The innovation of Nintendo is the roots 4 the holodeck tree

[Aaron Mathis]

Click this link, read the enthusiasm of the first two reviews (especially the second review) and then consider the seeds Nintendo is sowing.

More and more we are seeing videogames designed as private cyber worlds where humans from all over the globe can stay in their room and explore vast colorful worlds, interacting in various ways.

I was reading the other day that many wives lost their husbands to a videogame called war-craft - - the game involves developing the skills of a warrior or magic user and banding up with other fighters and magic users to conquer territories and gain increased abilities, equipment, power and dominion.

The warcraft examples shows how I realize that not just Nintendo is developing Fantasy worlds that the whole world can exist in - -but Nintendo in my opinion is a prime innovator.

Consider Nintendo's new system, the Wii.

The remote control is the like handle of a sword, with motor sensory technology tweaked so tightly that gamers are almost unanimously enamored by the game play.

These latest innovations may seem highly sophisticated to some now - - -but just wait. When I think of the possibilities for these gaming platforms, my brain overloads with ideas. I get frusterated that I am not and probably never will be a video game designer. But what a heavenly job.

What a tremendous way to keep humanity well behaved! Get them addicted to the rewards of electronic virtual world.

[Kelly Jones]

The funny thing is, the avatars people assume in their virtual worlds show that nothing has changed psychologically.

It alarms me to see how attracted people are to star in their own private movies, and become the same as celebrity actors --- boring and soulless.

The challenge is whether make-believe suffocates or stimulates the idea of living purely in mental universes.

[Katy]

It is interesting to me that with the real identity of people hidden players begin to interact with one another based on the perceived characteristics of the player's character. A lot of the people I know in real life play, and I was told a while back that it was better to create a female character because random strangers will give you gifts. This is interesting to me because everyone knows that a large number of people are playing characters of the opposite sex from themselves, and there is no interaction - no benefit to be gained from giving gifts to random strangers. Yet it is a common occurance. Something so engrained in our psychology that even in fantasy we enact it?

[Aaron Mathis]

It is interesting to me that with the real identity of people hidden players begin to interact with one another based on the perceived characteristics of the player's character. A lot of the people I know in real life play, and I was told a while back that it was better to create a female character because random strangers will give you gifts. This is interesting to me because everyone knows that a large number of people are playing characters of the opposite sex from themselves, and there is no interaction - no benefit to be gained from giving gifts to random strangers. Yet it is a common occurance. Something so engrained in our psychology that even in fantasy we enact it?

Oh big time. I imagine that becoming enamoured, enchanted and well, quite frankly addicted to the stimulation of these fantasy worlds, results in the participants becoming very, very removed from anxiety, social awkwardness, humilation, and fear of death. These cyber simulations allow humans to live out their more pre-wired behavioral tendencies without any socially devestating - humilating consequences. Approaching the opposite sex and giving a gift would have less anxiety bound with it, and ones physical appearances would be substituted by a cute image or by something designed to the players liking.

The world such as the one in animal crossing is desgined by gentle, relatively conscious God's. The popularity of this very gentle, social and docile game I think provides a crude foundation for the development of increasingly refined and addicting utopias.

For the humans who are pre-disposed to be incorrigibly unintersted in and biologically unsuited for Nietzchian/buddha self overcoming - -- these cyber utopias are going to play a huge role in the future of humanity.

The future viritual worlds will take the best from the femine animal crossing and the more masculine warcraft, introduce virtual sex, introduce the crime fantasies of grand theft auto, and fuse all of these present video game paradigms into amazingly detailed worlds where people can live out their natural emotional inclinations without as much anxiety, guilt and shame distorting and twisting their actions.

[Kelly Jones]

It may just be me, in fact, it most certainly is. Or do others find this statement depressing.......?

For the humans who are pre-disposed to be incorrigibly unintersted in and biologically unsuited for Nietzchian/buddha self overcoming - -- these cyber utopias are going to play a huge role in the future of humanity.

Have fun. Oh, didn't need to say that, did i?

