That’s such a sublime analogy, Mike – did you come up with that yourself?
Also a question on the first sentence I bold reded : "When a sailboat goes against the wind, every step of every process is 100% deterministic."
when a sailboat goes AGAINST the wind - wouldn't that be the opposite of deterministic? Something has intervened to counter the force of the wind.
~ ~ ~ ~
also, on a side note are you thinking of publishing your work? If so, aren't you concerned about presenting it on an open forum, at the risk of someone stealing your work?
That’s such a sublime analogy, Mike – did you come up with that yourself?
It kinda blows my mind also.
I should say "thanks," but of course, I have to search for “who gets the credit?” with it in mind that there are no real new ideas, that all good ideas come from God.
But somehow the idea ended up in my word processor, and I am not sure who came up with it. I definitely have no book or article or person in mind telling that idea to me.But I do know all the pieces were swirling around in my head like a vortex a few years ago.
I wasn’t expecting it, but it came in just months before the Pandemic started, I think, without checking records.
Best my memory serves me, the sailboat idea just plopped out of many fierce debates I had for years in forums devoted to free will, both for and against.Since I am in between, and I have a new idea, I got fierce resistance from both sides.
At this minute I honestly can’t remember if I put the pieces together or if they were jammed together in the heat of battle, and I just noticed it. I’ve been so busy working the idea that I haven’t stopped to remember where it came from.
The swirling around in my head I mentioned is from two friends I have. One who is very excited about sailing and it was from him I might have picked something up. He was the one who impressed on me that sailboats can go faster than the wind.THAT got my attention, especially since I had ignored sailboats for a lifetime.
The other friend is a Deadhead friend, a fellow fan of the Grateful Dead.He plays great Dead covers with other musicians in their basements.He also happens to be a world famous sailing author. So, as the sailboat freedoms were being hyped by friend #1, I could bounce any technical ideas off Deadhead friend #2.It was in homage to him that I included the Grateful Dead in my Chapter 2.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Also a question on the first sentence I bold reded : "When a sailboat goes against the wind, every step of every process is 100% deterministic."
when a sailboat goes AGAINSTthe wind - wouldn't that bethe opposite of deterministic?Something has intervened to counter the force of the wind.
To be more full in the description, a sailboat goes against wind DIRECTION.
The wind, being a major deterministic force here, is what powers the boat in whatever direction it goes.The boat uses the Bernouli Principle to convert wind energy in THAT direction into wind energy in THIS direction.
So it is the wind itself that intervened, along with the sail shape etc, to force a different DIRECTION on the boat’s motion.
Because the Bernoulli Principle is involved, this sailing process is just as complicated and just as “magical” as how airplanes fly. The Bernoulli Principle gives airplanes a sense of “freedom” from gravity determinism, but that is just at first glance.
But a sailboat and an airplane COMPLETELY obey all the Laws of Physics, which is where determinism comes from.I explain this more in chapter 5.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
also, on a side note are you thinking of publishing your work? If so, aren't you concerned about presenting it on an open forum, at the risk of someone stealing your work?
. As you know I have some peculiar attitudes towards copyrights, originality, and other related issues.
As I mentioned above, the way I hammered out this theory was in public forums. If I had been paying attention to hoarding the ideas I had for self-purposes and copywriting, then I probably would have not gotten them into fairly decent written form.
Plus, copyright paperwork is a bore. I’m too old to bother with all that. I’d rather DONATE the ideas to humanity, as I state in chapter 1, this free will thingy has become a cultural EMERGENCY!That is one reason I jumped at the chance to “publish” here.It is one more way the ideas can get out there. Maybe someone else can put these same pieces together better than me, and add more pieces to boot.I just feel honored to participate, and that’s been my attitude all along.
Plus, if someone stole my ideas that would be GREAT !!!If they can market them, more power to them. Hey, maybe I could collaborate with them if they were thinking that much like me that they would invest in such a heist.
That’s such a sublime analogy, Mike – did you come up with that yourself?
I was thinking more on this. I got many ideas from Daniel Dennett, as I have a whole chapter (4) on him. I may have "gotten wind" of the idea from all the confusion in Dennett's writing, that I also mention in chapter 4.
also, on a side note are you thinking of publishing your work? If so, aren't you concerned about presenting it on an open forum, at the risk of someone stealing your work?
I am somewhat entertained by your attempts to transform these people into your idea of how they should be thinking about you and your endless babblings, and it's pretty disgusting to see your desire for worship, first for you to worship you and then for others to worship you.
Your relentless pursuit of the ghost of VPW will end and be cast down to the ground. Neither you or anyone else is made in the image of VPW or PFAL.
We, each one of us, is made in the image of God, not man, and until you respect this you will not find any true answers, even when they are in plain sight.
That’s such a sublime analogy, Mike – did you come up with that yourself?
It kinda blows my mind also.
I should say "thanks," but of course, I have to search for “who gets the credit?” with it in mind that there are no real new ideas, that all good ideas come from God.
