• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 22:18
CEST 04:18
KST 11:18
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation StarCraft 1 & 2 Added to Xbox Game Pass
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals RECOVER LOST BTC USDT FUNDS RECLAIMER COMPANY [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 30028 users

What Are You Reading 2013 - Page 9

Forum Index > Media & Entertainment
Post a Reply
Prev 1 7 8 9 10 11 165 Next
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 17 2013 21:41 GMT
#161
People can be smart and on the entirely wrong track both at once. I think he's a hack.
shikata ga nai
bardtown
Profile Joined June 2011
England2313 Posts
January 17 2013 21:43 GMT
#162
On January 18 2013 05:43 sam!zdat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 05:31 corumjhaelen wrote:
You remind me a bit of a Merleau-Ponty text I had at an oral where he explained that litterature was almost a subcategoy of philosophy and how soon there wouldn't be any difference left^^


My experience would tend to support this thesis

Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 05:32 bardtown wrote:
On January 18 2013 05:07 sam!zdat wrote:
I'm mostly thinking about Dawkins and Hitchens. The "OMG religion is a meme we figured it out all of you are idiots" crowd. Sophomoric.


You have to remember Dawkin's was a 'professor for the public understanding of science' and religion in America was such a counter to this that it was somewhat inevitable he'd have to challenge it. I think the popular backlash against him for this is pretty poor; the whole "I don't think God exists but I'm not arrogant about it and I don't attack people like Dawkins does".


Yeah, I understand what he's fighting against and that's fine, that battle needs to be fought as well. But he's doing it in a clumsy way that ends up putting him opposed to me on the other side of the dialectic.

Me <----> Dawkins <-----> Baptists

What you describe as the popular backlash against him is not my position. I DO think "God" exists, and I AM arrogant about it

I think atheism is very bad philosophy and is a part of a whole ideological complex which it's sort of my mission to try to deconstruct.

The problem is that Dawkins only understands vulgar religion - he's never taken the effort to take religious texts seriously (neither have most believers, of course). So what he's rebutting is the wrong way to think about religion anyway, but he thinks he's rebutted all of religion. He should stick to his field.

Show nested quote +

He's not a philosopher, and he doesn't handle the issue as completely as he perhaps thinks he does, but the views and arguments he addressed were not straw men, they were widespread particularly in the US. Popular issues can require popular books for a popular response.


It's true. But I'm just as worried about the popularity of Dawkin's atheistic worldview as I am about the popularity of the worldview he's opposing.


I'm worried about the theists who think the concept of an Abrahamic God is in any way reconcilable with the world we live in. If that's not you then you shouldn't have a problem with Dawkins. Even simple arguments more or less rebut the entirety of those religions.

If you're arguing from a Spinozan point of view or something, I don't think you need see Dawkins as a threat.

Your blanket accusation of atheism being 'very bad philosophy' is a far greater and more naive accusation than any Dawkins has ever made.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
January 17 2013 21:55 GMT
#163
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.
shikata ga nai
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:02 GMT
#164
On January 18 2013 06:35 Roe wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 05:07 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 17 2013 22:41 Kimaker wrote:
On January 17 2013 16:36 sam!zdat wrote:
@Kimaker: have you read much LeGuin before?

Mostly short stories. This is my first try at her main body of work, one of my friends recommended that I make her my next read, so I did.


Earthsea is great. You should also check out books like The Left Hand of Darkness and the Dispossessed.

On January 17 2013 22:58 Roe wrote:
On January 17 2013 18:51 sam!zdat wrote:
The New Atheists are hack sophists. Dawkins early work is brilliant, read The Selfish Gene. But he doesn't know the first thing about religion.

edit: shit sorry, that book ok, I thought you were reading about his atheism


Who are "The New Atheists"?


I'm mostly thinking about Dawkins and Hitchens. The "OMG religion is a meme we figured it out all of you are idiots" crowd. Sophomoric.

