Mystic Muse's Mostly Mildly Mediocre Random Banter #238

[tyckspoon]

Because Jason had the good sense to get a named ship.

Of course he did, you wouldn't take a non-name-level ship on high level adventures! It wouldn't have enough HD to survive in higher encounter level oceans.

[Bartmanhomer]

I have a very serious question to ask:

Do you think it fair to accuse a celebrity of the crimes that person allegedly committed which happened years ago and come forward to make a documentary to expose the celebrity when that celebrity has been deceased more than a decade ago? I just want to hear your opinion.

[Fyraltari]

I have a very serious question to ask:

Do you think it fair to accuse a celebrity of the crimes that person allegedly committed which happened years ago and come forward to make a documentary to expose the celebrity when that celebrity has been deceased more than a decade ago? I just want to hear your opinion.

I mean, if you've got evidence to back your claims up, yes.

[Tvtyrant]

I have a very serious question to ask:

Do you think it fair to accuse a celebrity of the crimes that person allegedly committed which happened years ago and come forward to make a documentary to expose the celebrity when that celebrity has been deceased more than a decade ago? I just want to hear your opinion.

Would it be fair if they weren't a celebrity? I don't buy the argument that morality changes based on fame.

[Keltest]

Except that if someone in 2, 000 gets my femur and claims it was Albert Einstein's, no matter how many people believe it and call it "Einstein's femur", that bone was never inside Einstein's body, which is what these people are saying by calling it that. There are just a lot of people who are wrong. And if it is possible for the consensus to be wrong about the identity of a thing, then identity is not decided by consensus.

Sure, but they'll be able to identify it as a specific femur that people know and collectively recognize by that name. The reasoning for naming it that specific name are immaterial.

[2D8HP]

Last week television cameras were trained on someone saying “The people of San Francisco deserve…” and in the background was a drip from a leak from the ceiling to the floor of a courtroom entrance way. Because of how much water needed to be shut off to so many areas of the building we just set up tarps and buckets above the ceiling and I had to come in Saturday to replace the pipe.

Still sore.

Monday on leaving my wife at dark o’clock in the morning she (very briefly) kissed me on the lips for the first time in about 19 years, I then went to the hospital to visit my beloved roommate and watched her walk (with a walker) for the first time since the large tumor in her torso was removed days earlier. She cried while walking (happy tears she said).

While I was at the hospital she fell asleep for about five minutes and snored a bit, then she woke and told me that she dreamt of walking to her dog (which now lives with her ex-boyfriend of many years) that I was holding.

“It was so vivid” she said of her dream.

Today she’ll be transferred from the hospital where she had the surgery to a new one with a rehabilitation clinic where they’ll work on her too numb knee for a couple of weeks until she may walk up the stairs to our home.

I’ll be leaving work early and delivering some medicine that’s in our refrigerator to her today.

Even though I saw her only a couple of days ago I miss her, but I also fear seeing her as it’s saddening to see her suffer.

[Bartmanhomer]

I mean, if you've got evidence to back your claims up, yes.

Would it be fair if they weren't a celebrity? I don't buy the argument that morality changes based on fame.

I've been having strong opinions about a celebrity who's no longer alive. The celebrity is Michael Jackson. There was this documentary called (Leaving Neverland) where these victims accuse Michael of being a C.P. My problem about this whole situation is that they should have come forward years ago when Michael was alive and he's been dead for more than a decade now.

[Fyraltari]

Sure, but they'll be able to identify it as a specific femur that people know and collectively recognize by that name. The reasoning for naming it that specific name are immaterial.

And if the femur is lost and then someone shows up with another femur and everybody believes that it is indeed Einstein's femur (which, may I remind you, it's not, it's mine), then that bone suddenly becomes the one that was in the museum two months prior?

[Rater202]

2D8, would it be rude if I said that your life from what you've shared sounds like a Telenovela or maybe a tragic romance novel?

[Keltest]

And if the femur is lost and then someone shows up with another femur and everybody believes that it is indeed Einstein's femur (which, may I remind you, it's not, it's mine), then that bone suddenly becomes the one that was in the museum two months prior?

We generally have a pretty good way to tell them apart, so I'd like to think they apply some rigor to the process.

But sure, if they decide to do that. We do it with buildings all the time. Paintings and art too.