But somehow the idea ended up in my word processor, and I am not sure who came up with it. I definitely have no book or article or person in mind telling that idea to me.But I do know all the pieces were swirling around in my head like a vortex a few years ago.
I wasn’t expecting it, but it came in just months before the Pandemic started, I think, without checking records.
Best my memory serves me, the sailboat idea just plopped out of many fierce debates I had for years in forums devoted to free will, both for and against.Since I am in between, and I have a new idea, I got fierce resistance from both sides.
At this minute I honestly can’t remember if I put the pieces together or if they were jammed together in the heat of battle, and I just noticed it. I’ve been so busy working the idea that I haven’t stopped to remember where it came from.
The swirling around in my head I mentioned is from two friends I have. One who is very excited about sailing and it was from him I might have picked something up. He was the one who impressed on me that sailboats can go faster than the wind.THAT got my attention, especially since I had ignored sailboats for a lifetime.
The other friend is a Deadhead friend, a fellow fan of the Grateful Dead.He plays great Dead covers with other musicians in their basements.He also happens to be a world famous sailing author. So, as the sailboat freedoms were being hyped by friend #1, I could bounce any technical ideas off Deadhead friend #2.It was in homage to him that I included the Grateful Dead in my Chapter 2.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Also a question on the first sentence I bold reded : "When a sailboat goes against the wind, every step of every process is 100% deterministic."
when a sailboat goes AGAINSTthe wind - wouldn't that bethe opposite of deterministic?Something has intervened to counter the force of the wind.
To be more full in the description, a sailboat goes against wind DIRECTION.
The wind, being a major deterministic force here, is what powers the boat in whatever direction it goes.The boat uses the Bernouli Principle to convert wind energy in THAT direction into wind energy in THIS direction.
So it is the wind itself that intervened, along with the sail shape etc, to force a different DIRECTION on the boat’s motion.
Because the Bernoulli Principle is involved, this sailing process is just as complicated and just as “magical” as how airplanes fly. The Bernoulli Principle gives airplanes a sense of “freedom” from gravity determinism, but that is just at first glance.
But a sailboat and an airplane COMPLETELY obey all the Laws of Physics, which is where determinism comes from.I explain this more in chapter 5.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
also, on a side note are you thinking of publishing your work? If so, aren't you concerned about presenting it on an open forum, at the risk of someone stealing your work?
. As you know I have some peculiar attitudes towards copyrights, originality, and other related issues.
As I mentioned above, the way I hammered out this theory was in public forums. If I had been paying attention to hoarding the ideas I had for self-purposes and copywriting, then I probably would have not gotten them into fairly decent written form.
Plus, copyright paperwork is a bore. I’m too old to bother with all that. I’d rather DONATE the ideas to humanity, as I state in chapter 1, this free will thingy has become a cultural EMERGENCY!That is one reason I jumped at the chance to “publish” here.It is one more way the ideas can get out there. Maybe someone else can put these same pieces together better than me, and add more pieces to boot.I just feel honored to participate, and that’s been my attitude all along.
Plus, if someone stole my ideas that would be GREAT !!!If they can market them, more power to them. Hey, maybe I could collaborate with them if they were thinking that much like me that they would invest in such a heist.
3 hours ago, Mike said:
I was thinking more on this. I got many ideas from Daniel Dennett, as I have a whole chapter (5) on him. I may have "gotten wind" of the idea from all the confusion in Dennett's writing, that I also mention in chapter 5.
You know how I feelabout copyright stuff, giving credit where credit is due, proper attribution and all that…if you’re posting here for feedback and critiques – I have to be honest with you…your responses remind me of wierwille’s indifference to plagiarism…I like Daniel Dennett – have 5 of his books – and watched some You Tubes with him…I thought some of your stuff had a mish-mash familiarity to it…
I’m no writer – but I still dabble in music and art as a hobby now – and I always prided myself on being creative, original and a little weirdbut I can rattle off my “pedigree” of influences and my thinking process on anything I have created – I’ve shared that a few times here when I talked with some other musicians.
I’m not a great musician or artist but all the creative people I’ve respected, I think one of their most admirable attributes is their genuineness in who they are and the respect they hold for who had inspired them…
…sorry Mike – don’t mean to be a downer – but your “style” really turns me off…
That’s all for now – maybe I'll share a few other things if I find the right words
I'm trying to be on my best behavior - not trying to pi$$ you off - I want to have an open honest conversation - but I get frustrated cuz I feel you're hiding something - sorry I'm not smart enough to draw it out of you
Also a question on the first sentence I bold reded : "When a sailboat goes against the wind, every step of every process is 100% deterministic."
when a sailboat goes AGAINSTthe wind - wouldn't that bethe opposite of deterministic?Something has intervened to counter the force of the wind.
To be more full in the description, a sailboat goes against wind DIRECTION.
The wind, being a major deterministic force here, is what powers the boat in whatever direction it goes.The boat uses the Bernouli Principle to convert wind energy in THAT direction into wind energy in THIS direction.