On January 18 2013 01:53 GenghisKhan wrote:
Game of Thrones is probably the only (edit: post-Tolkien) epic fantasy that's actually worth reading.


Not true, in my opinion. The Malazan Book of the Fallen is definitely worth a read.


Maybe that's true, can't say I'm probably gonna start reading any new epic fantasy series to find out though

On January 18 2013 03:47 aZealot wrote:
On January 17 2013 18:44 sam!zdat wrote:
On January 17 2013 17:43 aZealot wrote:
But the books are really not political in that sense. IMO, the religion themes (the tension between the Norse paganism that informed his scholarship and the Roman Catholicism that informed his belief) and the theme of friendship (partly arising from his WW1 experiences) have greater primacy.


All books are political. The most interesting political content in narrative is not what is put in there by the author, it's what remains unsaid and the assumptions in the narrative, what things are desired, why is this an attractive narrative to this person...

For example: why do people like stories about zombies now?

These things exist along with the kind of surface themes you are mentioning. This talk of "primacy" is a little naive.


Oh, you mean the things you read into it? Sorry, that is a pile of drivelling rubbish. Spare me your "literary criticism".


Sorry, I'm right about this. It's not my fault if you don't understand how to read literature.

edit: @above, lol that Singer book, for some reason the academy has become infested with "Animals Studies," those people make me want to open a slaughterhouse.


I have no clue about Dawkins' writings, but Hitch was pretty smart, and he was no sophist. You clearly have to do more research on him because calling him sophomoric only shows how sophomoric you are.

He is just typical pseudo-philosopher who has no idea what Dawkins is saying and projecting the same onto Dawkins. Dawkins's arguments are actually well thought out, but they are not a philosophical babble that cares more about semantics and less about the actual point. Which is not surprising considering he is a scientist. His books are popular, but even then it is pretty hard to find holes in the main arguments, unless you are being nitpicker that completely misses the actual points. But if someone is considering reading his books I suggest reading ones on different topics or at least skipping few on the same one before reading another as people who do mind repetition might have an issue with that.
bardtown
Profile Joined June 2011
England2313 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:06:59
January 17 2013 22:03 GMT
#165
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.


I'm comfortable making a claim like 'you're wrong'. I'm qualified.

Saying 'I'm qualified' means nothing, you won't achieve your mission like that. If you want respect, you earn it.

On topic of Dawkins, both the Selfish Gene and the Extended Phentotype are brilliant works of biology for anyone with any interest. It's also the kind of biology that is very useful in understanding behaviour and such. The Selfish Gene I would say is essential reading for everybody.

I'm currently reading Thucydides as part of a Great Books course. I like it, somehow I don't find it as dry as others seem to. I think it's because I have sufficient background knowledge of the time period to imagine things and understand motives and such. On the topic of high fantasy, the third book in the Malazan series is the best written fantasy book I've ever read. I really enjoyed that book, and while I gave up on the series part-way through the fourth book, the first three I really liked a lot.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:11:08
January 17 2013 22:05 GMT
#166
I HAVE earned it, but I got nothing to prove to you. Just putting my thoughts out there.

I'm actually a big fan of Dawkins - the Selfish Gene changed my world. I just don't think he's much of a theologian, and I don't think atheism is even a coherent thesis. What does it even mean to say "there is no God?" I can't parse it.

edit: not Dawkins, but if you'll read E.O. Wilson's book "Consilience," you'll discover that he doesn't even understand the problem he's purporting to solve. This goes for sociobiologists in general, who say fantastically smart things and then don't realize they're only looking at half the problem.
shikata ga nai
Doctorbeat
Profile Joined May 2011
Netherlands13241 Posts
January 17 2013 22:06 GMT
#167
Have been trodding through Gödel, Escher, Bach for a while at a leisurely pace. It doesn't read fast and I can't read a lot of it at a time. Making notes whilst reading definitely helps though.

Recreational reading I've finished my asoiaf reread and am now starting on the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. After that I'll be starting Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment.
- TEAM LIQUID - doctorbeat on LoL
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:07 GMT
#168
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.