Incidentally, is there any best part in anyone crossing animal?

Reminds me of the "Looney of the Year" award going to a guy who thought earthworms are the kindest creatures in nature, because of their selfless landcare activities.

[edit: Russell, would you like to discuss why this isn't a looney idea?]

.

[Aaron Mathis]

It may just be me, in fact, it most certainly is. Or do others find this statement depressing.......?

For the humans who are pre-disposed to be incorrigibly unintersted in and biologically unsuited for Nietzchian/buddha self overcoming - -- these cyber utopias are going to play a huge role in the future of humanity.

Have fun. Oh, didn't need to say that, did i?

Incidentally, is there any best part in anyone crossing animal?

You find it depressing? Well then it sounds like your attatched to quaint dreams. I'm a realist, not a spinner of fairy tales.

Not everyone is going to become an aspirant of wisdom.

And I see these virtual worlds as a way for humans who will settle for nothing less than fun and emotion based living, to have fun in a way that is superficially creative, cooperative, healthy competitively, and educating, or at bottom simply non-destructive and non-interfering to the merry Nietzschian overmen like myself who will perhaps be creating these virtual words to have more philosophical content and excercizes.

Reminds me of the "Looney of the Year" award going to a guy who thought earthworms are the kindest creatures in nature, because of their selfless landcare activities.

Can you send me a link to this - or are you just making this looney business up?

Earthworms arent of course kind, but they play a very vital role and do tremendous work/service that generally goes unrecognized.

[Katy]

It may just be me, in fact, it most certainly is. Or do others find this statement depressing.......?

.

I find it incredibly depressing. But true. A couple people have told me that a full 10% of the world's population already have a Warcraft account, and that's just one game out of how many? And with how many people in the world not even owning a computer?

[Aaron Mathis]

It may just be me, in fact, it most certainly is. Or do others find this statement depressing.......?

I find it incredibly depressing. But true. A couple people have told me that a full 10% of the world's population already have a Warcraft account, and that's just one game out of how many? And with how many people in the world not even owning a computer?

What is depressing about it? And yes, I'd like to hear you're speil too Kelly.

Why does it depress you people? Why do you need humanity to behave in a certain way in order for you to not be depressed?

[Katy]

Why does it depress you people? Why do you need humanity to behave in a certain way in order for you to not be depressed?

On a practical level, it depresses me because in some way I rely on these people. If nothing else, I have to hope they'll pay enough attention to politics to not elect someone like George Bush...


It is a symptom of a larger problem, really. Being willing to trade consciousness for bright colors and shiney lights. Being willing to trade thought for cyber-fishing... feminization of society.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

And I see these virtual worlds as a way for humans who will settle for nothing less than fun and emotion based living, to have fun in a way that is superficially creative, cooperative, healthy competitively, and educating, or at bottom simply non-destructive and non-interfering to the merry Nietzschian overmen like myself who will perhaps be creating these virtual words to have more philosophical content and excercizes.

To stay in this Matrix-like scenario: how would you know if you're not already participating in some virtual world for 'fun and emotion'? Perhaps in a distant past or future, after lots of experimentation people would get bored with just fun and excitement in their virtual worlds. They will ask to add real pain, real suffering to satisfy the deepest needs. They might want even to forget their former identity during the game to add to the impact of this virtual realism.

And so we're back to square one, leaving us with your fleeting wish to be a nietzschean overmanned video game designer....

But I agree it's hard to imagine a way for ten billion humatons to share space with each other without sufficient levels of opiates; bread and circuses.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Aaron Mathis wrote:

For the humans who are pre-disposed to be incorrigibly unintersted in and biologically unsuited for Nietzchian/buddha self overcoming - -- these cyber utopias are going to play a huge role in the future of humanity.

I’ve been paying attention to the evolution of these virtual worlds, and the latest development is an online game called Second Life. I installed it, and played it on my computer to see if the hype is legit.

I might admit, it is quite a game. The designers created a world, in which the players are free to choose whatever they desire in the world itself.