So it is the wind itself that intervened, along with the sail shape etc, to force a different DIRECTION on the boat’s motion.
Because the Bernoulli Principle is involved, this sailing process is just as complicated and just as “magical” as how airplanes fly. The Bernoulli Principle gives airplanes a sense of “freedom” from gravity determinism, but that is just at first glance.
Yeah…not feeling good about your statements here either…
you’re description is so awkwardly amateurish I’m almost embarrassed for you – thank goodness you’re playing to a small crowd... Did you Google to find out about how to sail a boat? It reads like something a 10-year-old would write…I think I can make correct guesses about how to sail than you can – and I’m not a sailor.
But I mentioned stuff about flight cuz I read up a lot on The Wright Brothers – shared some of that here in regards to Napoleon Hill’s what the mind of man can conceive and believe he can achieve. I think wierwille probably mangled up Hill’s idea with his own law-of-believing nonsense. Hill’s “formula” articulated the normal process of how things get done…wierwille’s “formula” was magic. (FYI – I don’t believe in magic)…anyway The Wright Brothers read up on what other inventors were doing to make flight possible, the Wrights studied birds – how they changed the wing shape to control flight – the Wrights built their own wind tunnel and experimented with models – they studied Bernoulli’s Principle – the Lift Force – Newton’s law of lift caused by a flow deflection…probably the same idea with moving the sail – and the rudder too – you never mentioned anything about using the rudder on a sailboat.
We, each one of us, is made in the image of God, not man, and until you respect this you will not find any true answers, even when they are in plain sight.
Love you
I thought I'd limit my response to where where we can agree.
I think you have a point here. That kind of respect for all is properly called for.
We at TWI would sometimes get that attitude that since we had so many pure fixed doctrines, that we in this "household" were superior beings, and those who "tripped out" of the household were scum of the earth, and those without spirit were "empties" and mere beasts.
I could see this attitude growing as the years went by.
What I decided to do is respect all humans as either family with spirit, or respect them as possibly future family with spirit.
Similarly with heretics: they can someday turn around and come back to like-mindedness.
*/*/*/*
I don't know how to comment on your other text, because it seems to have nothing to do with my Free Will posting here in this thread. I do seem to remember we clashed at times in the past, like YEARS ago, but I am sorry to say I don't remember what the issues were.
*/*/*/*/*/*
Much more than being focused on convincing anyone here, I am focused on just making certain alternative thoughts available. I can accept people rejecting what I say, and I am thankful that I can say it anyway.
…I like Daniel Dennett – have 5 of his books – and watched some You Tubes with him…I thought some of your stuff had a mish-mash familiarity to it…
I'm trying to be on my best behavior - not trying to pi$$ you off - I want to have an open honest conversation - but I get frustrated cuz I feel you're hiding something - sorry I'm not smart enough to draw it out of you
peace
First of all .... peace to you too.
Second, I am not aware of hiding anything at all. I really am SO INNOCENT of hiding things, that I can't imagine what you mean? Do you mean about my personal life? Someone asked me the other day if I was on TWI payroll. ABSOLUTELY NOT! I am definitely getting a tiny bit closer to them at HQ, and I have mentioned here I am already quite close to the local leaders in recent years.
Is that what you mean about hiding things?
I am wildly guessing on this. Do you think I am starting a ministry or a corporation or anything like that?
I just don't have a clue what you mean by me possibly hiding something.
*/*/*/*/*
As for Daniel Dennett I am glad you are a fan of his. I have studied his 2 books on free will, and if you have them, my next chapter will give you an extensive guide to reading his free will ideas.
Dennett's 2 books on free will are "Elbow Room" and "Freedom Evolves."
I met him in 1995 when he was a guest speaker at the UCSD group. He had a top best selling book then, Consciousness Explained, that we read as a group and discussed before his visit.
He has an odd reputation for being dense and unintelligible in just his 2 free will books, while in all his other books he is looked at as a master explainer and deep thinker. I expand on this in my chapter 4, which is next. I made a mistake in a previous post, saying it was chapter 5.
you’re description is so awkwardly amateurish I’m almost embarrassed for you – thank goodness you’re playing to a small crowd... Did you Google to find out about how to sail a boat? It reads like something a 10-year-old would write…I think I can make correct guesses about how to sail than you can – and I’m not a sailor.
There are some places where the ideas were flowing so fast, my attention to the prose and style has been minimal. Some sections I have been tuning up. I realize a lot of it is still awkward. The ideas are what matter most in these early stages.
you never mentioned anything about using the rudder on a sailboat.
.Hmmm. I thought I did. Maybe that is in a later chapter. I'll check.
Not just the rudder should be in there somewhere, but the keel is equally important. They are just as important as the Bernoulli shape in the sail.
I am somewhat entertained by your attempts to transform these people into your idea of how they should be thinking about you and your endless babblings, and it's pretty disgusting to see your desire for worship, first for you to worship you and then for others to worship you.
