dimreepr

Did they get, counselling? It's a bitter sweet symphony...

And getting more so, on this swing of the pendulum; let's hope the next swing will stop the clock, though history is not on our side...

I'm not assuming your level of understanding, but for me, I believe he was a genius and often argue in his favour; Imagine this site bereaved of those capable of filling the gaps in my understanding, Markus et al, I wouldn't just stop advocating his genius. Like Trump...

But they have knowledge of the paper and it sort of makes sense, why would it fade away with so many advocates?

Hand's up folk's it's a bloody awful title and OP, since I'm trying to explore how time can disconnect knowledge from understanding. For instance, if a teacher has full knowledge of, but doesn't understand Einstein's paper (and there's no one that can correct them), and their teacher's teacher, and their teacher's teacher's teacher, etc. I wonder how long it would take, if it would, for Einstein to become some sort of Buddha type deity. God may just be a cultural joke.

Are you sure? What if you're understanding is relative to the time you think you understood? I'm not saying science can't provide answer's, I'm just saying they aren't the only conclusion...

Is that your pride or his?

Not at all, do you understand time? Perhaps our current understanding is a close as we get and in one day that understanding converges and all we're left with is a model that never, really worked. I don't believe religion was ever really ontological, just a method of conveying current understanding, forgotten over time. I largely agree, other than the death thing; imagine if that warm fuzzy feeling happens in life, no point in waiting for death... I think the death thing is more about the divine comedy of karma...

Of course it does, if one has children; or if one inspires a book that lasts a millennia or so. Ones conciousness only has meaning in the eyes of another. Is that too many word's, to win?

Thanks, just wish I worded it better, perhaps: A fisherman takes what they need to eat and a corperation needs fishermen to take everything they can.

It seems a very strange way too strawman an argument...

A fisherman needs to fish, in order, to eat and a corpation needs fisherman, in order to thrive. What we need to thrive is a radically new economy, that can meet both needs without impinging on either. We can't blame the fisherman for his lazy attitude and we can't blame the businessman for getting angry at the apparent laziness; what we can, must, do is design an apparatus where both are satisfied. The third mouse, becomes vitally important in our moral horizon.

LOL, what are you going to do; wish me to death? "I got up half an hour before I went to bed"... 😉

In the immortal words of Monty Python, "You were lucky"...

But it is an accurate dipiction of Zerbo/our situation, I'm not saying suicide is wrong; it just needs careful inquiry, for accuracy. Indeed, at last we agree.

You're not very good in social situations are you... [/rhetorical]

Because, from time to time we all get sad...😪

You can't force a choice, you can only persuade; and you're trying to get shot of your good qualities? You can only accept who chooses you, but you'll find; the nicer you are, the finer the choice... 😉

You're going to have to make a lot more sense than that, if you want to discuss (what ever the question is)...

I wasn't thinking that.

It mean's what the feck, as in what father Ted says (and he's a catholic priest), what do you think it means?

I can't see that it will make much of a difference...

WTF are you talking about?

Except what you're saying is, it's infinite because it's infinite (I'm duty bound to point that out). 😉 Seems to me that infinite is just another way to say "I don't know". I think a more interesting question would be, can a paradox exist in nature? Then the answer to my question is yes, but only in people.

You're kinda proving my point... Einstein for instance, do you believe in his explanation of time?