315 réponses à ce sujet

[finnugold]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

An insane person may come to the conclusion that they are an inanimate object despite the fact that they breathe, eat, think, and move. Or that a completely harmless object is capable of damaging them despite the fact that it has never done so. Insane people do not have working perceptions based on what has been observed to be the norm for all living beings or their mind deviates notably from what they perceive.

It's perfectly understandable not to trust one's perception. Optical illusions are all over the place and perception does fail regularly. By your definition of sanity, if someone disbelieve in an illusion that fooled everyone else, they are insane.

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

Modifié par finnugold, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:13 .

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

That's take this argument to its natural conclusion with an example from our world.
Everyone used to think that heavy things fell faster. Then someone came up with a thought experiment - if a light object was tied to a slow object, the complex would fall both slower and faster then then the heavier component, therefore creating a paradox.
By your definition, until he convinced everyone else that they were unlikely to be correct, he was insane. but the moment he convinced "sufficient" number of people, he suddenly stopped being insane.
You are not seriously going to buy that, right ? 

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:13 .

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..
Oh by the way, another conclusion to that line of thought, is that children are insane.

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:18 .

[Collider]

None of you are real. I'm the only one who is sane.

[bluewolv1970]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Agamo45 wrote...

eucatastrophe wrote...

I can't think of any decision in DA:O that was outright evil other than the stupid Connor ones.

Murdering Genitivi for no reason.

Not evil, you're keeping the ashes from being exploited by the Chantry.

ErichHartmann wrote...

eucatastrophe wrote...

I can't think of any decision in DA:O that was outright evil other than the stupid Connor ones.

I don't see how you handled Connor is good or evil.  Way too subjective.

Letting the demon possess him is pretty bad.

particularly to ask the desire demon for sex...

Modifié par bluewolv1970, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:17 .

[Pritos]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..

And the ironic is that for them, people without religion or of a diferent one are the really insane ones.

[atheelogos]

Collider wrote...

Has any Bioware game done evil right? I hear criticisms that evil hasn't been done right or is often not done right. That the PC comes off as the idiotic mustache twirling villain rather than  true evil or intelligent evil. What do you think about that?

How should DA2 do evil? Should Hawke even be allowed?

In my opinion they should avoid evil. Its kinda silly imho because it doesn't exist. There are only shades of grey.

[Merlin326]

Pritos wrote...

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..

And the ironic is that for them, people without religion or of a diferent one are the really insane ones.

That or aligned with Satan/The Devil/Lucifer.

Life has a sense of humor, it seems. Black Humor.

[finnugold]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

That's take this argument to its natural conclusion with an example from our world.
Everyone used to think that heavy things fell faster. Then someone came up with a thought experiment - if a light object was tied to a slow object, the complex would fall both slower and faster then then the heavier component, therefore creating a paradox.
By your definition, until he convinced everyone else that they were unlikely to be correct, he was insane. but the moment he convinced "sufficient" number of people, he suddenly stopped being insane.
You are not seriously going to buy that, right ? 

You're not making any sense. I said nothing about people having to convince anyone of a radical idea before they are to be considered sane. I believe my point was that insane people formulate ideas based on faulty perception or they formulate faulty ideas based on what they've perceived.

Therefore, an insane person will adhere to their ideas despite any evidence to the contrary.
Example: An insane person believes they are a car. Even though they look in the mirror and do not see a car, even though they eat and breathe and drink and a car doesn't, they still think they're a car. This is either due to a flaw in their perception (they look in the mirror and really do see a car) or a flaw in their thought (they believe they don't see a car because they're being tricked).

Modifié par finnugold, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:26 .

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

In that case, nobody was sane until there was widespread knowledge that heavier thing did not fall faster or the earth was not flat ? There must still be laughably nonresistant believes to this day and I guess there was no sanity after all.

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:36 .

[finnugold]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

In that case, everyone was insane until there was widespread knowledge that heavier thing did not fall faster or the earth was not flat ?

No, because they had beliefs based on what  was possible for them to observe. They then, with sufficient evidence, changed their beliefs. A mind is not insane because its beliefs are wrong, but because it is incapable of changing its beliefs when substantial (read: a lot of) evidence to the contrary is presented.

[finnugold]

Meh, double post.

So how's the weather?
... Don't answer that.

Modifié par finnugold, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:41 .

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

No, because they had beliefs based on what was possible for them to observe.

I would like to disagree on the "possible" part of that argument. Ancient sailors saw the tip of sails of approaching ships on the horizon. This could not be explained by flat earth. Also, anyone could have thought about the chained object paradox - nothing stopped them from performing that experiment.

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[finnugold]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

No, because they had beliefs based on what was possible for them to observe.

I would like to disagree on the "possible" part of that argument. Ancient sailors saw the tip of sails of approaching ships on the horizon. This could not be explained by flat earth. Also, anyone could have thought about the chained object paradox - nothing stopped them from performing that experiment.

Ok, I phrased that poorly, I'll give you that.
They created beliefs based on what that had observed and what they knew. Keep in mind there was no real quality, widespread education back then and as a result, few people would think to wonder why they could see the tips of sails coming over the horizon - even though the Earth was supposed to be a flat plane.

[ZaroktheImmortal]

Well, some of their games had opportunities to be evil. I mean Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic. Though with Dragon Age and Mass Effect it doesn't really feel like you can be truly evil. No matter what, you're still going to save the world, or universe anyway. I mean sure you can be a bit of a bastard, but I wouldn't really consider it really evil. Though, Dragon Age, as it's more suppose to be this characters story and not him saving the world from some old evil, might actually give more of a chance to be an evil character.

[Pritos]

ZaroktheImmortal wrote...

Well, some of their games had opportunities to be evil. I mean Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic. Though with Dragon Age and Mass Effect it doesn't really feel like you can be truly evil. No matter what, you're still going to save the world, or universe anyway. I mean sure you can be a bit of a bastard, but I wouldn't really consider it really evil. Though, Dragon Age, as it's more suppose to be this characters story and not him saving the world from some old evil, might actually give more of a chance to be an evil character.

What is the point in being evil if the world is going to be destroyed by someone else?

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

few people would think to wonder why they could see the tips of sails coming over the horizon - even though the Earth was supposed to be a flat plane.

So it's not insane if you never think of it. So it's entirely okay for someone to believe they are a car as long as they don't think about it. And they become insane as soon as they look into the mirror and thought "Wow I might not be a car (but it's okay they look into mirror but do not think)."

Think of it, why did ancient humans not create hypothesis that the earth was a Torus, Lemniscate or something else equally ridiculous ? There was no more evidence supporting the earth was fat then there was supporting that the earth was Tetrahedron.

Silliness aside, is believing santa insanity ? or on a more somber note, if someone is dying, is believing that they will live insanity ?

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 04:04 .

[finnugold]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

If that's the case, why did they not create hypothesis that the earth was a Torus, Lemniscate or something else equally ridiculous ? There was no more evidence supporting the earth was fat then there was supporting that the earth was Tetrahedron.

Silliness aside, is believing santa insanity ? or on a more somber note, if someone is dying, is believing that they will live insanity ?

I'm done with this debate simply because you're making ridiculous examples that are part of culture, not the imaginings of a damaged or sickened mind.

My entire arguement throughout has been that insane people do exist and that they are they result of a mind that cannot perceive or process perceptions correctly.

I will not get into a discussion involving whether or not superstitions are insane.

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

I am just pointing out the possibility that your definition of sanity is contingent on other definitions that may not be entirely objective.

[Vandicus]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..
Oh by the way, another conclusion to that line of thought, is that children are insane.

Interesting concept. So you can prove the non-existence of the deities that each and every religion worships?

Modifié par Vandicus, 05 septembre 2010 - 04:42 .

[Perfect-Kenshin]

Looking at this topic, I notice there is too off topic material and spam.

End of line.

Modifié par Perfect-Kenshin, 05 septembre 2010 - 04:58 .

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

Vandicus wrote...

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..
Oh by the way, another conclusion to that line of thought, is that children are insane.

Interesting concept. So you can prove the non-existence of the deities that each and every religion worships?

No, but can you present any evidence that could change the mind of a truly religious person ? If no such evidence can exist, then according to the argument above, they are insane. But I think this thread resembles something like this at the moment.

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 04:59 .

[Collider]

Pritos wrote...

ZaroktheImmortal wrote...

Well, some of their games had opportunities to be evil. I mean Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic. Though with Dragon Age and Mass Effect it doesn't really feel like you can be truly evil. No matter what, you're still going to save the world, or universe anyway. I mean sure you can be a bit of a bastard, but I wouldn't really consider it really evil. Though, Dragon Age, as it's more suppose to be this characters story and not him saving the world from some old evil, might actually give more of a chance to be an evil character.

What is the point in being evil if the world is going to be destroyed by someone else?

Truth. Trying to stop the world from ending isn't necessarily good or evil, it's more practical and sensible than anything else.

[Vandicus]

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Vandicus wrote...

Merlin Dawnweaver wrote...

Perception =/= Sight.
When I say "perception" I mean "senses", including "intuition".
Generally, some people see something and think, "this is real". At that point, if presented with substantial evidence to the contrary, they will think, "this is an illusion". This is a sane method of thought.

An insane person frequently perceives something or thinks they perceive something and they think, "this is real". They then, no matter what evidence to the contrary they recieve, still adhere to that idea.

You make a point I can agree with. Unfortunately for us, this labels every single religious person ever as insane ..
Oh by the way, another conclusion to that line of thought, is that children are insane.

Interesting concept. So you can prove the non-existence of the deities that each and every religion worships?

No, but can you present any evidence that could change the mind of a truly religious person ? If no such evidence can exist, then according to the argument above, they are insane. But I think this thread resembles something like this at the moment.

His arguement was that if people continue to believe in something despite evidence to the contrary. You said that religious people are insane by that definition, therefore you were claiming that there was evidence that could disprove their religious beliefs. If you could present evidence of an actual deity that could mold reality at will, then you could change the mind of a religious person. If you believe no such evidence can exist, then believing in religion is like believing in a scientific theory. Einstein's theory of relativity is just that, until it can be proven true in every possible case.

[Merlin Dawnweaver]

I will only say this again once.
Finn's argument was that a person that continued to believe something in spite of any counter evidence was insane.

Therefore there must exist some evidence, by which a sane person could be persuaded to abandon any belief.

My argument was that no evidence exist that can persuade any truly religious person to abandon at least one of his or her belief (this come from the definition of faith).

Therefore according to Finn's argument, a person who is truly religious must be insane.
Now if you please, we have more red herring here then most aquariums.

Modifié par Merlin Dawnweaver, 05 septembre 2010 - 05:26 .