Wager only makes sense if you absolutely refuse to acknowledge the possibility that there is a god, but it's a completely different one.

It's been a decade since I took Philosophy 101. But, I seem to recall that part of it possibly coming to have faith and belief by going through the motions.

[Method of Madness]

So basically faith is an acquired taste?

[Gyrre]

So basically faith is an acquired taste?

Hmmm... That could be the case for some folks.

But I'm trying to recall Pascal's specific argument and summarize it after a full decade.

[Kugai]