From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Mon Jun 02 2003 - 20:24:32 MDT
On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:08:25 -0400, <Spudboy100@aol.com> wrote:
> The reason is why, if this was a sim, would so much data-bytes be
> dedicated to pain/sorrow etc.? It must take up a lot of computing cycles
> to sustain agony and depression-well above the sensations & thoughts
> necessary for motivating and modifying a mamalian creature.
Umm, meaning no sacasm, but where I come from, "why" is a question, not a
reason.
I think you mean something like "The reason is that there can be no
excuse..." etc.
This seems to presuppose that you can accurately model the thought
processes of the putative sim writer[s]/editor[s]/operator[s]. Your blanket
claim, if I understand you correctly, that there can be no good reason, is
a bold one. You haven't supported it in any way as far as I can see.
Now, if you go to the Problem of Evil matter, which is probably one of the
primary reasons reflective people go agnostic (the other being the "rock-
he-can't-lift" sort of notion, that a god wth all the listed attributes
must be self-contradictory and thus impossible--though that more often
leads to the faith of atheism--"I know what God is supposed to be and he
can't be, 'cause he can't be that!")...anyway, that doesn't seem to be your
aim or viewpoint so far, but I'm raising it just in case:
Lately, my favorite explanation for the Problem of Evil (shamelessly stolen
from somebody) is the conjecture that /God is _malevolent_, but _only 80%
effective_/.
No, I'm not serious when I countenance this notion. I only do it to be more
amusing to...whom it may concern. :)
-- I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization. Sometimes I forget.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 20:40:41 MDT