Do you believe in god?

[dippididodaday]

The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument

Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.

Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’

If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...

I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural.

There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes.

The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBY

Even one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature.

[QuestionAuthority]

The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument

Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.

Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’

If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...

I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural.

There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes.

The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBY

Even one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature.

Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing.

[CoinCube]

I am naturally human. As such, I display traits that some want to attribute to a transcendental (constructed) being. In doing so, these characters claim control over others, in claiming they act on behalf of the transcendental being by forcing laws on others and thereby forfeit their true nature, as humans. These characters have become artificial and unnatural.

You assumption that religion by "forcing" laws on humans voids our true nature. I assume you mean our human nature is forfeit because our freedom of action becomes restricted.

This approach is flawed as it represents a fundamental misunderstanding of freedom.

Freedom and God

Freedom is neither license nor anarchy: It does not mean chaos or the use of tooth and nail. Freedom does not give any man or group the right to steal, to use fraud or aggressive force or threats of same to get what one wants.

Freedom is the right of the individual to choose how he controls himself, so long as he respects the equal rights of every other individual to control and plan his own life. Freedom is thus not the ability to do whatever you want. It is self-control, and self-government, no more, no less.

Thus "freedom is self-control" leads to the conclusion that as acting individuals, we must respect the rights and boundaries of others. In other words, every individual should control his or her actions such that they do not aggress or invade against other individuals or their rightfully owned properties. "Freedom" as "self-control" points up the dual nature of human existence: of the Self (mind, soul, and spirit) housed in a physical body. Human beings require both spiritual freedom and physical liberty

The evolution of the social contract is a progressive climb to systems with increased overall freedom. The state of nature begat tribalism. Tribalism grew into despotism. Despotism advanced into monarchy. Monarchies were replaced by republics. Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increased the overall cooperative activity and freedom the system permitted.

The ultimate driver behind this process is Ethical Monotheism for this is the underappreciated foundation that freedom rests upon. The Ten Commandments are often misunderstood as as restrictions. In reality they are the road map to freedom. To better understand this I highly recommend the following 5 minute video clip from Prager University.

God Wants Us To Be Free

Freedom out-competes slavery. This is why the Odin worshiping vikings were replaced by Christian vikings. It is the ultimate reason why Arab polytheism was replaced by Islam and why the Jews who who's traditions demand an individual understanding and observance of scripture have so excelled.

A person is responsible for every action he takes and for every action he refuses to take. Thus, he is responsible for commissions and omissions, and whether these are good or bad. The individual is the responsible unit. Responsibility cannot be collectively delegated. Each person is responsible in exactly the same way and to the same degree that every other person is.

At the level of the individual we again return to choice. Do we truly care about freedom or do we care about our cravings and wants? If we choose freedom we must embrace that which makes freedom possible. If we choose whims and desires we should admit to ourselves that we do not prioritize freedom and are most concerned with our ability to sate our appetites.

Freedom is something that is maximized and approached not something that is ever achieved. We are much freer today than the ancient Egyptian society where the majority of people were enslaved by their Pharaoh. Why is that? I would argue it is due to the following rules that have entered our culture. Rules that when followed minimize the need for top down control and maximize freedom.  

Rules:
1 ) I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
2 ) You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself an idol.
3 ) You shall not take the name of God in vain.
4 ) Remember and observe the Sabbath and keep it holy.
5 ) Honor your father and mother.
6 ) You shall not murder.
7 ) You shall not commit adultery.
8 ) You shall not steal.
9 ) You shall not bear false witness.
10) You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or house or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

The Ten Commandments: Still The Best Moral Code
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00USBMEX2/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

Imagine for a moment a world in which there was no murder or theft. In such a world, there would be no need for armies, or police, or weapons. Men and women and children could walk anywhere, at any time of day or night, without any fear of being killed or robbed. Imagine further a world in which no one coveted what belonged to their neighbor; a world in which children honored their mother and father and the family unit thrived; a world in which people obeyed the injunction not to lie. The recipe for a good world is all there—in these ten sublime commandments.

But there is a catch. The Ten Commandments are predicated on the belief that they were given by an Authority higher than any man, any king, or any government. That’s why the sentence preceding the Ten Commandments asserts the following: “God spoke all these words.”