[Fyraltari]

We generally have a pretty good way to tell them apart, so I'd like to think they apply some rigor to the process.

But sure, if they decide to do that. We do it with buildings all the time. Paintings and art too.

This is boderline solipsistic. People thinking that an object is the same than another object does not make it so. Objects have an objective reality.

If these people, believing the femur to be Einstein extracted his genetic material from it (dunno if you can do that with 2, 000 year old bones, if not assume future-science) to get some idea of what Albert Einstein was likew they'd be wrong. Because Albert Einstein was a person with an objective existence that doesn't care what the people of two thousand years later think.

[LaZodiac]

And do you think that the fact they rebuilt it exactly like it was is not the important part?
I'm still not clear what you mean by the thing's spirit.

Is it a religion thing?

Except that if someone in 2, 000 gets my femur and claims it was Albert Einstein's, no matter how many people believe it and call it "Einstein's femur", that bone was never inside Einstein's body, which is what these people are saying by calling it that. There are just a lot of people who are wrong. And if it is possible for the consensus to be wrong about the identity of a thing, then identity is not decided by consensus.

I'll trust you're not just being obtuse, and try my best to explain what I mean. Because firstly, it wasn't built exactly the same, and even if it was, would it be "correct" to say it is the same building, even though all the material components were destroyed by fire? By your understanding, it would not.

But okay, lets explain this. Think of something that means something. The Statue of Liberty, for example. That construct is symbolic of certain ideals and beliefs. If it were to be destroyed and rebuilt, or repaired over time due to weathering and stuff, would it no longer be the Statue of Liberty? Of course it would, because it still stands for those things! The material form of it has changed, but the feelings it evokes and the symbolism it imparts are the same. It is still the same thing as it always was.

While this is true, it ultimately has nothing to do with this discussion? No one could argue, for example, that a model of the Statue of Liberty is the true statue. Just as someone who made a random boat and called it Theseus's' Ship would just be a model. Sure, people can convince people that it is, and maybe within the general human consciousness it IS, but ultimately it will never be that, because it didn't do the things Theseus's Ship did.

[Rater202]

Pop culture trivia: Camelot as depicted in Monty Python and the Holy Grail was in fact, not, "only a model."

...I watched that movie for the first time blind in middle school. I know the knights who say ni and I know the just a flesh wound bit but otherwise hadn't a clue what was what.

(A lot of jokes I'd seen made more sense after watching it.)

Originally the ending pissed me off but it grew on me as I got older.

[Mystic Muse]

I've been having strong opinions about a celebrity who's no longer alive. The celebrity is Michael Jackson. There was this documentary called (Leaving Neverland) where these victims accuse Michael of being a C.P. My problem about this whole situation is that they should have come forward years ago when Michael was alive and he's been dead for more than a decade now.

Have you ever been abused by someone, and did you speak out against them when they were alive? And were they anywhere near as famous as Michael Jackson?

[Fyraltari]

I'll trust you're not just being obtuse, and try my best to explain what I mean. Because firstly, it wasn't built exactly the same, and even if it was, would it be "correct" to say it is the same building, even though all the material components were destroyed by fire? By your understanding, it would not.

Yes, it would. The material does not matter. The structure does. If a building is destroyed and you reuse the blueprints to make the same building you have not built another building, you have rebuilt it.

But okay, lets explain this. Think of something that means something. The Statue of Liberty, for example. That construct is symbolic of certain ideals and beliefs. If it were to be destroyed and rebuilt, or repaired over time due to weathering and stuff, would it no longer be the Statue of Liberty? Of course it would, because it still stands for those things! The material form of it has changed, but the feelings it evokes and the symbolism it imparts are the same. It is still the same thing as it always was.

But what about objects that have no meaning? The table next to me stands for nothing, no one has any attachment to it, if it's damaged in some way, I'll get another one and forget about it. But it still exists. Existence cannot rest on a thing having a special significance for people because things exist even if no one is aware of them. Pluto is the same thing now than it was before it was discovered.

While this is true, it ultimately has nothing to do with this discussion? No one could argue, for example, that a model of the Statue of Liberty is the true statue. Just as someone who made a random boat and called it Theseus's' Ship would just be a model. Sure, people can convince people that it is, and maybe within the general human consciousness it IS, but ultimately it will never be that, because it didn't do the things Theseus's Ship did.

