| Revision as of 20:55, 29 June 2010 editGun Powder Ma (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers16,796 edits →Taijitu← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:51, 13 June 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,311,012 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Ludwigs2/Archive 20) (bot | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{not around|3=9 March 2013}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 75K | |maxarchivesize = 75K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 20 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = 0 | |minthreadsleft = 0 | ||
| |algo = old(10d) | |algo = old(10d) | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archives|auto=yes}} | {{archives|auto=yes}} | ||
| == proposal - need collab == | |||
| <!--MiszaBot stopper: 00:00, 1 January 3000 (UTC)--> | |||
| I've invited a number of people to join at this thread, so thank you for looking. I'd like to develop something similar to ], except PHP based (frankly, I'm starting this because I'm annoyed that there's no version of AWB that works on Macs). My idea is to create a separate user (much like a bot-account): people can navigate to that user's page, where they will find an assortment of HTML forms where they can perform AWB-like functions straight through wikipedia's servers. My problem is the learning curve - the PHP coding is not beyond me technically, but the project is too large for me to handle on my own, given my current informational deficit. I've contacted you (as a group) because you have worked on or developed PHP bot code, and will probably be much more 'up' on this problem than I am. what I need to know is the following: | |||
| * Which of the various available bot frameworks is best suited to this task? | |||
| * How difficult do you think this project will actually be? | |||
| * What's the best approach (In your view) to achieving this? | |||
| * What considerations am I missing? I'm already concerned about keeping this from turning into a vandalism tool, for instance, and about server resources (it would probably be best to have a system of queueing requests, which would help with both problems). | |||
| I'd also like to know if any of you are interested in collaborating on this project - that would make things a hell of a lot easier for me, and make development much faster. Please let me know. --] 06:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Religion, science, faith and Pseudoscience. == | |||
| In one section, I agree with you when you say "Science may be pseudo-religion" | |||
| That's because Religion the way ''it actually is'' '''is''' real science (if one accept that real science should relate to ''understanding things exactly as they are''). '''Modern science''' is not real science. | |||
| I was discussing a question somewhere: | |||
| Why do some people have 6 fingers/toes? | |||
| A: | |||
| Anytime a baby is born, there is a chance of a mutation, or a change from his/her parents which would be considered "abnormal". If that mutation helps the baby survive, then that mutation will probably pass on to his/her children. Mutations occur when the DNA gets altered in some way either through natural or unnatural means. Having six fingers is like being born albino, or without legs or arms, etc. | |||
| I just thought of updating the answer by adding (I do such things very rarely): | |||
| Mutation is an answer to "how", and not "why". Mutation is NOT chance. | |||
| There is no question of 'chance' in life. Everything is thoughtfully 'planned' by God. It is because of one's past ''karma'' (deeds, doings), one is born in a particular family, has certain features etc. however weird it may be. | |||
| for example: Siamese (conjoined) twins are born that way because they had to suffer in some way in this life due to their ''bad karma'' (misdeeds) in some previous life. God ''wanted'' them to be born that way. | |||
| This is actually common sense. But unfortunately the most advanced biologists lack common sense. | |||
| What do you think? | |||
| ] (]) 17:02, 12 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :First, I think that the whole science/religion distinction is overblown. There is belief, and there are the reasons that lie behind belief, and science and faith merely have different ways of evaluating the reasons they accept. Science is far more rigorous within the domains in which it applies, but fairly useless outside those domains. | |||
| :Second, you're right, I think, that mutation is an answer to the 'how' question rather than the 'why' question, and you're also correct that science does not (as a rule) have much sensible to say about 'why' questions. However, the reincarnation/karma answer you give is only one possible answer to the 'why' question, and not even the only answer given within Hinduism. not all hindus take karma to imply reincarnation, or believe that karma is part of a god-defined 'plan', and certainly that's not true of other religions. In fact, a lot of faiths teach that 'why' questions are problematic in and of themselves - the need to know 'why' some event occurred can lead to misery, because it implicitly accuses the natural order of things of being unethical. | |||