No, you are not qualified. Unless you are a god. Atheism is not even philosophy per se, it is just application of scientific empiricism and basic logical principles on all human experience. It then simply follows from that. And those assumptions are pretty reasonable considering that outside philosophical(including theology) discourse everyone actually uses them in their lives.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:12:11
January 17 2013 22:11 GMT
#169
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.

No, you are not qualified. Unless you are a god. Atheism is not even philosophy per se, it is just application of scientific empiricism and basic logical principles on all human experience. It then simply follows from that. And those assumptions are pretty reasonable considering that outside philosophical(including theology) discourse everyone actually uses them in their lives.

People act on faith at practically every turn of their lives as well. Also, how is relying on empiricism in regards to "all human experience" not a philosophy?
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:12:49
January 17 2013 22:11 GMT
#170
Atheism is philosophy pretending not to be philosophy, which is the worst kind of philosophy of all.

edit:
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
It then simply follows from that.


You have no idea what you are saying.
shikata ga nai
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:13 GMT
#171
On January 18 2013 07:05 sam!zdat wrote:
I HAVE earned it, but I got nothing to prove to you. Just putting my thoughts out there.

I'm actually a big fan of Dawkins - the Selfish Gene changed my world. I just don't think he's much of a theologian, and I don't think atheism is even a coherent thesis. What does it even mean to say "there is no God?" Can't even parse it.

edit: not Dawkins, but if you'll read E.O. Wilson's book "Consilience," you'll discover that he doesn't even understand the problem he's purporting to solve. This goes for sociobiologists in general, who say fantastically smart things and then don't realize they're only looking at half the problem.

Ah, beautiful example of creating issues where none are by playing with words. Everyone actually knows pretty well what it means when someone says "there is no God". Of course it depends on context, but with most contexts this is pretty clear statement and only someone whose only interest is nonsensical nitpicking would try to make issue out of it.
sam!zdat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States5559 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:19:35
January 17 2013 22:18 GMT
#172
"When everyone dislikes something, it should be examined. When everyone likes something, it should be examined"

"When everyone knows beauty is beauty, this is bad.
When everyone knows good is good, this is not good."

Look dude, when you start saying things like "everyone knows" that's when you KNOW you are in trouble.

edit: and now, I really don't think you can tell me what you mean when you say "There is no God." I have no idea what that means. Wouldn't you have to know what God was in order to claim this?
shikata ga nai
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
January 17 2013 22:18 GMT
#173
On January 18 2013 07:13 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 07:05 sam!zdat wrote:
I HAVE earned it, but I got nothing to prove to you. Just putting my thoughts out there.

I'm actually a big fan of Dawkins - the Selfish Gene changed my world. I just don't think he's much of a theologian, and I don't think atheism is even a coherent thesis. What does it even mean to say "there is no God?" Can't even parse it.

edit: not Dawkins, but if you'll read E.O. Wilson's book "Consilience," you'll discover that he doesn't even understand the problem he's purporting to solve. This goes for sociobiologists in general, who say fantastically smart things and then don't realize they're only looking at half the problem.

Ah, beautiful example of creating issues where none are by playing with words. Everyone actually knows pretty well what it means when someone says "there is no God". Of course it depends on context, but with most contexts this is pretty clear statement and only someone whose only interest is nonsensical nitpicking would try to make issue out of it.

Use value does not necessarily conflict or even figure into truth value.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:26 GMT
#174
On January 18 2013 07:11 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.

No, you are not qualified. Unless you are a god. Atheism is not even philosophy per se, it is just application of scientific empiricism and basic logical principles on all human experience. It then simply follows from that. And those assumptions are pretty reasonable considering that outside philosophical(including theology) discourse everyone actually uses them in their lives.

People act on faith at practically every turn of their lives as well. Also, how is relying on empiricism in regards to "all human experience" not a philosophy?

