If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
I found it a most pleasant evolution from the "quality of life" I achieved during my paid working years, and I loved my job, to the freedom I had when I retired.
I no longer set deadlines, unless absolutely necessary - I start things earlier than I used to, and find focusing on "process" and the "present" gets them done on time.
I now only follow "routines" that I have freely chosen because I find them adding to my "quality of life".
I now pretty much self-set my "goals"; they are not set by others; and my goals include, of course, trying to keep my family happy.......so sometimes I am working on the goals of others.
I no longer have to do the "100-yard" dash regularly; slow and steady wins the race, and leaves you with energy to spare.
I totally pick my own "projects" - unpaid work that allows me to still contribute something to society.
I guess we are two of the retirees who like and enjoy it!
.. and last time I looked (admittedly some time ago) it was a lot of rubbish - my opinion of course.
At least all of it is nicely compartmentalized into one place to ignore.
Not in my opinion. I believe that only minds and their contents exist. Ideas of sense are in the mind, all ideas are in the mind, there is NOTHING outside of the mind save for other minds. This is my philosophical opinion.
If a bullet rips through A's heart, mind A also disappears...so did the heart not exist to make that mind also exist?
Bob, I hope you're not trying to influence the flow of this thread because you're concerned about everyone discovering that you're a honcho in the Covert Earthly ET Societies.
Pete (T-S...JNH)*
* Truth-Seeker...Just Not Here
p.s. don't worry, your secret is safe with me
Haha, Hi Peter, I had never heard the term Covert Earthly ET Societies before, honest.
But I entered it into youtube search and got a hilarious jumble of weird stuff,
including motivational speeches, clips on the illuminati, advanced civilizations before humans, secret moon bases, ancient aliens and something about the number 12 in the bible, and Donald Trumps family tree.
If a bullet rips through A's heart, mind A also disappears...so did the heart not exist to make that mind also exist?
It may be that it only seems that mind A disappears. There isn't much direct evidence of what happens to mind A after that sort of incident. Perhaps it is all cloud based?
As humans start to die out after we pass the Jan. 1, 2031 "Tipping Point" of Nature, and create a "New Balance" of Nature that is lethally hostile to us, I think it will be a rather moot point whether matter disappears, or illusion disappears, from the face of the planet.
If a bullet rips through A's heart, mind A also disappears...so did the heart not exist to make that mind also exist?
Bullets and hearts exist as ideas in minds. The Laws of Nature, which are patterns of God/Nature's thoughts, inform us that the ideas of a bullet going through the heart will lead to death, to the cessation of all ideas in the mind. The Laws of Nature also teach us that if we experience ideas of a ball rolling off of a table then we will experience next ideas of it falling. Both Berkeley and Hegel contend that only minds and their contents exist. The same is arguably true for Plato, Descartes, Kant and many other thinkers. Berkeley believes that the mind survives death and is eternal, so does Plato, so does Descartes, so does Kant, while Hegel believes that the mind perishes with death. I have no personal opinion one way or the other. Now, materialists believe that the ideas of sense we experience in our minds come about as a result of the interactions of matter and that the ideas in some sense correspond to or resemble material objects out there in the world. But idealists do not believe in a world out there, they do not believe that the ideas in the mind are related to anything material because they do not believe that material substance exists. I am an idealist, you are a materialist. This is a philosophical question beyond resolution. Because I experience myself as conscious and I experience ideas of sense, I assume that consciousness must be primary, it must be the substance. You believe that the ideas of sense are actually related to some material substance distinct from the ideas, that causes the ideas and that gives the illusion of mind, and of freedom. There are arguments to support both idealism and materialism, some of us are persuaded by the arguments for idealism, some by the arguments for materialism.
As humans start to die out after we pass the Jan. 1, 2031 "Tipping Point" of Nature, and create a "New Balance" of Nature that is lethally hostile to us, I think it will be a rather moot point whether matter disappears, or illusion disappears, from the face of the planet.
I believe that the "Tipping Point" has just taken place. The pandemic convinces me of this, as do the radical weather patterns that we are now seeing. We are being culled if not snuffed completely. The Omega variant is not far off. We may as well enjoy our remaining time, and if philosophical discussions are enjoyable then whether or not they are moot is moot.
1a : open to question : debatable
b : subjected to discussion : disputed
2 : deprived of practical significance : made abstract or purely academic
B.
Essential Meaning of "moot":
1 : not certain : argued about but not possible for people to prove He says that they should have foreseen the accident, but that point is moot. [=debatable]
2 US : not worth talking about : no longer important or worth discussing.
// The court ruled that the issue is now moot because the people involved in the dispute have died.
// I think they were wrong, but the point is moot. Their decision has been made and it can't be changed now.
The main topic of this thread is "Climate Change".
However, in my original posts for this thread, I posited that there were also important "attached issues" to be discussed.
Purists suggested that this diluted the thread, and that participation would diminish.
Just to answer that point again, our thread stats seem to indicate the opposite.
Thread "Views"
On the morning of Jan. 2, 2022, the number of views stood at 274.