| :Third, if you try to argue that biologists have an incorrect appreciation of karma you're going to get your bubble burst very quickly. Scientists do not care to explain physical phenomena in terms of moral or spiritual precepts because moral and spiritual precepts cannot be examined within the restricted evidentiary model that science relies on to be functional. Some scientists (a lot more than you might realize) will think that it's an interesting idea but (rightfully) note that it is not an idea with any scientific merits. For example, I know that some physicists have drawn on the philosophical principles of taoism to exemplify certain ideas, and taoism has some interesting similarities to the karmic model, but none of those physicists would actually ''use'' taoism as part of a scientific argument (there would be no point). other scientists won't be so nice about it. You're going to have to recognize that Misplaced Pages will always privilege scientific explanations on topics like this because scientific explanations (no matter if they are limited) are factual. --] 19:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: "You're going to have to recognize that Misplaced Pages will always privilege scientific explanations on topics like this because scientific explanations (no matter if they are limited) are factual." | |||
| ::Yes, that's right. | |||
| ::As for the karma answer, I could only be brief, and I do not claim to have given an accurate answer. | |||
| ::I am "Hindu" in the traditional sense, but I would consider myself as being an adherent of ''sanaatana-dharma'' and Vaishnava philosophy. (You will never find the word "Hindu" in the traditional Vedic literatures. It is a name that was given to the followers (or supposed followers) of sanaatana-dharma (the Vedic way of life) by the Muslims. | |||
| ::Since it is my duty to preach, I just want to try to explain what Vedic Science says . I hope this makes interesting reading to you. | |||
| ::The following is a ''']''' viewpoint of the Vedas | |||
| ::'''Science, according to Vedic literatures is:''' | |||
| ::The Vedas proclaim that God ultimately is a person, but is the Supreme, most perfect Personality, who has no cause, and He Himself is the "cause of all other causes", the Supreme origin of absolutely everything. A principal name of God given in the Vedic scriptures is "Krishna" who also has billions (actually infinite) of other names (like Vishnu, Narayana, Govinda, Hari to name a few). God possesses a form that is eternal, full of knowledge, and full of bliss. He has a spiritual (now it requires time to properly describe the meaning of the word spiritual in "scientific" terms) form, that is incomprehensible to us in our present conditioning (having a material body). He posseses infinite wonderful qualities and possesses opulences like wealth, fame, beauty, knowledge to the supreme extent (infinite wealth, infinite beauty etc.) | |||
| ::Some Vedic texts describe God as being ''nir-aakaara'' (having no form). Now this does not mean that God has no form, but that He ''does not have a form like us'' or any other living being we can conceive of. God is "He" because Vedas describe Him to be the actual and the only Male (Purusha or Param purusha (Supreme Male)). | |||
| ::The ''jeeva'' (soul) having disobeyed God (The Super-soul or ''Paramaatmaa''), is trapped in various types of material bodies and is subject to repeated births and deaths, and the soul is what gives life to the body. Consciousness is a symptom of the soul being present. All living beings (humans, animals and even other gods (devatas or secondary directors of the universe)are the infinite non-material ''jeevas'' and are actally infinitesimal in nature (spiritual sparks), and their real ''dharma'' '''(dharma actually means nature or position. Dharma does not always mean 'religion' and is actually not so easy to translate into English)''' is to serve God with love and devotion eternally. This is called ''sanaatana dharma'' (eternal constitutional position). | |||
| ::When the soul realizes his actual position and is ready to obey God and serve Him with love (this is the principle of Bhakti (Loving devotional service)) eternally, it is actually liberated and goes back to the "Kingdom of God" (known in sanskrit as "Vaikuntha" (a place without any misery at all)(Completely spiritual and beyond all the material universes {there are billions and trillions of other material universes far superior to ours}. | |||
| ::Now to show that Krishna is the Supreme Being (or the Supreme Personality of Godhead) is beyond the scope of modern science, but the Vedic literatures state that it is the highest truth. | |||
| ::The Vedas say this is the ultimate conclusion and the Vedas actually declare anything fully supporting this conclusion to be real '''science''', and any other ''science'' that denies the above statements are said to be "pseudoscience" or "false science". (If we define Science simply to be ''knowledge of things exactly as they actually are''). In fact, even deeply studying the Vedas without authorized guidance cannot make one realize this. | |||
| ::And the Vedas claim to be most authentic because they have been "spoken" by (originated from) God (Krishna). They originated from the "mouth" of God. (God has a form/body but it is nothing like ours (which is made of material skin, flesh, blood, bones, bile, mucus, and containing urine, feces, pus etc.) It is beyond our power of comprehension. More on this later. ] (]) 19:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Mayurvg - the operative phrase in all of the above it where you say it's your duty to preach. that's the problem -[REDACTED] is not the correct venue for preaching. | |||