I said it is not much of a philosophy, since it has not too many claims, not too many assumptions and it does not really say much. It follows from other assumptions that are much more worthy of being called philosophy and atheism is just a simple conclusion : there is no god. Nothing else follows from it, nothing else can be said, that is why I would not call it philosophy. The other assumptions that atheism follows from are much more "philosophical". Namely scientific empiricism and principle of parsimony and other logical principles and their applicability to the real world. There might be atheists that use other reasoning, but I would guess they are in extreme minority.

People actually do not act on faith that much. They often act irrationally, but that is different issue and not in much conflict with what I meant. But we might be missing each other so if you disagree, just give me example of people acting on faith in everyday lives and I will try to tell you what I mean.
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:29:10
January 17 2013 22:28 GMT
#175
On January 18 2013 07:11 sam!zdat wrote:
Atheism is philosophy pretending not to be philosophy, which is the worst kind of philosophy of all.

edit:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
It then simply follows from that.


You have no idea what you are saying.

See my post to farvacola what I mean by saying it is not much of an philosophy. In short because it does not really say much and nothing else really follows from the only thing it says.

EDIT: Your posts are so full of actual arguments.
Ilikestarcraft
Profile Blog Joined November 2004
Korea (South)17726 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:33:22
January 17 2013 22:28 GMT
#176
Think you guys should take it to pms since this isn't really the thread to discuss this.

To bring the thread back on topic have been reading Neuromancer lately. A pleasant read so far.
[image loading]
"Nana is a goddess. Or at very least, Nana is my goddess." - KazeHydra
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:36 GMT
#177
On January 18 2013 07:18 sam!zdat wrote:
"When everyone dislikes something, it should be examined. When everyone likes something, it should be examined"

"When everyone knows beauty is beauty, this is bad.
When everyone knows good is good, this is not good."

Look dude, when you start saying things like "everyone knows" that's when you KNOW you are in trouble.

edit: and now, I really don't think you can tell me what you mean when you say "There is no God." I have no idea what that means. Wouldn't you have to know what God was in order to claim this?

No, you are in trouble when you start questioning meaning of well understood words. It is common trick of sophists like you. I am just waiting when will you ask me to define what it means "there", "is", "no".

What god means in different context is mostly clear from that context. In Dawkins's books it is pretty clearly concept of the entity that most abrahamic religious believers consider as god, with the specific attributes required. He often specifies which attribute of god he is criticizing thus making it even clearer.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-01-17 22:40:41
January 17 2013 22:37 GMT
#178
On January 18 2013 07:26 mcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 07:11 farvacola wrote:
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.

No, you are not qualified. Unless you are a god. Atheism is not even philosophy per se, it is just application of scientific empiricism and basic logical principles on all human experience. It then simply follows from that. And those assumptions are pretty reasonable considering that outside philosophical(including theology) discourse everyone actually uses them in their lives.

People act on faith at practically every turn of their lives as well. Also, how is relying on empiricism in regards to "all human experience" not a philosophy?

I said it is not much of a philosophy, since it has not too many claims, not too many assumptions and it does not really say much. It follows from other assumptions that are much more worthy of being called philosophy and atheism is just a simple conclusion : there is no god. Nothing else follows from it, nothing else can be said, that is why I would not call it philosophy. The other assumptions that atheism follows from are much more "philosophical". Namely scientific empiricism and principle of parsimony and other logical principles and their applicability to the real world. There might be atheists that use other reasoning, but I would guess they are in extreme minority.

People actually do not act on faith that much. They often act irrationally, but that is different issue and not in much conflict with what I meant. But we might be missing each other so if you disagree, just give me example of people acting on faith in everyday lives and I will try to tell you what I mean.

In keeping with the topic of the thread, I very highly recommend Michael Polanyi's
[image loading]
It goes into far greater depth than I can, and even though some of it is a bit dated, the basic premise that faith works into almost every aspect of society, even science, still holds true. For a brief and silly example, what are we to call the assumption that everyone follows traffic laws anything but faith?
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:40 GMT
#179
On January 18 2013 07:28 Ilikestarcraft wrote:
Think you guys should take it to pms since this isn't really the thread to discuss this.

