Books in a similar vein to "A Short History of Nearly Everything"

JGailor · 24 days

Not nearly as easy of a read, but fascinating in the extreme: Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, by Douglas Hofstadter.

mopecore · 1 month

The NIV translation calls it rape, and even christian sources say rape is the likely translation. Concerning the scape goat issue- any time the punishment is delivered to someone who was not the perpetrator, it is unjust. It would not be right for a murderer to be released because I choose to go to jail for them- the family of the victim would find no justice there.

mopecore · 1 month

Lets assume for a moment that it is about sacrificing oneself for the sake of all others- it is still, as the OP puts its, scape-goating on a cosmic scale. It still means that torture and murder of an innocent person can somehow make right all the other wrongs in the world- in any other context, you would find this deplorable. Consider: would you find it just, if instead of sending people to jail for their crimes, we beat and murdered one innocent person a year?

Regarding Book of Deuteronomy, please see this article which looks into the hebrew, and shows how this very much does refer to rape.

ShannonOh · 1 month

While this is great in theory, it fails in practice- very often, we have to make judgment calls concerning how to judge the veracity of a claim made by someone without the ability to refer to evidence. A better way to view it is this- I update my probability that a claim is true based on many factors, but a claim supported y evidence will create a greater change in that update than a claim without evidence.

Tholo · 2 months

Removed, with my apologies.

Tholo · 2 months

An answer ironically in keeping with the point of the song.

snowballman · 2 months

Where we study the mass of beers?

scd250 · 2 months

Percentage overhead is a pretty poor way to judge the worth of a charity. To illustrate, lets look a two fictional charities: Good Guys are Us and Rand's Devil Children. Each charity, by happy coincidence, recieved 100 million dollars last year. Good Guys Are Us only spent 10 million on overhead- however, due to poor choices in purchasing decisions, were only able to help 50 people. Meanwhile, Rand's Devil Children spent 30 million dollars on overhead, but due to shrewd handling of their money, were able to help 150 people. If these are your only two options, you would want to donate to Rand's Devil Children- your money is more effective there.

All this means is overhead doesn't tell you how effective a charity is.

pussyhands · 2 months

Percent overhead is actually a pretty bad way to evaluate the effectiveness of a charity- if you spend most of your money on things that are not overhead, but but don't actually fix very much, you are doing worse than a charity that spends more on overhead but is more effective in their non-overhead spending. Its an easy number to look at, but it doesn't really tell us much.

MediocreDeity · 2 months

I fight that bias by forcing myself to argue for the other side as if I believed it- remarkable effective in helping to identify the salient issues.

Tholo · 4 months

Good point- I was rushing to any known solved problem, but you are correct- we should rush to known solved problems with the highest return on investment.

Tholo · 4 months

I believe you're substituting religion with science, as a way of gaining an afterlife, if you will.

I don't want an afterlife- I just don't wish a cessation of this life. I fully realize that there are certainly obstacles to my recovery from vitrification- however, preserving my body and mind are such a high priority, that it becomes worth it to attempt what may be a long shot, as it is the only shot with a non-zero chance of success. Read some of the articles in the link above- I do not think I am basing this on non-rational thought.

no scientific basis for us ever shedding death.

I am not sure I understand- do you mean that science has shown death is inevitable for all time, or do you mean that this is a problem we have not yet solved?

Tholo · 4 months

Some historical trends are useless, however, there does appear to be a non-trivial causal link between technological advancement and charity towards all people.

Or alternatively, take the money that you'd flush on this speculative idea and will it to your heirs or charity.

While I certainly support charity work as well, 300$ a year is less than the average american spends on soda. With my continued existence being rather astronomically high on a weighted list of my values, even at a somewhat slim chance of success, the cost/benefit analysis makes this easily a rational choice.

Tholo · 4 months

I had read that several months ago, and now find anger to be among the greatest of my feelings, but in a different direction- we can spend billions of dollars to ensure that people all over the world will feel the pain of death in the form of the military, but we cannot spend even a fraction of that money to stop death in the form of a problem we have already solved, namely hunger?

Tholo · 4 months

I appreciate it.

Tholo · 4 months

I disagree on all of these points.

Cryonics is unreliable only in the reanimation: brain resolution, with no ice damage as the vitrification process precludes the formation of ice crystals, and a very quick time for vitrification allow for a high resolution storage of brain and body.
Preservation costs are nominal- for 300$ a year, half in fees and half in life insurance, you can ensure that there is enough money to cover costs. For a more detailed analysis, see alcor.org.
This is a concern- alcor.org discusses the steps being taken to avoid this. However, the probability of surviving the alternative is zero, making this the default rational choice from this perspective.
This ignores the historic trend toward increased charity. Furthermore, alcor specifically allocates funds for reintegration into society- again, see alcor.org. Finally the alternative is non-existence, and I find as long as I have the possibility to improve my station, I prefer existence to non-existence.

Tholo · 4 months

Please read any of the articles in the link I provided. Given the current technology explosion, and given current technology in cryonics, I think it is more rational to spend a small amount of money now, and in the case of terminal illness be able to allow myself the chance of reanimation than to simply die without attempting to survive. Part of that money is specifically set back to fund your reanimation- more information can be found at alcor.org. Having named my evidence, what then do you find to be irrational?

Tholo · 4 months

Vitrification produces brain resolution at a level that is indistinguishable under electron microscopes. Technology, and specifically computing power, continues to accelerate on an exponential curve- conservative estimates show that while the curve may not be quite as steep as it has been, it is still exponential. Reanimation from vitrification is highly likely given what we know of physics. We have performed it on fertilized embryos, and quite frankly it is the only rational method of attempting to extend life at this point in time.

Tholo · 4 months

I was trying to find a meaningful way to honor her life. I wish there had been a way to convince her of the effectiveness of cryonics- there was not. However, letting her death motivate me to try and spread awareness seemed a way to let a horrible situation spur me to positive action.

Tholo

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login