| :::Further, you have drastically misrepresented the vedas if you think that the vedas claim to speak some sort of uber-truth. The vedas say that there are understandings ''beyond what can be expressed in words'' and point in their general direction (as do the teachings of almost every religion and philosophy). trying to cast the teachings of a faith as statements of concrete fact misses the point entirely. | |||
| :::More on this is not needed, not until you've considered the matter more fully. You still have your hand caught in the monkey-trap - you need to loosen your grip on your pre-conceived notions of 'vedic science', or you're going to remain stuck where you are. --] 17:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Well, there won't be more! Yes I shouldn't have posted my views on Misplaced Pages and I'm sorry. So I won't be posting any such 'preaching' in the future. | |||
| ::::'''Just one last word''': Those statements are not ''my'' pre-conceived notions. You're right when you say that the vedas say that there are understandings ''beyond what can be expressed in words''. But, according to my understanding the Vedas '''do''' claim to speak uber-truth, which is very, very difficult to understand (All our logic and reasoning can fail). I have presented the statements as they are. I do not claim to be a very learned, nor do I claim to have a perfect understanding, but what I presented come from very authentic, and highly respected Vaishnava literature, and I have various pointers in my life to tell me that the statements I made are concrete facts. Vedas are not just teachings of faith. Faith is required in every field of science, and I just claim to have a certain degree of ''reasonable'' faith. To the degree one is sincere and humble, in trying to understand God, one can understand God (The Supreme Truth) to ''that'' extent. Not by one's own endeavor can anyone understand the actual purport of the vedas, but only by the mercy of God. Thank you for enlightening me however. ] (]) 19:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC) ] (]) 14:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Oh, I don't disagree with you at all. the only mistake you may have made here is to assume that Misplaced Pages has any real relation to life. shanti. {{=)}} --] 21:22, 24 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Well, I was just clarifying that I have not included any of ''my own'' views. And as you said Misplaced Pages is not the right place... i now understand that. ] (]) 14:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == SIgnature == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| Okay no problem, but I have no time these days, if you just tell me how to lower the effect, I'll do it. Thanks, <span style="white-space:nowrap; text-shadow:rgb(150,150,150) 5px 3px 1px;"> - <font face="sans-serif">] <sub>]</sub></font></span> 08:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :try either of these (pardon me for copying your signature for demonstration purposes) - lighter shade of gray or a slightly colored shadow: | |||
| {| border="1" cellpadding="8" | |||
| |<span style="white-space:nowrap; text-shadow:rgb(180,180,180) 5px 3px 1px;"> - <font face="sans-serif">] <sub>]</sub></font></span> | |||
| |<span style="white-space:nowrap; text-shadow:#9999cc 5px 3px 1px;"> - <font face="sans-serif">] <sub>]</sub></font></span> | |||
| |} | |||
| :or if you have a particular effect in mind, let me know and I'll work it out for you. --] 15:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == ANI == | |||
| This message has been sent to inform you about a discussion at ]. The thread is ]. Thank you. ] (]) 03:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Taijitu == | |||
| Hello. Shall we go through all this again? It's certainly fascinating to see how you jump on the support of some dubious newly registered socket puppet, but if you still feel like having an axe to grind because of your ridiculous ], I am sorry but I thought you were over it. I am certainly willing to move on, but I won't shy from notifying all these user if you think you can reopen the whole debate. It would certainly take a lot of time from me away, especially during World Cup, but, trust me, since I spent much more time researching the material, I am willing to go all the way and you know so. ] (]) 17:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :up to you, what you want to do. you know my position. or maybe you don't... --] 18:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Out for your June block? ] (]) 20:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == WikiProject Apple Inc. == | |||
| I wanted to be the first to welcome you into the project! We're glad to have new members, and if you have any queries, just drop me a line. Once again, welcome! <font face="Papyrus" size="4">—<span style="cursor:crosshair">]</font></span></font> 22:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Mediation == | |||
| If you really want the Israeli Apartheid mess, please feel free to take it off of my hands. :) ] (]) 05:34, 29 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Israel and apartheid == | |||
| Per your suggestion, I moved the "list of candidate titles" table in ] down from the "Opening statements" section to the "Discussion" section. From this point onward, you may wish to take ownership of the table (if you find it useful) and direct its progress. Good luck! --] (]) 14:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:51, 13 June 2024
 | This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Ludwigs2 has not edited Misplaced Pages since 9 March 2013. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
 Archives |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |