Talk about anything: Page 82 - Godot Community Forums

Talk about anything

Nerdzmasterz

Suppose we didn't have technology, though, would things have gotten better? Probably not. Technology can't be the issue, can it? I mean without it, we wouldn't have Godot. :p

As for education, not everyone is fortunate enough to have it.

fire7side

I'm not saying we should go back to the stone age. I'm just saying technology and science won't solve our problems.

fire7side

@cybereality said:

@Nerdzmasterz said:

Hm. Now education may be knocked out of the park as well? Perhaps the issue is that we haven't identified the real problem? Unless someone has an idea on what it actually is- and not just a little part of it.

Well, I'm half joking / half-trolling, but I think the issue is complex. The education system could be better, but even people that went to school believe the Earth is flat, and there are college grads saying that COVID is a hoax. This is deeper than just reading books. This is about human psychology and the issues that arise when technological developments outpace evolution. So it's not a problem that is solved by technology, in fact it is the technology that has caused it.

I didn't think covid was a hoax, but I thought the dangers were being exaggerated. I didn't get inoculated because I didn't have any of the underlying conditions that most people were dying from and I'm used to doing self treatment. Mainly gargling with garlic water. It wasn't that bad, but it did last about 3 weeks. Personally, I think doctors should have prescribed diet and exercise the same as they should be doing for most illness. I personally knew someone that had diabetes and her doctor told her she could eat anything she wanted as long as she took her medication. She had two strokes in about the 3 years that I knew her. Yeah, covid was real and probably started by the Wuhan lab with the Americans in full co-development. And btw, I think if you took into account all the people who died and will die from all the crazy lockdowns and the shortages they caused, we didn't "save" anyone.

cybereality

Audiobellum

To my mind, disagreements that stem from a difference in first principles( or fundamental axioms) can never be resolved through debate/discussion; I don't think that's a problem that philosophy or even education can ever solve. At best we might get people to reject scientifically false ideas, and that's assuming that the people in question aren't anti-realist towards science. Instead, people will continue to have disputes about relatives truths and philosophical questions that will never be solved.

I used to care deeply about religious debates, then I realized that these debates have been going on for more than 2000 years and only few if any new arguments have been brought to the table by both sides. Also, these debates have involved people who are more intelligent that we'll ever be. Even when new ideas are brought to the table, they don't necessarily have any changes to material conditions that we haven't seen before. That said, despite how old science is, I suspect that there were no heart transplants taking place 2000 years ago.

Audiobellum

@fire7side said: I'm not saying we should go back to the stone age. I'm just saying technology and science won't solve our problems.

I don't know whether or not science can solve our problems. Perhaps it can't and I do know that the scientific method itself has limitations. Still, I'm reluctant to say for certain that it can't solve our problems. I also doubt anything else will solve our problems as it seems that everything else has been tried. I mean if science can't solve our problems, could we at least admit that nothing else will?

Nerdzmasterz

Wow. That's not depressing at all.

Like I said before, perhaps what we need to do is discover the underlying source of the problem before trying to fix it.

Nerdzmasterz

Ie: if division is not the problem, what causes division?

cybereality

No, the problems can and will be solved. What I am saying is that the level of intelligence that created the problems is not sufficient to resolve them. Just like it is much easier to break a glass vase than it is to piece it back together, one shard of glass at a time, and make it appear it was never broken to begin with. Our best bet is to develop an AI that is vastly superior to humans, and ask them. We do have that ability. And the AI can propose a solution that we could never come to on our own, and it may even be something we don't understand or wish to accept. That is about the only realistic way out of it, if we are talking about the near future (I'm predicting we have about 20 years left to pull this off, before environmental factors or war destroy us beyond repair).

Audiobellum

@Nerdzmasterz said: Ie: if division is not the problem, what causes division?

The reason why there is division, is perhaps because people want division. I know they're other reasons but, it all goes back to what people want at the end of it all. This shouldn't be hard to see, if we think that all this division could never be justified.

Nerdzmasterz

Is it selfishness?

cybereality

People honestly enjoy being angry and miserable with their life. It makes them feel comfortable, and it's easy to blame your problems on other people, or society, or the government, or whatever. Because the alternative is to accept full responsibility and that is too much for many people to handle. You can change your life, it's not physically difficult, but it is very hard mentally. Because you have to put in hard work and accept you may have been misguided and mistaken your whole life. And that you are responsible for your own problems, and either directly or indirectly created them entirely yourself. I try to help people, but then they attack me. I've gotten hate messages, even a death threat, for talking about love. People would rather die, or kill you, than accept the truth.

DaveTheCoder

Our best bet is to develop an AI that is vastly superior to humans, and ask them. We do have that ability.

Many science fiction writers have shown that doesn't work.

This discussion is begging for a religious viewpoint, but I won't go there.

TwistedTwigleg

I think the current major thread of discussion here has been very broad, reaching from science, society, psychology, and more. Not that this is necessary against the forums or anything like that, but I think it is a touch outside of the intent of the Godot community forums. I think on such broad topics, everyone has their own views and opinions on.

Not saying broad topics cannot be talked about, but I’ve noticed as of late it has been really, really broad with all sorts of views expressed on topics that are vastly outside of the Game development and Godot sphere. The topics seem to just spin around without really any resolving, more like an echoing of ideas/beliefs/thoughts on extremely broad topics.

Again, not saying broad topics cannot be talked about, but that seems to be main discussion that has been very much about society/philosophy/psychology/science/scientific-beliefs/etc with the occasional game development related thing popping up, before the discussion going back to topics listed prior.

Ultimately, I think it is important to remember we’re a community around game development, we are the Godot community forums after all. That does not mean everything has to be game development related, far from it, and it doesn’t mean that broad and personal topics cannot be discussed, but let’s not make it the main focus. There are other forums for more general discussion if you wish to discuss those types of topics as the primary focus, but since we are a game development forum, let’s not stay heavily focused on these topics as a constant. Again, it’s fine to delve into it occasionally, but as of late, I have noticed this thread has very much been heavily society/philosophy/psychology/science/scientific-beliefs/etc focused.

Ultimately what brought us all together is game development and/or Godot. :smile:

cybereality

I got a pretty big feature on GamesFromScratch. Good for me, of course, and good for Godot, too.

duane

@Megalomaniak said: I once set up my computer in a spot where signal reception seemed to be fine, so long as I didn't sit down.

Reminds me of one of my favorite episodes of Mr Bean.

fire7side

@Audiobellum said:

@fire7side said: I'm not saying we should go back to the stone age. I'm just saying technology and science won't solve our problems.

I don't know whether or not science can solve our problems. Perhaps it can't and I do know that the scientific method itself has limitations. Still, I'm reluctant to say for certain that it can't solve our problems. I also doubt anything else will solve our problems as it seems that everything else has been tried. I mean if science can't solve our problems, could we at least admit that nothing else will?

Well, as a society, yes, nothing will solve it. That's why there is an Armageddon in the bible. It's not the end, though. I don't think this is really the place for a spiritual discussion, though.

Erich_L

@TwistedTwigleg You can think of it as the “get to know your godot community” forum post. Humanity’s problems are hard to face, but not impossible for us to simulate. My dream game (to make with Godot) is basically letting players fly around the asteroid belt and start developing it. How long are national/religious affiliations going to define people so far away? Could “belters” have a single broad uniform and shared cultural identity as seen in the Expanse? Wouldn’t that be fun to let players figure out on their own?

To be more specific, I often wonder, when faced with a “create a starter ship” scene, what emblem will players put on their ships? National flags? Hammer and sickles? Cat memes? And what would that say about people and the underlying theme of expansion and exploration.

cybereality

Nerdzmasterz

@Erich_L said: @TwistedTwigleg You can think of it as the “get to know your godot community” forum post. Humanity’s problems are hard to face, but not impossible for us to simulate. My dream game (to make with Godot) is basically letting players fly around the asteroid belt and start developing it. How long are national/religious affiliations going to define people so far away? Could “belters” have a single broad uniform and shared cultural identity as seen in the Expanse? Wouldn’t that be fun to let players figure out on their own?

To be more specific, I often wonder, when faced with a “create a starter ship” scene, what emblem will players put on their ships? National flags? Hammer and sickles? Cat memes? And what would that say about people and the underlying theme of expansion and exploration.

You mean sort of like Oxygen Not Included? That's not a bad idea for a game, really.

« Previous Page Next Page »