dimreepr

Not if it's not what you want to believe...

Why do you have faith in these word's? "It's wrong to call a banana a fruit, it's very wrong to claim its a car"...

I'm happy to acknowledge your right to neg my post, but without a reasoned argument, I really don't care; but thanks for participating... 🤒

What struck me as I read this, imagine how much more powerful AI could become if we copy n paste that wiring diagram into a supercomputer?

It always starts somewhere, then the ripples grow...

The one that fits the persons ability and intelligence on the spectrum of faith, you are certain of your position bc what you've built can be seen to be working, no faith needed, but you're an outlier; the outlier at the other end of the scale is a baby. All I'm saying is that most of us are dotted around the middle, whatever ism we follow, requires a fair bit of faith. For me, this statement applies to everyone on the spectrum equally. There's no evidence that science will continue to evolve, tomorrow.

That's a very shallow definition of rich, money is an ever more arbitrary measure of wealth distribution, it could change overnight and you have no money, you've still got the house and and a larder that can feed the family for six months. For me the truely rich are happy with that for six months.

They're not helping, they're prolonging the agony by giving Israel a 'world' license to carry on regardless. WWIII isn't beyond reason...

Fair enough; scienceism = people who put their faith in science; I count myself among their numbers. That includes a lot of people who don't really understand the science, bc we don't speak the language properly; the great thinkers evolve our thinking, sometimes against the prevailing/dogmatic understanding. Ditto religions. I'm not sure how else one could interpret that word, in the context of my post.

Baruch Spinoza - Wikipedia Given the context, isn't it obvious?

It's still basically the same question, in that nothing offered that you consider to be true.

Which ones are you talking about? Religion's may lag behind sometimes and resist fundamental changes in their belief, but they also contain great thinkers that challenge the dogma and lead to better explanation's. Ditto scienceism. How does it prove your point? Evolution is the very definition of chaos, and your premise is that atheist misunderstand evolution. IOW no need for a god to guild thing's... 😉

Philosophically speaking, language's can be misinterpreted, maybe the premise offered is valid, even when both appear to be speaking the same language, the smallest nuance can be the switch between the truths. If memory serves, it a Wittgenstein type question.

We are all indoctrinated, it's an inevitability if we survive our birth, please don't assume that your particular indoctrination is superior just bc; have a think about why your immune to the notion of god, just bc you don't believe in an ism...