You see, if the Ten Commandments, as great as they are, were given by any human authority, then any person could say: “Who is this man Moses, who is this king or queen, who is this government to tell me how I should behave? Okay, so why is God indispensable to the Ten Commandments? Because, to put it as directly as possible, if it isn’t God who declares murder wrong, murder isn’t wrong. Yes, this strikes many people today as incomprehensible, even absurd. Many of you are thinking, “Is this guy saying you can’t be a good person if you don’t believe in God?”

Let me respond as clearly as possible: I am not saying that. Of course there are good people who don’t believe in God, just as there are bad people who do. And many of you are also thinking, “I believe murder is wrong. I don’t need God to tell me.” Now that response is only half true. I have no doubt that if you’re an atheist and you say you believe murder is wrong, you believe murder is wrong. But, forgive me, you do need God to tell you. We all need God to tell us. You see, even if you figured out murder is wrong on your own, without God and the Ten Commandments, how do you know it’s wrong? Not believe it’s wrong, I mean know it’s wrong? The fact is that you can’t.

Because without God, right and wrong are just personal beliefs. Personal opinions. I think shoplifting is okay, you don’t. Unless there is a God, all morality is just opinion and belief. And virtually every atheist philosopher has acknowledged this.

Another problem with the view that you don’t need God to believe that murder is wrong is that a lot of people haven’t shared your view. And you don’t have to go back very far in history to prove this. In the twentieth century millions of people in Communist societies and under Nazism killed about one hundred million people—and that doesn’t count a single soldier killed in war.

So, don’t get too confident about people’s ability to figure out right from wrong without a Higher Authority. It’s all too easy to be swayed by a government or a demagogue or an ideology or to rationalize that the wrong you are doing isn’t really wrong. And even if you do figure out what is right and wrong, God is still necessary. People who know the difference between right and wrong do the wrong thing all the time. You know why? Because they can. They can because they think no one is watching. But if you recognize that God is the source of moral law, you believe that He is always watching.

So, even if you’re an atheist, you would want people to live by the moral laws of the Ten Commandments. And even an atheist has to admit that the more people who believe God gave them—and therefore they are not just opinion—the better the world would be.

In three thousand years no one has ever come up with a better system than the God-based Ten Commandments for making a better world. And no one ever will.

[dippididodaday]

The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument

Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.

Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’

If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...

I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural.

There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes.

The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBY

Even one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature.

Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing.

Your penis getting rock hard and long is a natural phenomenon, even if it is the case by chasing slutty women. Don't try and fight it - accept the trouble it will cause. Learn to live with it, and merge your consciousness with that of your penis.

[Buffer Overflow]

Yes, I do. I always believe in God . I can not see God but I can feel this fact when I say prayer to God . After praying, I will be better and more peaceful with everything I can do. Thanks God because you are always with me in everytime and everywhere.

Many people who suffer from dementia also present themselves such as Napoleon and believe in it. This does not mean that he is the Emperor of the French. So faith in God. I think it's a kind of dementia.

However, once a person finds that God DOES exist, then lack of faith in God is shown to be the dementia.

Any belief should be supported by evidence that you are on the right track. In the case of dementia you will not believe that you are Napoleon. In this you'll believe only you. What makes you believe in God? This is not supported by any evidence?

Here are some links to both, the scientific proof, and overwhelming evidence that God exists. If you don't understand the science, you can easily see the evidence of nature.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380

While the proof gives knowledge that God exists, why should I believe Him? In fact, how do I know that He is even talking to me? The history of the way the Bible came into existence makes it an impossible-to-have-happened book. Since the Bible is impossible, yet exists, it has been guided by God to be His Word to people.

Those are not scientific nor proofs.

Since you can't seem to explain any rebuttal you might have, it is you who are proving yourself scientifically inadequate. But that's okay. Since the science stands, there isn't any rebuttal for it.

No point, you've already shot that one down in flames yourself.

Science is guesswork

Hi, Fluffer. Be a good little kid, and go out and play.

But I'm am playing. You're a ball in my pocket I can bounce around anytime I get bored.
Wanna get out of my pocket? Easy, all you have to do is stop lying. I cannot trip up the truth; never can, never will.

Trouble is, in order to do that, you'd have to stop lying to yourself as well........
I don't think your ready to step up to that stage just yet.

[QuestionAuthority]

The Argument from Religion - A Transcendental Argument

Morality can’t be found from a scientific examination of nature. So if morality is not in nature it must be beyond nature – the supernatural.