Your relentless pursuit of the ghost of VPW will end and be cast down to the ground. Neither you or anyone else is made in the image of VPW or PFAL.
Hey CMan,
I think you finally nailed what Mike's been up to for the last 20 years.
Further, I believe he has, unless he has donated ($$$$$) generously to Pawtucket for the upkeep of this website, has morally -- if not technically -- MISAPPROPRIATED resources he should have been paying for all along.
…sorry Mike – don’t mean to be a downer – but your “style” really turns me off…
It is my considered (at least for a short time) opinion that Mike has been operating a long con game (off and on, and by that I mean, except for the times he has taken extended periods without posting)for the last 20 years at GSC.
He has NOT contributed honestly, IMO, to discussion about twi. I believe CMAN nailed it earlier on Saturday evening.
I think you have a point here. That kind of respect for all is properly called for.
We at TWI would sometimes get that attitude that since we had so many pure fixed doctrines, that we in this "household" were superior beings, and those who "tripped out" of the household were scum of the earth, and those without spirit were "empties" and mere beasts.
I could see this attitude growing as the years went by.
Really dark stuff here…seems like you’re projecting – or mimicking what LCM would say…I never thought like that – and I was actually in the way corps and you were NOT
I thought I'd limit my response to where where we can agree...
...Much more than being focused on convincing anyone here, I am focused on just making certain alternative thoughts available. I can accept people rejecting what I say, and I am thankful that I can say it anyway.
It does seem like your number one goal is to convince people you know what you’re talking about
Second, I am not aware of hiding anything at all. I really am SO INNOCENT of hiding things, that I can't imagine what you mean? Do you mean about my personal life? Someone asked me the other day if I was on TWI payroll. ABSOLUTELY NOT! I am definitely getting a tiny bit closer to them at HQ, and I have mentioned here I am already quite close to the local leaders in recent years.
Is that what you mean about hiding things?
I am wildly guessing on this. Do you think I am starting a ministry or a corporation or anything like that?
I just don't have a clue what you mean by me possibly hiding something.
Seems like I touched a nerve here
I wasn’t thinking along the lines of you starting your own ministry or corporation – that’s way out of your league
Hiding the fact that one does not know what they’re talking about – depending on the context, THAT could be a big problem
He has an odd reputation for being dense and unintelligible in just his 2 free will books, while in all his other books he is looked at as a master explainer and deep thinker. I expand on this in my chapter 4, which is next. I made a mistake in a previous post, saying it was chapter 5.
Further, I believe he has, unless he has donated ($$$$$) generously to Pawtucket for the upkeep of this website, has morally -- if not technically -- MISAPPROPRIATED resources he should have been paying for all along.
You have one point there. It has not occurred to me for years that someone pays for this site to operate. Point taken.
But I disagree with your other points. If I were posting dishonest material, lies, or exaggerations you would have a moral point, but I don't do that.
If what I post is TRUE, and if that same material undermines some of what others think is the purpose of GSC, then it is moral and right for me to continue.
It’s dishonest when you skirt around an issue or point of contention
You have no idea how many points of contention land in my lap every time I post. (1) I cannot handle all of them for the shear volume, plus (2) many are not serious and mere harassing of me. (3) There are also some points I feel way to incompetent to handle, especially in public. (4) Then there are some that are obviously there to distract and get me off a point I am trying to make. (5) Oh and don't forget when do respond to an idea, but it is within a response to someone else and not read by the one stewing in anger for my supposed dodging.
So, if you are going to be a self appointed steward of the "Issue Dodging Inventory," please do a thorough job and subtract from your ledger all the items I listed above.
Now, can you name one single OUTSTANDING instance of my skirting around an issue? Maybe I'll have time to handle it.
It’s dishonest when you skirt around an issue or point of contention
No, it just seems like that to you sometimes, because you don't see the whole picture.
I just handled this issue, and will repeat this response:
You have no idea how many points of contention land in my lap every time I post. (1) I cannot handle all of them for the shear volume, plus (2) many are not serious and mere harassing of me. (3) There are also some points I feel way to incompetent to handle, especially in public. (4) Then there are some that are obviously there to distract and get me off a point I am trying to make. (5) Oh and don't forget when do respond to an idea, but it is within a response to someone else and not read by the one stewing in anger for my supposed dodging.
So, if you are going to be a self appointed steward of the "Issue Dodging Inventory," please do a thorough job and subtract from your ledger all the items I listed above.
Now, can you name one single OUTSTANDING instance of my skirting around an issue? Maybe I'll have time to handle it.
you’re description is so awkwardly amateurish I’m almost embarrassed for you – thank goodness you’re playing to a small crowd... Did you Google to find out about how to sail a boat? It reads like something a 10-year-old would write…I think I can make correct guesses about how to sail than you can – and I’m not a sailor.
There are some places where the ideas were flowing so fast, my attention to the prose and style has been minimal. Some sections I have been tuning up. I realize a lot of it is still awkward. The ideas are what matter most in these early stages.
you never mentioned anything about using the rudder on a sailboat.