It has everything the real world has and more – Art galleries, sex shops, casinos, dungeons where you can battle enemies, fishing holes, and other sports competitions, and it is still growing and evolving.

And the programming for the game is growing quite rapidly.

There is an actual economy in the world that trades on the New York stock exchange, and its dollar is worth more than in some third world countries.

On their website, I just checked and in the last 24 hours, over $900 000US has been spend on goods and services within the world. It has 2.3 Million members and is growing rapidly.

From my research, the economy seems to be dominated by gambling, extreme forms of fantasy pornography, men’s and women’s fashion, cars, boats, etc and real estate. There are other markets, but those are the big ones according to my research.

One thing I noticed is that one's character can fly or teleport to anywhere he or she wants in the world within a snap of a finger. One can see man’s desire to overcome limitation. One can also design ones character to look like anything imaginable and wear anything imaginable.

Also, it isn’t all darkness, there is an atheist society that meets in the world to have regular discussions, and there is also a dance club called the conscious nightclub where documentaries are shown and people are encouraged to participate in discussions. Major religions like Buddhism and Taoist temples are also present as teaching tools for seekers.

I found the whole thing fascinating really, there seems to be more than just the desire for crude forms of stimulation happening within the world. Artists and programmers are having a field day.

Many talented programmers and artists have designed beautiful architecture and breathtaking nature scenes.

It is quite the art form, just like the real world.

Here is a link to the site:

http://secondlife.com/

http://lindenlab.com/ - Company responsible for Second Life.

[Kelly Jones]

Aaron,

Kelly: It may just be me, in fact, it most certainly is. Or do others find this statement depressing.......?

For the humans who are pre-disposed to be incorrigibly unintersted in and biologically unsuited for Nietzchian/buddha self overcoming - -- these cyber utopias are going to play a huge role in the future of humanity.

Aaron: You find it depressing? Well then it sounds like your attatched to quaint dreams. I'm a realist, not a spinner of fairy tales.

Not everyone is going to become an aspirant of wisdom.

I find it no more depressing than walking though the shopping mall, and seeing pornographic sales posters for clothing. What's the difference? There's no difference. Except perhaps: in virtual worlds, there hasn't yet been any significant movement towards governance. So no one's getting arrested for killing or raping.

The main depressant of cyber or non-cyber worlds is the absence of intelligent dialogue and intellectual stimuli, and the presence of mindless sensationalism. Sounds like America.

Aaron: And I see these virtual worlds as a way for humans who will settle for nothing less than fun and emotion based living, to have fun in a way that is superficially creative, cooperative, healthy competitively, and educating, or at bottom simply non-destructive and non-interfering to the merry Nietzschian overmen like myself who will perhaps be creating these virtual words to have more philosophical content and excercizes.

There's no such thing as "non-interfering". Absence of intelligent dialogue and intellectual stimuli, and the presence of mindless sensationalism, are interferences for anyone who experiences them. Nietzsche would never have abandoned humanity to such depravity.

Kelly: Reminds me of the "Looney of the Year" award going to a guy who thought earthworms are the kindest creatures in nature, because of their selfless landcare activities.

Aaron: Can you send me a link to this - or are you just making this looney business up?

Half-and-half. Makes a good story anyway!

I spent almost a fortnight wwoofing for Russell; just left on Monday.

He "made several nominations" for Looney of the Year Award during my stay. For instance, he believes that Aboriginal Australians are wise individuals because they are "community-minded" and "share everything". I rebutted this saying that because of this "wisdom", they didn't develop a military, and this meant they left themselves open to being conquered and virtually decimated by an invading race.

Figure that out.



[edit: Russell, would you like to discuss why your belief in the wisdom of aboriginal australians is not looney?

The Genius Forum is very open to rational debate, most people are open-minded and not hostile to challenging ideas. Why not give it a shot? But you may have to persevere......]

Earthworms arent of course kind, but they play a very vital role and do tremendous work/service that generally goes unrecognized.

Some earthworm behaviours, such as making sticky, faecal-coated holes in the soil, just happen to be useful to humans. But they don't have the consciousness to choose to be beneficial or maleficent ever. They're little dead machines. Feminine-mindedness, including animal behaviour, is just as selfless in the sense that there is no soul, no consistency of conscience, no I, no will to truth. This is the essence of evil because there is no ability to distinguish between truth and falsehood. This is earthworm mind.

Masculine-mindedness, on the other hand, is selfless when the I is defined as Ultimate Truth. It's selfless in the sense that one is finally capable of living without the ego.

The point is: there's an infinite difference between unconscious selflessness and conscious selflessness.

-----------


Nietzsche's opinion of "superworlds" is quite clear in this quote from Zarathustra (the prologue). He would have called Second Life "poisonous to the spirit":

When Zarathustra arrived at the nearest town which adjoineth the forest, he found many people assembled in the market-place; for it had been announced that a rope-dancer would give a performance. And Zarathustra spake thus unto the people:

I TEACH YOU THE SUPERMAN. Man is something that is to be surpassed. What have ye done to surpass man?

All beings hitherto have created something beyond themselves: and ye want to be the ebb of that great tide, and would rather go back to the beast than surpass man?

What is the ape to man? A laughing-stock, a thing of shame. And just the same shall man be to the Superman: a laughing-stock, a thing of shame.

Ye have made your way from the worm to man, and much within you is still worm. Once were ye apes, and even yet man is more of an ape than any of the apes.

Even the wisest among you is only a disharmony and hybrid of plant and phantom. But do I bid you become phantoms or plants?

Lo, I teach you the Superman!

The Superman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: The Superman SHALL BE the meaning of the earth!

I conjure you, my brethren, REMAIN TRUE TO THE EARTH, and believe not those who speak unto you of superearthly hopes! Poisoners are they, whether they know it or not.

Despisers of life are they, decaying ones and poisoned ones themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so away with them!

Once blasphemy against God was the greatest blasphemy; but God died, and therewith also those blasphemers. To blaspheme the earth is now the dreadfulest sin, and to rate the heart of the unknowable higher than the meaning of the earth!

Once the soul looked contemptuously on the body, and then that contempt was the supreme thing:--the soul wished the body meagre, ghastly, and famished. Thus it thought to escape from the body and the earth.

Oh, that soul was itself meagre, ghastly, and famished; and cruelty was the delight of that soul!

But ye, also, my brethren, tell me: What doth your body say about your soul? Is your soul not poverty and pollution and wretched self-complacency?

Verily, a polluted stream is man. One must be a sea, to receive a polluted stream without becoming impure.

Lo, I teach you the Superman: he is that sea; in him can your great contempt be submerged.

What is the greatest thing ye can experience? It is the hour of great contempt. The hour in which even your happiness becometh loathsome unto you, and so also your reason and virtue.

The hour when ye say: "What good is my happiness! It is poverty and pollution and wretched self-complacency. But my happiness should justify existence itself!"

The hour when ye say: "What good is my reason! Doth it long for knowledge as the lion for his food? It is poverty and pollution and wretched self-complacency!"

The hour when ye say: "What good is my virtue! As yet it hath not made me passionate. How weary I am of my good and my bad! It is all poverty and pollution and wretched self-complacency!"

The hour when ye say: "What good is my justice! I do not see that I am fervour and fuel. The just, however, are fervour and fuel!"

The hour when we say: "What good is my pity! Is not pity the cross on which he is nailed who loveth man? But my pity is not a crucifixion."

Have ye ever spoken thus? Have ye ever cried thus? Ah! would that I had heard you crying thus!

It is not your sin--it is your self-satisfaction that crieth unto heaven; your very sparingness in sin crieth unto heaven!

Where is the lightning to lick you with its tongue? Where is the frenzy with which ye should be inoculated?

Lo, I teach you the Superman: he is that lightning, he is that frenzy!--

When Zarathustra had thus spoken, one of the people called out: "We have now heard enough of the rope-dancer; it is time now for us to see him!" And all the people laughed at Zarathustra. But the rope-dancer, who thought the words applied to him, began his performance.

.

[Tharan]

It is a symptom of a larger problem, really. Being willing to trade consciousness for bright colors and shiney lights. Being willing to trade thought for cyber-fishing... feminization of society.

But humans have always traded consciousness for bright shiny things. We are no different now than we have ever been. The difference is the fact that there are a lot more bright shiny things. And many are more enticing and lethal than ever before. Only that.

And how is cyber-fishing "better" than real fishing? Both are perceptive. If both are nourishing in their own ways, how is one valued over the other? A deluded person does not gain transcendance through fishing, real or virtual. That person gains it through understanding. And the Transferance of Mind can arguably be accomplished more easily through virtual fishing than the real thing. The real lake has limited output as a platform. Plus it gets cold. And wet. And is probably polluted. But you get my meaning.

[Katy]

But humans have always traded consciousness for bright shiny things. We are no different now than we have ever been. The difference is the fact that there are a lot more bright shiny things. And many are more enticing and lethal than ever before. Only that.

I'm not actually sure about that. I mean, when I was a kid we used to interact with our minds. If all you have to play with is a bucket, you can find hundreds of ways to make that bucket interesting. Creativity. Using your mind in ways that they haven't tried before. Video games are limited not by your imagination, but by the imagination of a third party programming the game. I've sat there and listened to complete strangers talk about WoW and they've all had the exact same experiences, and the exact same strategies.

Beyond that, "real life" experiences take time. They take energy. This has two advantages. One it allows time to think. I mean, if you're going to sit on a lake for hours by yourself hoping to pull in a bucketfull of fish, what else is there to do? Cyber fishing takes minutes at best. If I go exercise my pet, it takes several minutes and there's time to think. If I exercise a cyber pet it takes less than 30 seconds. Same thing for any experience.

I'm not convinced limited outcome is a problem. The input from video games is often a threat and requires someone to concentrate on the game.

The other benefit is that it teaches patience and that it is good to do the same thing for a long period of time. You don't get real thought and progress in 5 minute soundbites. The longer you can keep your mind on one thing (without obsessing constantly) the better.

[Dan Rowden]

I think there are arguments both ways regarding cyber entertainment v real life. How much time do you spend online, Katy? i.e., how much of your life is actually "virtual"?

[Katy]

I think there are arguments both ways regarding cyber entertainment v real life. How much time do you spend online, Katy? i.e., how much of your life is actually "virtual"?

Not as much as you think, actually. Remember - you and I have a 15 hour time difference between us. You get on during the day and see me here all the time, but it's usually either while I am required to be here for my job or late at night. When you logged off tonight, it was 2:30am here (currently it is 6:15am - late at night in my world, but I haven't been online for the hours in between). Unfortunately, the majority of my day is spent at school or work or homework.

Probably 90% of my online time is spent between message boards. Either that or I have yahoo open in the background while I'm actually doing something else.

But I do take the time to take a walk every day, even if it's just to and from school which gives me time to stop everything else and think for a while.

That said I do think there is a significant qualitative difference between reading here, which points out new ideas or at least tells me where I am completely confused, and playing WoW for hours on end. Never have I ever heard the phrase "I was playing WoW and I thought..."

[Kelly Jones]

I don't really care one way or the other about exploring cyber worlds.

Arguments for it on this thread, so far, are pretty sloppy. It sounds like arguments for pornography:

- to stimulate thought about human psychology through erotic art
- to broaden one's perspective about desire and imagination
- to expend pent-up sexual energy in a harmless way
- to give hot-blooded women meaningful employment
- to justfiy academia by turning universities into childcare companies
- to increase economic activity
- to help more people become literate/computer literate
- to give people things to talk about, and encourage social interaction

Etc.

conscious nightclub where documentaries are shown and people are encouraged to participate in discussions

Interesting that a nightclub has to be used to attract people to discuss anything. What do they discuss? I don't have broadband, so can someone post some of the leading examples?

Mentioning popular religious institutions as something positive has to be a joke.

the Transferance of Mind can arguably be accomplished more easily through virtual fishing than the real thing

This doesn't make much sense, when you accepted Katy's definition of fishing as something one traded consciousness/thought for.

It makes even less sense to say both "worlds" are perceptive and nourishing. If one is unconscious and unthinking, how can there be any difference? Or did you mean to say, a thoughtless person might become more conscious in a cyber world ? If so, why?

What is the "Transference of Mind" anyway?



I think it's just one more way to feed the ego.

[Tharan]

But humans have always traded consciousness for bright shiny things. We are no different now than we have ever been. The difference is the fact that there are a lot more bright shiny things. And many are more enticing and lethal than ever before. Only that.

I'm not actually sure about that. I mean, when I was a kid we used to interact with our minds. If all you have to play with is a bucket, you can find hundreds of ways to make that bucket interesting. Creativity. Using your mind in ways that they haven't tried before. Video games are limited not by your imagination, but by the imagination of a third party programming the game. I've sat there and listened to complete strangers talk about WoW and they've all had the exact same experiences, and the exact same strategies.

Again, we are back to the position that virtual worlds offer no such possibilities. If a person explores some area of a game, are they not experiencing the very thing you describe? I think the issues lies in the old saying "Poison is in the Dose."

Beyond that, "real life" experiences take time. They take energy. This has two advantages. One it allows time to think. I mean, if you're going to sit on a lake for hours by yourself hoping to pull in a bucketfull of fish, what else is there to do? Cyber fishing takes minutes at best. If I go exercise my pet, it takes several minutes and there's time to think. If I exercise a cyber pet it takes less than 30 seconds. Same thing for any experience.

Thinking and strategy and social interaction are a VERY large part of games like WoW, EQ, Guild Wars, etc. You are not "successful" in them without it. And it usually takes longer than 30 minutes. That in fact is what causes the social issues in most cases. Online people develop more dynamic, exciting, imaginative relationships with other like-minded individuals to the detriment of the people sitting in the same room with them. Looking at it historically, it says something profound (about the person sitting "alone" in the room getting angry and feel left out).

I'm not convinced limited outcome is a problem. The input from video games is often a threat and requires someone to concentrate on the game.

Broad stroke, sterotype, outsider-looking-in.

The other benefit is that it teaches patience and that it is good to do the same thing for a long period of time. You don't get real thought and progress in 5 minute soundbites. The longer you can keep your mind on one thing (without obsessing constantly) the better.

Covered earlier. The level of concentration required is exponentially larger in most cases than your typical conversation. That is part of the thrill and stimulation.

[Tharan]

I don't really care one way or the other about exploring cyber worlds.

Because you don't.

Arguments for it on this thread, so far, are pretty sloppy. It sounds like arguments for pornography:

- to stimulate thought about human psychology through erotic art
- to broaden one's perspective about desire and imagination
- to expend pent-up sexual energy in a harmless way
- to give hot-blooded women meaningful employment
- to justfiy academia by turning universities into childcare companies
- to increase economic activity
- to help more people become literate/computer literate
- to give people things to talk about, and encourage social interaction

Etc.

I assume you have an argument against pornography? Pornography is about ejaculation, nothing more. Do you see something wrong with that?

the Transferance of Mind can arguably be accomplished more easily through virtual fishing than the real thing

This doesn't make much sense, when you accepted Katy's definition of fishing as something one traded consciousness/thought for.

You are missing the moon for the finger pointing. It is not relevant HOW you accomplish enlightenment. Some vehicles are inherently better than others, but it is always up to the Transferee.

It makes even less sense to say both "worlds" are perceptive and nourishing. If one is unconscious and unthinking, how can there be any difference? Or did you mean to say, a thoughtless person might become more conscious in a cyber world ? If so, why?

Anything is both perceptive and nourishing, and non-perceptive and non-nourishing. It depends on the perciever. With fishing, you know what you have. Perhaps we could quantify the nourishment as X. With a virtual world, you could include a world of fishing, a world of not-fishing, a world of silent meditation, a classroom, a typer on a message board, etc. It could be quantified as X^X (X raised to the X).

What is the "Transference of Mind" anyway?

Come now, Kelly, it is an old Buddhist phrase describing the relationship of the sage and student. You enjoy playing the sage lately, so you should learn the terminology, especially when it is what you are doing, for example, with the following phrase:

I think it's just one more way to feed the ego.

Yes, of course you do. I expected it from you.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Kelly wrote:

Interesting that a nightclub has to be used to attract people to discuss anything. What do they discuss? I don't have broadband, so can someone post some of the leading examples?

When I explored the club, they were showing a documentary called “The century of the self” which explored the relationship between Freud and others. Obviously most of the people in the virtual world aren’t wise, but there are some interesting developments there. I am able to see the possible positive aspects in something, it isn’t entirely negative. For instance this sort of technology has proved useful in training simulations and educational material for children. They could also be used to prevent people from spending money and energy to travel as a means to see beautiful sights. Virtual worlds could potentially destroy the tourism industry, which is another positive development.

The programmers of Second Life are merely paving the way for higher types of virtual worlds.

How one behaves in the virtual world reflects how one behaves in the real world. When I was in the world, I enjoyed flying around and examining many of the architectural and nature designs of the programmers, and checking out the quality of the philosophy there, and I did so alone. Whereas most of the users only go to popular areas where they can socialize in superficial ways and expose themselves to superficial forms of stimulation like gambling and so on.

Kelly wrote:

Mentioning popular religious institutions as something positive has to be a joke.

Aspects of Buddhism and Taoism are indeed wise. Much of Buddhism isn’t wise, but one can discriminate between what is wise and what is not. The teachings of the founders are available in the virtual world, which is a different story compared to the religious doctrines.

[ExpectantlyIronic]

I've got a fantastic argument in favor of even the most mindless of entertainment: it's fun. It must be stressful to always attempt to justify every aspect of one's existence.

[Kelly Jones]

I don't really care one way or the other about exploring cyber worlds.

Because you don't.

You mean if i was attached, i'd be attached in favour or against, right?

Arguments for it on this thread, so far, are pretty sloppy. It sounds like arguments for pornography:

- to stimulate thought about human psychology through erotic art
- to broaden one's perspective about desire and imagination
- to expend pent-up sexual energy in a harmless way
- to give hot-blooded women meaningful employment
- to justfiy academia by turning universities into childcare companies
- to increase economic activity
- to help more people become literate/computer literate
- to give people things to talk about, and encourage social interaction

Etc.

I assume you have an argument against pornography? Pornography is about ejaculation, nothing more. Do you see something wrong with that?

I think you're talking about ejaculation as emotional need, rather than throwing out semen.

Speaking hypothetically as a male, when it was time to drain off some semen, and avoid a wet wake-up, then i'd do it as part of my general meditation. I doubt i'd need to use anything except my hand and a rag to wipe off.

If i was really under the weather, and my emotions were playing up, then i might find it helpful to wallow in egotistical pleasure and get it out of my system. But that's emotional need.

Biologically speaking, ejaculation doesn't require pornography.

Similarly, there's no need to justify cyber-realities. They're simply what they are: another manifestation of Reality.

the Transferance of Mind can arguably be accomplished more easily through virtual fishing than the real thing.

Kelly: This doesn't make much sense, when you accepted Katy's definition of fishing as something one traded consciousness/thought for.

Tharan: You are missing the moon for the finger pointing. It is not relevant HOW you accomplish enlightenment. Some vehicles are inherently better than others, but it is always up to the Transferee.

To be pedantic, Pussy, you ought to have written "fishing can be lessened more easily through the virtual rather than the real thing". The thing doesn't need to be defined, as it's evidently some kind of attempt to point.

I'm not sure what you are saying about the "transferance of mind". Are you saying that the transferred/receiver (?) decides how mind will be transferred? Isn't that illogical - since it isn't there before, but after?

If you are just playing around, i don't think it's a laughing matter.

Kelly: It makes even less sense to say both "worlds" are perceptive and nourishing. If one is unconscious and unthinking, how can there be any difference? Or did you mean to say, a thoughtless person might become more conscious in a cyber world ? If so, why?

Pussy: Anything is both perceptive and nourishing, and non-perceptive and non-nourishing. It depends on the perciever.

Well, is there really a perceiver in this particular context? I mean, "something one trades consciousness/thought for" is nourishing and cultivating unconsciousness.

With fishing, you know what you have. Perhaps we could quantify the nourishment as X. With a virtual world, you could include a world of fishing, a world of not-fishing, a world of silent meditation, a classroom, a typer on a message board, etc. It could be quantified as X^X (X raised to the X).

Tharan, throw it out the window. This is worthless.

What is happening with you? You're getting more more blanched out every year.

Kelly: What is the "Transference of Mind" anyway?

Tharan: Come now, Kelly, it is an old Buddhist phrase describing the relationship of the sage and student. You enjoy playing the sage lately, so you should learn the terminology, especially when it is what you are doing, for example, with the following phrase:

I think it's just one more way to feed the ego.

Yes, of course you do. I expected it from you.

Even if i studied everything written in books, i still would have to work with the living and dynamic meanings presented to me in dialogue.

So, if you please, what do you mean by "transferance of mind"?



(P.S. I'm not playing the sage. There are imperfections that it's up to me to fix. Yet my growing wisdom is not faulty. It just remains to be seen how deep it will go.)


[edit=code]

[Tharan]

You show your emotions, Kelly. I like it. One of the biggest hurdles after the first stage is to get people out of the I-think-I-am-a-sage-now mindset. You slipped out easily, resorted to namecalling, and yet quickly shifted your eyes back to the prize. It tells me you are not overly ashamed of who you were, which is good. I like it real.

As far as your opinions on what is real, how you might masturbate your hypothetical penis, ect. I have no comment on.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Speaking hypothetically as a male, when it was time to drain off some semen, and avoid a wet wake-up, then i'd do it as part of my general meditation.

I've heard of walking meditation, but wanking meditation??????

Do you say "Om" with that?

[Aaron Mathis]

I generally agree with the critiques people have of virtual worlds.

What I am wondering:

What if everyone on the genius forum interacted in a virtual world instead of on this text based forum?

Each member would have a 3D avatar of whatever image, and people would generally gather in locations. Like on this forum, different combinations of people gather on certain threads, while on other threads you will see a different group. The Worldly matters forum here in contrast to the genius forum, might, in the virtual worlds, be like two paraellel universes that could be joined by a portal.

Once you entered a world, you would have your choice in places to visit. You can check the map to see where people are gathered at. A cluster here, a cluster there. The clusters are colored differently depending on the emotion that the technology detects. The hot spots might be evident.

When you sign off the forum, you might do so by going to your virtual house and going to bed.

People could gather on virtual mountain tops, along a river, around a table in a nice inn. If there was a certain member who was trolling, then people could simply mute him out and render him invisible, or simply ban him from the world.

People would discuss amongst eachother with earphones and microphones, so convo would happen in real time.

The downside is that people will tend to not have their comments thought out as carefully, people might interupt eachother too much, and it would be difficult to record whatever was said in the way that this forum has things recorded. I suppose there could be a way of recording the audio and storing it for people to view later.

due to the real time audio, It would be harder to participate in discussion while you are at work, which is usually done in stealth. typing is better for stealth.

Typing and communicating real time in audio might be difficult to balance and reconcile. It might have to be one or the other.

Would the 'so called' improvement be only aesthetic, or would there be any great practical benifits?

I think genius forum is pretty good as it is. Can it be improved with virtual reality innovation? will it be worth all the extra labor? By the time the technology is matured, will there even be much labor?