The next morning (Jan. 3), there had been a 75% jump in the number of views, in only the one day (to 493).
This morning (Jan. 4), we find that yesterday (Only one day) pushed up the Jan. 3 morning total by 52% (to 751 views).
So we will see what today brings in increasing this 751 views current total.
This seems a good pace of participation so far.
Thread Comments:
As of this morning (Jan. 4), the number of "Responses" to the original post stands at 54. This is after the post has been up for 5 days (Dec. 30 to and including Jan. 3; original post @ 8:47 PM EST (According to the CT date stamp, which in my case is wrong......it is one hour ahead.....still timing my post as if it was Eastern Daylight Time).
So the number of responses per full day since the start of the thread is over 10 responses per day. Again, this seems a good pace for participation so far.
Your post makes me think of the philosophical system known as "Solipsism":.. Is your belief system different from this in some way?
It seems to me that only the materialists may be accused of solipsism. They argue that the ideas in our minds are caused by the interactions of matter, therefore they have no basis for necessarily presuming the existence of other minds/consciousnesses. Materialists require matter to demonstrate how/why we experience ideas of sense, thus so far as they can know within the context of their own systems of metaphysics, they could be alone, solipsism could be the case. The idealist on the other hand denies the existence of matter, thus because we do not create our own ideas of sense we must presume that they are created by some other mind, which mind is God/Nature, meaning that at least one other mind is demonstrated to exist and solipsism is therefore demonstrated to be false/impossible.
Likewise with the theory of the world being an "illusion". It is in fact the materialists who are committed to this claim, not the idealists. The materialist believes that the "real" object is external to the brain and that the interactions of matter/light lead to an idea taking place in the mind/brain/consciousness, which idea is fleeting and only a pale sort of representation of the actual more permanent external object that exists independently of the mind/brain/consciousness. Thus the materialist believes that the sensible world is completely illusory. The idealist on the other hand believes that our ideas are absolutely the real objects themselves, and that they are not illusions in any sense. In short, the materialists believe in an illusory world insofar as they have a Representational Theory of Perception while the idealists deny a world of illusion insofar as they propound a Direct Realist Theory of Perception.
To get back on (non-chess) topic, a huge unexpected snow blast hit Washington DC and it also stranded hundreds of motorists on Interstate 95 for about 15 or more hours. Add this to the recent wave of out-of-season tornadoes, the crazy cold out west, the crazy heat out west last summer, the wild fires exacerbated by hurricane force winds in Colorado, and on and on, and we seem to have a climate that is turning against mankind. More and more of these events, along with more volcanic eruptions, extreme flooding, more violent earthquakes and radical ice-melting continue unchecked. I am not at all religious, but Jesus did predict all of this in his Sermon on the Mount.
Bob, why do you think that the "tipping point" is still almost a decade in the future? Does it not seem that we are at or past that point now? Also, do you see any possible chance that we geniuses on this planet will shut down the economy sufficiently to meet this "tipping point" target by that time? Personally I do not. Thus the only solution is the cull that is taking place. We can reduce the cull if we shut down the economy, but if in our wisdom we insist upon going full steam ahead, then so too will Nature and the cull.
It may be that it only seems that mind A disappears. There isn't much direct evidence of what happens to mind A after that sort of incident. Perhaps it is all cloud based?
Ha ha...if you are considering mind to be consciousness, you may involve the natural phenomenon of 'entanglement' instead of giving so much power to google's 'cloud'...
Bullets and hearts exist as ideas in minds. The Laws of Nature, which are patterns of God/Nature's thoughts, inform us that the ideas of a bullet going through the heart will lead to death, to the cessation of all ideas in the mind. The Laws of Nature also teach us that if we experience ideas of a ball rolling off of a table then we will experience next ideas of it falling. Both Berkeley and Hegel contend that only minds and their contents exist. The same is arguably true for Plato, Descartes, Kant and many other thinkers. Berkeley believes that the mind survives death and is eternal, so does Plato, so does Descartes, so does Kant, while Hegel believes that the mind perishes with death. I have no personal opinion one way or the other. Now, materialists believe that the ideas of sense we experience in our minds come about as a result of the interactions of matter and that the ideas in some sense correspond to or resemble material objects out there in the world. But idealists do not believe in a world out there, they do not believe that the ideas in the mind are related to anything material because they do not believe that material substance exists. I am an idealist, you are a materialist. This is a philosophical question beyond resolution. Because I experience myself as conscious and I experience ideas of sense, I assume that consciousness must be primary, it must be the substance. You believe that the ideas of sense are actually related to some material substance distinct from the ideas, that causes the ideas and that gives the illusion of mind, and of freedom. There are arguments to support both idealism and materialism, some of us are persuaded by the arguments for idealism, some by the arguments for materialism.
With all due respect, Brad, the simple phenomena of optical illusions (leaving aside the complex issues of delusions and hallucinations) are incompatible with 'idealism' (and I wonder why we have mis-labeled that theory ideal...ism insted of simply calling idea...ism ... maybe because the former sounds more mystique ... :-) )
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Wednesday, 5th January, 2022, 01:19 AM.
Tweet
Comment