.Hmmm. I thought I did. Maybe that is in a later chapter. I'll check.
Not just the rudder should be in there somewhere, but the keel is equally important. They are just as important as the Bernoulli shape in the sail.
8 hours ago, Mike said:
I just did a search on Chapter 2 and found 7 places where "rudder" is mentioned.
You might like it more with a second reading?
Late edit: there are 6 uses of "rudder" and 2 uses of "keel."
Oh yeah – I know what you wrote in those chapters…my standard practice on Grease Spot Café is to copy and paste entire threads – including the hyperlinks to find each post – into Word docs on my computer, network drive and iCloud. It’s handy for self-referencing of course – that’s why I put a lot of sources, quirky phrasing in my posts – it makes a search much easier…and adding plus – I don’t have to be online to review threads.
For instance, on this thread – so far I’ve got it on 65 pages of a Word doc. I already knew how many times you mentioned rudder when I asked that question. The reason I phrased that question the way I did was to see if you knew what you were talking about…sorry - it seems that you DO NOT.
We used to check out someone’s story that way in high school. One of my friends is now an attorney…asking someone to repeat their story or elaborate on details is a quick an easy vetting process – and sometimes it might expose a bull$hit artist – if you know what I mean.
~ ~ ~ ~
Hey, I’ve got an old joke for this thread – maybe you’ve heard it:
A top economist was talking with his driver on the way to a speaking engagement. The economist has been touring for years and was complaining about how boring it has become. Promoting his books, bragging about the same old projects and think tanks, answering the same old questions from the audience.
The driver said, “I know what you mean – I’ve been hauling you around to all these gigs and listening to you speak for so long – I think I could get up there and give your talk.”
The economist was hallway listening – being distracted by the heavy traffic and frequent stops – and then says “wait…what did you just say?”
The driver replies, “aw it was nothing…just that I’ve heard your talk for so long I think I’ve got it memorized.”
The economist leans forward – puts his hand on the driver’s shoulder “I’ve got a crazy idea, Mac – I bet most of the people in this town don’t know what I look like – let’s switch roles. You get up on stage, give the same old talk, answer the same old questions – and I’ll just sit in the back enjoying our little ruse.”
So, they switch roles, and everything goes fine and without a hitch. But in the middle of the question-and-answer period someone in the audience asked a cost-effective related question that had never been asked before in all the years of their touring.
The quick thinking driver – used to making snap decisions in traffic calmly replied “Ha, that’s an easy one – I bet my driver in the back of the auditorium could answer that – uhm, Mac would you please.”
You have no idea how many points of contention land in my lap every time I post. (1) I cannot handle all of them for the shear volume, plus (2) many are not serious and mere harassing of me. (3) There are also some points I feel way to incompetent to handle, especially in public. (4) Then there are some that are obviously there to distract and get me off a point I am trying to make. (5) Oh and don't forget when do respond to an idea, but it is within a response to someone else and not read by the one stewing in anger for my supposed dodging.
So, if you are going to be a self appointed steward of the "Issue Dodging Inventory," please do a thorough job and subtract from your ledger all the items I listed above.
Now, can you name one single OUTSTANDING instance of my skirting around an issue? Maybe I'll have time to handle it.
wow wee wow - this entire post is full of dodge tactics - way to go !
Really dark stuff here…seems like you’re projecting – or mimicking what LCM would say…I never thought like that – and I was actually in the way corps and you were NOT
Sure it is really dark stuff if you leave out the light I posted.
You need to look at the part of my response where I decided (long ago) to DIFFER from LCM:
Here was what you seemed to overlook in my post:
We at TWI would sometimes get that attitude that since we had so many pure fixed doctrines, that we in this "household" were superior beings, and those who "tripped out" of the household were scum of the earth, and those without spirit were "empties" and mere beasts.
I could see this attitude growing as the years went by. (and did not like it)
What I decided to do is respect all humans as either family with spirit, or respect them as possibly future family with spirit.
Similarly with heretics: they can someday turn around and come back to like-mindedness.
It does seem like your number one goal is to convince people you know what you’re talking about
It is not number one, but of course I want to convince people that I have some good knowledge that IF IT IS TRUE. If I don't know about a topic I will either say so or keep quiet about it.
My number one goal is to get some certain thing said, and said as well as possible. Once I feel that has been achieved I move on. I feel that the Absent Christ thread is relatively finished. The NT Canon still has some things to post, but I did get my main points out there.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
330
267
271
186
Popular Days
Nov 12
118
Nov 13
107
Nov 20
105
Nov 9
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 330 posts
T-Bone 267 posts
OldSkool 271 posts
Nathan_Jr 186 posts
Popular Days
Nov 12 2022
118 posts
Nov 13 2022
107 posts
Nov 20 2022
105 posts
Nov 9 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personall
waysider
This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collecte
Charity
I agree with So_Crates when he said "Here's a wild idea: why don't YOU become meek and I'll tell you about all the fruit in my life since I stopped making PLAF the center of my life." There have
Posted Images
Mike
That’s such a sublime analogy, Mike – did you come up with that yourself?