So you agree that the meaning it holds for people is irrelevant then? If there were indeed a ship that Theseus owned, then no other ship is Theseus's ship even if people then start associating some other boat with Theseus's deeds.

[Bartmanhomer]

Have you ever been abused by someone, and did you speak out against them when they were alive? And were they anywhere near as famous as Michael Jackson?

No, I haven't. The problem I have is the timing plus that Michael Is deceased that he can't defend himself due to these accusations.

[Fyraltari]

No, I haven't. The problem I have is the timing plus that Michael Is deceased that he can't defend himself due to these accusations.

Can't really be hurt by them either.

[Bartmanhomer]

Can't really be hurt by them either.

What do you mean by that?

[Beeftank]

Dude is dead.

[Bartmanhomer]

Dude is dead.

That's what I'm saying.

[Keltest]

That's what I'm saying.

The idea is that because he's dead, he can't be hurt by the accusations.


Personally, I think even if you aren't hurting the accused, there are plenty of other people you'll hurt in the process, so you better be darned certain of your evidence.

[LaZodiac]

Yes, it would. The material does not matter. The structure does. If a building is destroyed and you reuse the blueprints to make the same building you have not built another building, you have rebuilt it.

But what about objects that have no meaning? The table next to me stands for nothing, no one has any attachment to it, if it's damaged in some way, I'll get another one and forget about it. But it still exists. Existence cannot rest on a thing having a special significance for people because things exist even if no one is aware of them. Pluto is the same thing now than it was before it was discovered.



So you agree that the meaning it holds for people is irrelevant then? If there were indeed a ship that Theseus owned, then no other ship is Theseus's ship even if people then start associating some other boat with Theseus's deeds.

I don't believe they used the same blueprints for it.

I mean, that's your thoughts on the table. I care about my dead couch because it's my first couch ever, so it has meaning to me. People can easily find meaning in everything. If I had the couch repaired, it'd be the same old couch though, just repaired. Ultimately however they both are "my couch" and not the same couch. Which is an interesting thought thinking on it.

Not even remotely. The meaning people hold for it still matters.

[Peelee]

No, I haven't. The problem I have is the timing plus that Michael Is deceased that he can't defend himself due to these accusations.

That's a good reason for him to not be tried by the courts. That's not a good reason against public opinion.

[TaiLiu]

This is boderline solipsistic. People thinking that an object is the same than another object does not make it so. Objects have an objective reality.

If these people, believing the femur to be Einstein extracted his genetic material from it (dunno if you can do that with 2,000 year old bones, if not assume future-science) to get some idea of what Albert Einstein was likew they'd be wrong. Because Albert Einstein was a person with an objective existence that doesn't care what the people of two thousand years later think.

Yes, it would. The material does not matter. The structure does. If a building is destroyed and you reuse the blueprints to make the same building you have not built another building, you have rebuilt it.

I wonder if there's a tension here. If Einstein's femur has the same structure as another femur, whatever structure means for you, then would that other femur also be Einstein's femur? If not: why is the history of the femur so crucial to its ontology while the history of the building isn't?

[2D8HP]

2D8, would it be rude if I said that your life from what you've shared sounds like a Telenovela or maybe a tragic romance novel?

Parts of it sure, though when my MGB caught fire it was rather more cinematic!

My beloved roomie has called herself “your tragic heroine roommate”, and she’s not wrong.

She just called in tears while I was driving to the clinic she’s trapped at until the 30th, complaining about the food!

A small thing, but after what she’s been through already it’s insult to injury!

She’s charming, honest and kind, but also possibly cursed.

“The luckiest unlucky person”.

[Anonymouswizard]

To be honest, every post 2D8HP makes makes me more convinced life is a romance novel.

I'm hoping the kind where the heroine gets the dashing guy, not the 'Twilight but with cancer' kind aimed at teenage girls.

[Peelee]

To be honest, every post 2D8HP makes makes me more convinced life is a romance novel.

I'm hoping the kind where the heroine gets the dashing guy

Sorry, I'm already taken.

[Keltest]

Sorry, I'm already taken.

I'm pretty sure dragons qualify as Majestic, not Dashing.

[Peelee]

I'm pretty sure dragons qualify as Majestic, not Dashing.

There's a myriad of adjectives that work.

[Anonymouswizard]

Sorry, I'm already taken.

Darn, guess it's three partners for me