To bring the thread back on topic have been reading Neuromancer lately. A pleasant read so far.
[image loading]

You are right. So to get back to thread exactly where we left it. I agree with samizdat that Ursula Le Guin's books are really worth a read. One of very few sci-fi and fantasy authors that are.
mcc
Profile Joined October 2010
Czech Republic4646 Posts
January 17 2013 22:51 GMT
#180
On January 18 2013 07:37 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 18 2013 07:26 mcc wrote:
On January 18 2013 07:11 farvacola wrote:
On January 18 2013 07:07 mcc wrote:
On January 18 2013 06:55 sam!zdat wrote:
I think Dawkins is teaching people to dismiss religion, and yes I see that as a problem.

I'm comfortable with making a claim like "atheism is bad philosophy." I'm qualified.

No, you are not qualified. Unless you are a god. Atheism is not even philosophy per se, it is just application of scientific empiricism and basic logical principles on all human experience. It then simply follows from that. And those assumptions are pretty reasonable considering that outside philosophical(including theology) discourse everyone actually uses them in their lives.

People act on faith at practically every turn of their lives as well. Also, how is relying on empiricism in regards to "all human experience" not a philosophy?

I said it is not much of a philosophy, since it has not too many claims, not too many assumptions and it does not really say much. It follows from other assumptions that are much more worthy of being called philosophy and atheism is just a simple conclusion : there is no god. Nothing else follows from it, nothing else can be said, that is why I would not call it philosophy. The other assumptions that atheism follows from are much more "philosophical". Namely scientific empiricism and principle of parsimony and other logical principles and their applicability to the real world. There might be atheists that use other reasoning, but I would guess they are in extreme minority.

People actually do not act on faith that much. They often act irrationally, but that is different issue and not in much conflict with what I meant. But we might be missing each other so if you disagree, just give me example of people acting on faith in everyday lives and I will try to tell you what I mean.

In keeping with the topic of the thread, I very highly recommend Michael Polanyi's
[image loading]
It goes into far greater depth than I can, and even though some of it is a bit dated, the basic premise that faith works into almost every aspect of society, even science, still holds true. For a brief and silly example, what are we to call the assumption that everyone follows traffic laws anything but faith?

Well that is slightly different meaning of faith than I had in mind and that is a basis of the modern abstract religious belief. The faith you are describing is better described as assumption or guess, not really faith. But whatever you call it I think the meaning is different than the faith used to describe religious faith of modern times. Faith in this case is just societal strategy based on the fact that we lack knowledge of the future and has reciprocity as a basis, but on human level you can just say it follows from morality of human beings. It is more a educated guess combined with assuming that other humans are similarly motivated somewhat rational agents. I am pretty sure that there are much more interesting books on the subject in game theory. I would post the one I started reading few months ago, but had no time to finish, but it is only in Polish.
Prev 1 7 8 9 10 11 165 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PiGosaur Monday
00:00
#35
PiGStarcraft621
SteadfastSC145
CranKy Ducklings137
davetesta35
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft621
SteadfastSC 145
RuFF_SC2 128
Nina 110
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 26192
Sea 2925
Artosis 863
Sharp 30
Icarus 7
Dota 2
LuMiX1
League of Legends
tarik_tv8537
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor116
Other Games
summit1g9546
shahzam1257
WinterStarcraft323
ViBE144
Maynarde116
Sick107
ToD39
Trikslyr35
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1015
BasetradeTV114
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH263
• rockletztv 59
• Hupsaiya 28
• Kozan
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki3
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Shiphtur1164
Other Games
• Scarra696
Upcoming Events
GSL Code S
7h 12m
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
21h 42m
Replay Cast
23h 42m
GSL Code S
1d 7h
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
1d 7h
Replay Cast
1d 21h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
3 days
SOOP
3 days
[ Show More ]
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.