It kinda blows my mind also.
I should say "thanks," but of course, I have to search for “who gets the credit?” with it in mind that there are no real new ideas, that all good ideas come from God.
But somehow the idea ended up in my word processor, and I am not sure who came up with it. I definitely have no book or article or person in mind telling that idea to me. But I do know all the pieces were swirling around in my head like a vortex a few years ago.
I wasn’t expecting it, but it came in just months before the Pandemic started, I think, without checking records.
Best my memory serves me, the sailboat idea just plopped out of many fierce debates I had for years in forums devoted to free will, both for and against. Since I am in between, and I have a new idea, I got fierce resistance from both sides.
At this minute I honestly can’t remember if I put the pieces together or if they were jammed together in the heat of battle, and I just noticed it. I’ve been so busy working the idea that I haven’t stopped to remember where it came from.
The swirling around in my head I mentioned is from two friends I have. One who is very excited about sailing and it was from him I might have picked something up. He was the one who impressed on me that sailboats can go faster than the wind. THAT got my attention, especially since I had ignored sailboats for a lifetime.
The other friend is a Deadhead friend, a fellow fan of the Grateful Dead. He plays great Dead covers with other musicians in their basements. He also happens to be a world famous sailing author. So, as the sailboat freedoms were being hyped by friend #1, I could bounce any technical ideas off Deadhead friend #2. It was in homage to him that I included the Grateful Dead in my Chapter 2.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
Also a question on the first sentence I bold reded : "When a sailboat goes against the wind, every step of every process is 100% deterministic."
when a sailboat goes AGAINST the wind - wouldn't that be the opposite of deterministic? Something has intervened to counter the force of the wind.
To be more full in the description, a sailboat goes against wind DIRECTION.
The wind, being a major deterministic force here, is what powers the boat in whatever direction it goes. The boat uses the Bernouli Principle to convert wind energy in THAT direction into wind energy in THIS direction.
So it is the wind itself that intervened, along with the sail shape etc, to force a different DIRECTION on the boat’s motion.
Because the Bernoulli Principle is involved, this sailing process is just as complicated and just as “magical” as how airplanes fly. The Bernoulli Principle gives airplanes a sense of “freedom” from gravity determinism, but that is just at first glance.
But a sailboat and an airplane COMPLETELY obey all the Laws of Physics, which is where determinism comes from. I explain this more in chapter 5.
*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*
also, on a side note are you thinking of publishing your work? If so, aren't you concerned about presenting it on an open forum, at the risk of someone stealing your work?
. As you know I have some peculiar attitudes towards copyrights, originality, and other related issues.
As I mentioned above, the way I hammered out this theory was in public forums. If I had been paying attention to hoarding the ideas I had for self-purposes and copywriting, then I probably would have not gotten them into fairly decent written form.
Plus, copyright paperwork is a bore. I’m too old to bother with all that. I’d rather DONATE the ideas to humanity, as I state in chapter 1, this free will thingy has become a cultural EMERGENCY! That is one reason I jumped at the chance to “publish” here. It is one more way the ideas can get out there. Maybe someone else can put these same pieces together better than me, and add more pieces to boot. I just feel honored to participate, and that’s been my attitude all along.
Plus, if someone stole my ideas that would be GREAT !!! If they can market them, more power to them. Hey, maybe I could collaborate with them if they were thinking that much like me that they would invest in such a heist.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I was thinking more on this. I got many ideas from Daniel Dennett, as I have a whole chapter (4) on him. I may have "gotten wind" of the idea from all the confusion in Dennett's writing, that I also mention in chapter 4.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Dear Mike,
I am somewhat entertained by your attempts to transform these people into your idea of how they should be thinking about you and your endless babblings, and it's pretty disgusting to see your desire for worship, first for you to worship you and then for others to worship you.
Your relentless pursuit of the ghost of VPW will end and be cast down to the ground. Neither you or anyone else is made in the image of VPW or PFAL.
We, each one of us, is made in the image of God, not man, and until you respect this you will not find any true answers, even when they are in plain sight.
Love you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
You know how I feel about copyright stuff, giving credit where credit is due, proper attribution and all that…if you’re posting here for feedback and critiques – I have to be honest with you…your responses remind me of wierwille’s indifference to plagiarism…I like Daniel Dennett – have 5 of his books – and watched some You Tubes with him…I thought some of your stuff had a mish-mash familiarity to it…
I’m no writer – but I still dabble in music and art as a hobby now – and I always prided myself on being creative, original and a little weird
but I can rattle off my “pedigree” of influences and my thinking process on anything I have created – I’ve shared that a few times here when I talked with some other musicians.
I’m not a great musician or artist but all the creative people I’ve respected, I think one of their most admirable attributes is their genuineness in who they are and the respect they hold for who had inspired them…
…sorry Mike – don’t mean to be a downer – but your “style” really turns me off…
That’s all for now – maybe I'll share a few other things if I find the right words
I'm trying to be on my best behavior - not trying to pi$$ you off - I want to have an open honest conversation - but I get frustrated cuz I feel you're hiding something - sorry I'm not smart enough to draw it out of you
peace
Edited by T-Bonetypo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Yeah…not feeling good about your statements here either…
you’re description is so awkwardly amateurish I’m almost embarrassed for you – thank goodness you’re playing to a small crowd... Did you Google to find out about how to sail a boat? It reads like something a 10-year-old would write…I think I can make correct guesses about how to sail than you can – and I’m not a sailor.
But I mentioned stuff about flight cuz I read up a lot on The Wright Brothers – shared some of that here in regards to Napoleon Hill’s what the mind of man can conceive and believe he can achieve. I think wierwille probably mangled up Hill’s idea with his own law-of-believing nonsense. Hill’s “formula” articulated the normal process of how things get done…wierwille’s “formula” was magic. (FYI – I don’t believe in magic)…anyway The Wright Brothers read up on what other inventors were doing to make flight possible, the Wrights studied birds – how they changed the wing shape to control flight – the Wrights built their own wind tunnel and experimented with models – they studied Bernoulli’s Principle – the Lift Force – Newton’s law of lift caused by a flow deflection…probably the same idea with moving the sail – and the rudder too – you never mentioned anything about using the rudder on a sailboat.
Sorry Mike - another disappointment here
Edited by T-Bonerevision
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I thought I'd limit my response to where where we can agree.
I think you have a point here. That kind of respect for all is properly called for.
We at TWI would sometimes get that attitude that since we had so many pure fixed doctrines, that we in this "household" were superior beings, and those who "tripped out" of the household were scum of the earth, and those without spirit were "empties" and mere beasts.
I could see this attitude growing as the years went by.
What I decided to do is respect all humans as either family with spirit, or respect them as possibly future family with spirit.
Similarly with heretics: they can someday turn around and come back to like-mindedness.
*/*/*/*
I don't know how to comment on your other text, because it seems to have nothing to do with my Free Will posting here in this thread. I do seem to remember we clashed at times in the past, like YEARS ago, but I am sorry to say I don't remember what the issues were.
*/*/*/*/*/*
Much more than being focused on convincing anyone here, I am focused on just making certain alternative thoughts available. I can accept people rejecting what I say, and I am thankful that I can say it anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
First of all .... peace to you too.
Second, I am not aware of hiding anything at all. I really am SO INNOCENT of hiding things, that I can't imagine what you mean? Do you mean about my personal life? Someone asked me the other day if I was on TWI payroll. ABSOLUTELY NOT! I am definitely getting a tiny bit closer to them at HQ, and I have mentioned here I am already quite close to the local leaders in recent years.
Is that what you mean about hiding things?
I am wildly guessing on this. Do you think I am starting a ministry or a corporation or anything like that?
I just don't have a clue what you mean by me possibly hiding something.
*/*/*/*/*
As for Daniel Dennett I am glad you are a fan of his. I have studied his 2 books on free will, and if you have them, my next chapter will give you an extensive guide to reading his free will ideas.
Dennett's 2 books on free will are "Elbow Room" and "Freedom Evolves."
I met him in 1995 when he was a guest speaker at the UCSD group. He had a top best selling book then, Consciousness Explained, that we read as a group and discussed before his visit.
He has an odd reputation for being dense and unintelligible in just his 2 free will books, while in all his other books he is looked at as a master explainer and deep thinker. I expand on this in my chapter 4, which is next. I made a mistake in a previous post, saying it was chapter 5.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I just did a search on Chapter 2 and found 7 places where "rudder" is mentioned.
You might like it more with a second reading?
Late edit: there are 6 uses of "rudder" and 2 uses of "keel."
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Hey CMan,
I think you finally nailed what Mike's been up to for the last 20 years.
Further, I believe he has, unless he has donated ($$$$$) generously to Pawtucket for the upkeep of this website, has morally -- if not technically -- MISAPPROPRIATED resources he should have been paying for all along.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
It is my considered (at least for a short time) opinion that Mike has been operating a long con game (off and on, and by that I mean, except for the times he has taken extended periods without posting)for the last 20 years at GSC.
He has NOT contributed honestly, IMO, to discussion about twi. I believe CMAN nailed it earlier on Saturday evening.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It’s dishonest when you skirt around an issue or point of contention
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Really dark stuff here…seems like you’re projecting – or mimicking what LCM would say…I never thought like that – and I was actually in the way corps and you were NOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It does seem like your number one goal is to convince people you know what you’re talking about
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Seems like I touched a nerve here
I wasn’t thinking along the lines of you starting your own ministry or corporation – that’s way out of your league
Hiding the fact that one does not know what they’re talking about – depending on the context, THAT could be a big problem
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
returning to the scene of the crime
tampering with evidence
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You have one point there. It has not occurred to me for years that someone pays for this site to operate. Point taken.
But I disagree with your other points. If I were posting dishonest material, lies, or exaggerations you would have a moral point, but I don't do that.
If what I post is TRUE, and if that same material undermines some of what others think is the purpose of GSC, then it is moral and right for me to continue.
If what I post is FALSE then I am in trouble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You have no idea how many points of contention land in my lap every time I post. (1) I cannot handle all of them for the shear volume, plus (2) many are not serious and mere harassing of me. (3) There are also some points I feel way to incompetent to handle, especially in public. (4) Then there are some that are obviously there to distract and get me off a point I am trying to make. (5) Oh and don't forget when do respond to an idea, but it is within a response to someone else and not read by the one stewing in anger for my supposed dodging.
So, if you are going to be a self appointed steward of the "Issue Dodging Inventory," please do a thorough job and subtract from your ledger all the items I listed above.
Now, can you name one single OUTSTANDING instance of my skirting around an issue? Maybe I'll have time to handle it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
No, it just seems like that to you sometimes, because you don't see the whole picture.
I just handled this issue, and will repeat this response:
You have no idea how many points of contention land in my lap every time I post. (1) I cannot handle all of them for the shear volume, plus (2) many are not serious and mere harassing of me. (3) There are also some points I feel way to incompetent to handle, especially in public. (4) Then there are some that are obviously there to distract and get me off a point I am trying to make. (5) Oh and don't forget when do respond to an idea, but it is within a response to someone else and not read by the one stewing in anger for my supposed dodging.
So, if you are going to be a self appointed steward of the "Issue Dodging Inventory," please do a thorough job and subtract from your ledger all the items I listed above.
Now, can you name one single OUTSTANDING instance of my skirting around an issue? Maybe I'll have time to handle it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Oh yeah – I know what you wrote in those chapters…my standard practice on Grease Spot Café is to copy and paste entire threads – including the hyperlinks to find each post – into Word docs on my computer, network drive and iCloud. It’s handy for self-referencing of course – that’s why I put a lot of sources, quirky phrasing in my posts – it makes a search much easier…and adding plus – I don’t have to be online to review threads.
For instance, on this thread – so far I’ve got it on 65 pages of a Word doc. I already knew how many times you mentioned rudder when I asked that question. The reason I phrased that question the way I did was to see if you knew what you were talking about…sorry - it seems that you DO NOT.
We used to check out someone’s story that way in high school. One of my friends is now an attorney…asking someone to repeat their story or elaborate on details is a quick an easy vetting process – and sometimes it might expose a bull$hit artist – if you know what I mean.
~ ~ ~ ~
Hey, I’ve got an old joke for this thread – maybe you’ve heard it:
A top economist was talking with his driver on the way to a speaking engagement. The economist has been touring for years and was complaining about how boring it has become. Promoting his books, bragging about the same old projects and think tanks, answering the same old questions from the audience.
The driver said, “I know what you mean – I’ve been hauling you around to all these gigs and listening to you speak for so long – I think I could get up there and give your talk.”
The economist was hallway listening – being distracted by the heavy traffic and frequent stops – and then says “wait…what did you just say?”
The driver replies, “aw it was nothing…just that I’ve heard your talk for so long I think I’ve got it memorized.”
The economist leans forward – puts his hand on the driver’s shoulder “I’ve got a crazy idea, Mac – I bet most of the people in this town don’t know what I look like – let’s switch roles. You get up on stage, give the same old talk, answer the same old questions – and I’ll just sit in the back enjoying our little ruse.”
So, they switch roles, and everything goes fine and without a hitch. But in the middle of the question-and-answer period someone in the audience asked a cost-effective related question that had never been asked before in all the years of their touring.
The quick thinking driver – used to making snap decisions in traffic calmly replied “Ha, that’s an easy one – I bet my driver in the back of the auditorium could answer that – uhm, Mac would you please.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
wow wee wow - this entire post is full of dodge tactics - way to go !
can't make up my mind which emoticon to use
Edited by T-Boneemoticon in motion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Sure it is really dark stuff if you leave out the light I posted.
You need to look at the part of my response where I decided (long ago) to DIFFER from LCM:
Here was what you seemed to overlook in my post:
We at TWI would sometimes get that attitude that since we had so many pure fixed doctrines, that we in this "household" were superior beings, and those who "tripped out" of the household were scum of the earth, and those without spirit were "empties" and mere beasts.
I could see this attitude growing as the years went by. (and did not like it)
What I decided to do is respect all humans as either family with spirit, or respect them as possibly future family with spirit.
Similarly with heretics: they can someday turn around and come back to like-mindedness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
It is not number one, but of course I want to convince people that I have some good knowledge that IF IT IS TRUE. If I don't know about a topic I will either say so or keep quiet about it.
My number one goal is to get some certain thing said, and said as well as possible. Once I feel that has been achieved I move on. I feel that the Absent Christ thread is relatively finished. The NT Canon still has some things to post, but I did get my main points out there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.