Where does value come from? It’s not found in the world reduced to scientific facts. Nonetheless, it’s found in the world as we actually experience it. We find value in all sorts of things. We value our friendships, and hopefully at least some of our family members. We value certain books, films, projects, beautiful days, ‘nature,’ and music. So value exists. We experience it. A transcendental argument asks – what must the world be like for this experience to be possible? There must be more to the world than scientific facts. The value of the world that we discover must have its basis in something else.
...
Morality is invisible to science because science cannot see value. Anything invisible to science must either not exist at all, or it must be nonphysical. Our name for the nonphysical aspects of reality is the spiritual, i.e., the divine, transcendent, God.
...
There is remarkable agreement among those at the higher reaches of many world religions. High level Buddhists, Catholic monks, Kabbalists, Sufis, all describe ultimate reality in similar terms and much of what they say can be summed up in the cliché, ‘all is one.’

If all is one, then my treating you badly is really treating myself badly.
...

I disagree with the argument from religion and its transcendental argument. It is my belief that humans are intrinsically moral whilst they are at the same time completely natural. I reject a transcendental argument with its postulate of a non physical transcendence - this is a mere construct, a superfluous idea - without a direct basis in physical existence, which is what I believe is in fact the only existence that is, and reality and all it implies (see wiki for details) as well. The world is as it is in its natural state and this reality make morality possible. There is no other basis to have this moral value we find in humans. I name the nonphysical aspects of reality the emergent qualities of personhood. No need to interject metaphysical (imaginary) constructs here. We are indeed connected to each other in a network, but its all natural.

There are others who would not agree with limited "modern" science in this regard - 15 minutes.

The Folly of Machine Consciousness (FULL) - Health Ranger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzNAy84OBY

Even one cellular organisms display patterns of learned behavior. You don't need a "spirit" to have moral traits - all you need is an example. The idea of me having (being) a "spirit", a consciousness that will continue after death is a fallacy. My consciousness will die with me. Consciousness in the sense of what it contributes to morality is learned behavior. All humans learn by example as they start life at 0 and take it from there on wards. This is the way of nature.

Oh yeah, well my penis didn't "learn" how to get this rock hard and long. It has a consciousness of its own because it keeps chasing slutty women around even though I keep trying to tell it how much trouble that behavior ends up causing.

Your penis getting rock hard and long is a natural phenomenon, even if it is the case by chasing slutty women. Don't try and fight it - accept the trouble it will cause. Learn to live with it, and merge your consciousness with that of your penis.

LOL

god made my cock the way it is so it must be perfect. I gotta go, god wants me to merge my penis with a slutty woman.

[dippididodaday]

I am naturally human. As such, I display traits that some want to attribute to a transcendental (constructed) being. In doing so, these characters claim control over others, in claiming they act on behalf of the transcendental being by forcing laws on others and thereby forfeit their true nature, as humans. These characters have become artificial and unnatural.

You assumption that religion by "forcing" laws on humans voids our true nature. I assume you mean our human nature is forfeit because our freedom of action becomes restricted.

This approach is flawed as it represents a fundamental misunderstanding of freedom.

Freedom and God
...
Freedom is the right of the individual to choose how he controls himself, so long as he respects the equal rights of every other individual to control and plan his own life. Freedom is thus not the ability to do whatever you want. It is self-control, and self-government, no more, no less.
...
The evolution of the social contract is a progressive climb to systems with increased overall freedom. The state of nature begat tribalism. Tribalism grew into despotism. Despotism advanced into monarchy. Monarchies were replaced by republics. Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increased the overall cooperative activity and freedom the system permitted.

Freedom cannot be reduced to self-control and self-government. But even if I assume that this is all freedom does amount to, which would not be bad for starters, there is still a diabolical contortion ongoing of the conceptual liberties associated with these concepts.

The devolution of the social contract is a regressive descent to systems with decreased overall freedom. The state of nature backslided to tribalism. Tribalism lapsed into despotism. Despotism declined into monarchy. Monarchies morphed into republics. Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increased the overall coerced activity and loss of freedom the system permitted.

"God" is a construct that is used to impair the individual's ability to identify with another person.

[Karloff]

I don't believe in God. No its because there is no evidence of its existence. There are a lot of people wrote that I believe in God, but no one has provided evidence. Was not even a single logical explanation of religious dogma.

[BADecker]

Yes, I do. I always believe in God . I can not see God but I can feel this fact when I say prayer to God . After praying, I will be better and more peaceful with everything I can do. Thanks God because you are always with me in everytime and everywhere.

Many people who suffer from dementia also present themselves such as Napoleon and believe in it. This does not mean that he is the Emperor of the French. So faith in God. I think it's a kind of dementia.

However, once a person finds that God DOES exist, then lack of faith in God is shown to be the dementia.

Any belief should be supported by evidence that you are on the right track. In the case of dementia you will not believe that you are Napoleon. In this you'll believe only you. What makes you believe in God? This is not supported by any evidence?

Here are some links to both, the scientific proof, and overwhelming evidence that God exists. If you don't understand the science, you can easily see the evidence of nature.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380

While the proof gives knowledge that God exists, why should I believe Him? In fact, how do I know that He is even talking to me? The history of the way the Bible came into existence makes it an impossible-to-have-happened book. Since the Bible is impossible, yet exists, it has been guided by God to be His Word to people.

Those are not scientific nor proofs.

Since you can't seem to explain any rebuttal you might have, it is you who are proving yourself scientifically inadequate. But that's okay. Since the science stands, there isn't any rebuttal for it.

No point, you've already shot that one down in flames yourself.

Science is guesswork

Hi, Fluffer. Be a good little kid, and go out and play.

But I'm am playing. You're a ball in my pocket I can bounce around anytime I get bored.
Wanna get out of my pocket? Easy, all you have to do is stop lying. I cannot trip up the truth; never can, never will.

Trouble is, in order to do that, you'd have to stop lying to yourself as well........
I don't think your ready to step up to that stage just yet.

Good choice. I'm proud of you. "He who walks with the wise becomes wise." You might even learn something.

[CoinCube]

Freedom cannot be reduced to self-control and self-government. But even if I assume that this is all freedom does amount to, which would not be bad for starters, there is still a diabolical contortion ongoing of the conceptual liberties associated with these concepts.

The devolution of the social contract is a regressive descent to systems with decreased overall freedom. The state of nature backslided to tribalism. Tribalism lapsed into despotism. Despotism declined into monarchy. Monarchies morphed into republics. Each iteration has a common theme for each advance increased the overall coerced activity and loss of freedom the system permitted.

"God" is a construct that is used to impair the individual's ability to identify with another person.

You appear to once again argue that God limits human freedom. You posit that God and religion impair human connection and interaction. This is false. The opposite is true.

To understand why, however, we must dive into the relationship between entropy, knowledge, and freedom of choice. The post below and the debate that followed covers this relationship.

In the opening post of this thread I linked to The Rise of Knowledge where Anonymint discussed the the nature of knowledge and its relationship to entropy.

Immediately up-thread I discussed the prerequisites of freedom. What freedom is and what is necessary to achieve it.

This post will explore the relationship between freedom and knowledge.

Knowledge and Power by George Gilder
https://www.amazon.com/Knowledge-Power-Information-Capitalism-Revolutionizing/dp/1621570274

The most manifest characteristic of human beings is their diversity. The freer an economy is, the more this human diversity of knowledge will be manifested. By contrast, political power originates in top-down processes—governments, monopolies, regulators, elite institutions, all attempting to quell human diversity and impose order. Thus power always seeks centralization.

Capitalism is not chiefly an incentive system but an information system. We continue with the recognition, explained by the most powerful science of the epoch, that information itself is best defined as surprise: by what we cannot predict rather than by what we can. The key to economic growth is not acquisition of things by the pursuit of monetary rewards but the expansion of wealth through learning and discovery. The economy grows not by manipulating greed and fear through bribes and punishments but by accumulating surprising knowledge through the conduct of the falsifiable experiments of free enterprises. Crucial to this learning process is the possibility of failure and bankruptcy. In this model, wealth is defined as knowledge, and growth is defined as learning.

Because the system is based more on ideas than on incentives, it is not a process changeable only over generations of Sisysphean effort. An economy is a noosphere (a mind-based system) and it can revive as fast as minds and policies can change.

That new economics—the information theory of capitalism—is already at work in disguise. Concealed behind an elaborate mathematical apparatus, sequestered by its creators in what is called information technology, the new theory drives the most powerful machines and networks of the era. Information theory treats human creations or communications as transmissions through a channel, whether a wire or the world, in the face of the power of noise, and gauges the outcomes by their news or surprise, defined as “entropy” and consummated as knowledge. Now it is ready to come out into the open and to transform economics as it has already transformed the world economy itself.

All information is surprise; only surprise qualifies as information. This is the fundamental axiom of information theory. Information is the change between what we knew before the transmission and what we know after it.

Let us imagine the lineaments of an economics of disorder, disequilibrium, and surprise that could explain and measure the contributions of entrepreneurs. Such an economics would begin with the Smithian mold of order and equilibrium. Smith himself spoke of property rights, free trade, sound currency, and modest taxation as crucial elements of an environment for prosperity. Smith was right: An arena of disorder, disequilibrium, chaos, and noise would drown the feats of creation that engender growth. The ultimate physical entropy envisaged as the heat death of the universe, in its total disorder, affords no room for invention or surprise. But entrepreneurial disorder is not chaos or mere noise. Entrepreneurial disorder is some combination of order and upheaval that might be termed “informative disorder.”

Shannon defined information in terms of digital bits and measured it by the concept of information entropy: unexpected or surprising bits... Shannon’s entropy is governed by a logarithmic equation nearly identical to the thermodynamic equation of Rudolf Clausius that describes physical entropy. But the parallels between the two entropies conceal several pitfalls that have ensnared many. Physical entropy is maximized when all the molecules in a physical system are at an equal temperature (and thus cannot yield any more energy). Shannon entropy is maximized when all the bits in a message are equally improbable (and thus cannot be further compressed without loss of
information). These two identical equations point to a deeper affinity that MIT physicist Seth Lloyd identifies as the foundation of all material reality—at the beginning was the entropic bit.
...
The accomplishment of Information Theory was to create a rigorous mathematical discipline for the definition and measurement of the information in the message sent down the channel. Shannon entropy or surprisal defines and quantifies the information in a message. In close similarity with physical entropy, information entropy is always a positive number measured by minus the base two logarithm of its probability. Information in Shannon’s scheme is quantified in terms of a probability because Shannon interpreted the message as a selection or choice from a limited alphabet. Entropy is thus a measure of freedom of choice. In the simplest case of maximum entropy of equally probable elements, the uncertainty is merely the inverse of the number of elements or symbols.
...
Linking innovation, surprise, and profit, learning and growth, Shannon entropy stands at the heart of the economics of information theory. Signaling the arrival of an invention or disruptive innovation is first its surprisal, then its yield beyond the interest rate—its profit, a further form of Shannon entropy. As a new item is absorbed by the market, however, its entropy declines until its margins converge with prevailing risk adjusted interest rates. The entrepreneur must move on to new surprises. The economics of entropy depict the process by which the entrepreneur translates his idea into a practical form from the realms of imaginative creation. In those visionary realms, entropy is essentially infinite and unconstrained, and thus irrelevant to economic models. But to make the imagined practical, the entrepreneur must make specific choices among existing resources and strategic possibilities. Entropy here signifies his freedom of choice.

As Shannon understood, the creation process itself escapes every logical and mathematical system. It springs not from secure knowledge but from falsifiable tests of commercial hypotheses. It is not an expression of past knowledge but of the fertility of consciousness, will, discipline, imagination, and art.

Knowledge is created by the dynamic interaction of consciousness over time. This process results in surprise (new information) which is the foundation of new knowledge. Entropy in this context is a measure of freedom, it is the freedom of choice. An information system with higher entropy allows for greater dynamic interaction of consciousness and thus greater knowledge formation. Freedom must be subject to the constraint of convergence. Some top-down order must be maintained to prevent destructive chaos aka noise that would otherwise destroy rather than create knowledge.

The amount of top-down control needed increases in the presence of increased noise. A primitive population may require the iron fist of a dictator whereas an educated one may thrive in a republic. However, power always seeks centralization. Thus the tendency of both of the dictatorship and the republic will be towards ever increasing centralization restricting freedom beyond that what is necessary and hobbling knowledge formation.

I posit that that the only model of top-down control that facilitates knowledge formation without inevitable progressive centralization is Ethical Monotheism. Uniformly adopted and voluntary followed it may be the only restraint on freedom that is necessary.

[CoinCube]

...
STOP...I am trying to help you  ..
Use your time on something more constructive...

Why thank you popcorn1. I am trying to help you too.
Sadly, however, you are correct in that I do not have time to continue this discussion.

I have demonstrated that belief in God is rational. I will defer further debate on the matter to others.

[johnny11011]

Do you believe in god? If you do, why do you believe? (give a few reasons)

Do you believe in God? I believe! The Lord Jesus Christ who sits on the throne of high! I know that because he cares about me, he will discipline me. His word shall be fulfilled, and his discipline out of love!

[CoinCube]

...YOUR AN ASS HOLE...

Please send the men in white coats for this dude ..
...
GROW UP NUTTER  

You are like a murderer who after killing some old lady would say: "Well, she was old so I did the right thing by killing her.  I did her a favour."

I wish you both the best of luck.

[Buffer Overflow]

Do you believe in God? I believe! The Lord Jesus Christ who sits on the throne of high! I know that because he cares about me, he will discipline me. His word shall be fulfilled, and his discipline out of love!

Anybody that bullies you the into the pointless ultimatum of "believe in me or I'll burn you forever in hell" for no reason, does not love you, neither is he your friend.

[A.M.]

I dont actually believe in god, I just agree and strongly follow that there is a energy in this universe which do justice. I still don't think god as a prson just a energy.

[BADecker]

Do you believe in God? I believe! The Lord Jesus Christ who sits on the throne of high! I know that because he cares about me, he will discipline me. His word shall be fulfilled, and his discipline out of love!

Anybody that bullies you the into the pointless ultimatum of "believe in me or I'll burn you forever in hell" for no reason, does not love you, neither is he your friend.

Anybody who tries to hide the fact of a dangerous, painful Hell from you is trying to harm you, and certainly is not your friend. Anybody who tells you about the Heaven and Hell that will come at the end of the world, is trying to get you to be saved rather than damned.

Note that Fluffer can't even begin to understand the proof that God exists -

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380

- to say nothing about being able to refute or rebut or debunk it.

[BADecker]

Do you believe in god? If you do, why do you believe? (give a few reasons)

Do you believe in God? I believe! The Lord Jesus Christ who sits on the throne of high! I know that because he cares about me, he will discipline me. His word shall be fulfilled, and his discipline out of love!

And you will die like the rest of apes before you.

Whatever gets you going little buddy...I am sure your contribution to the human progress has been minimal.

Are you the devil, himself, or just one of his mouths?   

[daiyuba1971]

Do you believe in god? If you do, why do you believe? (give a few reasons)

Do you believe in God? I believe! The Lord Jesus Christ who sits on the throne of high! I know that because he cares about me, he will discipline me. His word shall be fulfilled, and his discipline out of love!

And you will die like the rest of apes before you.

Whatever gets you going little buddy...I am sure your contribution to the human progress has been minimal.

Are you the devil, himself, or just one of his mouths?   

If he cares about you and you sincerely believe in it then tell me why you live in constant search of food. Why don't you live in abundance? Many Arab sheiks who Finance terrorists are living now in Paradise. Why?

[olushakes]

Science in his infinite wisdom has try to debunk every reasons why people believe in God from the world of medicine where almost every form of transplant is possible to the various theories to debunk the existence of God by the philosophers among other explanations for things that remain un-understandable in the past, but for me, I still believe in the super-natural because several things will happen in life that one cannot even explain and that is the Supernatural and that is simply God working in which I am proud to have and will still believe in.

[TrumpD]

What is CBDoken?

The secure, global and transparent marketplace for purchasing and trading of quality-assured CBD-based products utilizing the power of blockchain technology. CBD or Cannabidiol is a substance that is generated through extraction of organic materials found in the structure of special industrial hemp that does not contain significant amounts of THC (the substance that governments are concerned about).

There are issues in this industry that nobody is addressing, and we find it a viable use case for blockchain technology to be incorporated. It is difficult to trade CBD on the open market, and unlike Oil, Steel, and other commodities, trading hemp is not as simple as it sounds. This is why CBDoken is tokenizing premium 55% concentration CBD Full Spectrum Extract and creating voucher tokens on a 1:1 ratio under the watchful eye of KPMG, a global auditing company that will be taking care of keeping everything tracked. One token for one gram of product.

The tokenization helps solve the transparency issues with global CBD product pricing, deals with massive quality fluctuations. To top this off, CBDoken provides the world’s first CBD marketplace, where anybody in the world can trade actual CBD stock audited by a global player in the world. CBDoken is not a producer of CBD products, but rather we have partnered with one of Europe’s most affluent companies in the sector, PharmaHemp. Together with them, we have stockpiled 750 000 grams of the above-mentioned CBD product.

We are building a community around our project based on values and needs, so if you are interested in CBD, come and talk with us! For more information have a look at our whitepaper, but if you have any questions simply post a comment below or speak with us on Telegram.

Website - Whitepaper - Buy CBDoken - Blog