The Flying Spaghetti Monster, solipsism and absurdism

[mikkel_the_dane]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real and then make up my own subjective interpretation to fit me.
We all do that as for how we deal with reality in practice. Including all the different sects of the believers in truth. Religious as well as non-religious. So for the absurd as both solipsism in all its variants and absurdism I can do the same. I subjectively choose how to make sense of reality and the apparent truth is that it is real absurd to some of the other members here. I get that, but here is the explanation with cultural science:
All unreal beliefs have real consequences.

I have just tested that and as along as my unreal beliefs apparently work(real consequences, whether that really is), I have figured out, that apparently I am still a part of reality.
How do I know that? Well, the members of the forum, who know, what reality really is, keep telling me in effect, that I don't understand the real reality, because my beliefs are in effect with truth really absurd.
But for them to answer me, requires that I am either a part of the real reality or that I really exist as really not existing in reality. I have been told so for over 20 years now, that I really don't understand reality and to me, that qualifies for some sort of evidence that I am a part of the real reality, otherwise how can they answer?
Yeah, I know. It is absurd that unreal beliefs can have real consequences, but the joke is that you are apparently looking at it now. So is that real?

So for you how ever you in effect believe, that you know the truth, I don't and that works fine for me. And I hope it works for you to believe in the truth.
So if you have to use the truth in answering me, I will just do it differently. You don't have to agree with me and I hope your life works for you, but you might want to learn to accept that even the truth has a limit. That also goes for proof, evidence, reason, logic, objectivity and all the rest. In effect the falsification of that everything is real according to the model of the really real, is that, I do the unreal and I can do that, because I have learned to do it. The unreal has to be real, otherwise you wouldn't know it.
So here it is with cultural science: The word "real" doesn't really have an objective referent, just like God or truth and what not. Even reality doesn't have an objective referent.

Regards
Mikkel

 

[Altfish]

The beer mountains appeal

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The beer mountains appeal

Google doesn't do it for me. More words please, if you don't mind. I do think I get it, but I am not sure.

 

[Altfish]

Google doesn't do it for me. More words please, if you don't mind. I do think I get it, but I am not sure.

Actually it is a beer volcano and is apparently promised in the FSM's heaven.
Flying Spaghetti Monster - Wikipedia
See the bit about the afterlife in above Wiki reference

 

[IAMinyou]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real and then make up my own subjective interpretation to fit me.
We all do that as for how we deal with reality in practice. Including all the different sects of the believers in truth. Religious as well as non-religious. So for the absurd as both solipsism in all its variants and absurdism I can do the same. I subjectively choose how to make sense of reality and the apparent truth is that it is real absurd to some of the other members here. I get that, but here is the explanation with cultural science:
All unreal beliefs have real consequences.

I have just tested that and as along as my unreal beliefs apparently work(real consequences, whether that really is), I have figured out, that apparently I am still a part of reality.
How do I know that? Well, the members of the forum, who know, what reality really is, keep telling me in effect, that I don't understand the real reality, because my beliefs are in effect with truth really absurd.
But for them to answer me, requires that I am either a part of the real reality or that I really exist as really not existing in reality. I have been told so for over 20 years now, that I really don't understand reality and to me, that qualifies for some sort of evidence that I am a part of the real reality, otherwise how can they answer?
Yeah, I know. It is absurd that unreal beliefs can have real consequences, but the joke is that you are apparently looking at it now. So is that real?

So for you how ever you in effect believe, that you know the truth, I don't and that works fine for me. And I hope it works for you to believe in the truth.
So if you have to use the truth in answering me, I will just do it differently. You don't have to agree with me and I hope your life works for you, but you might want to learn to accept that even the truth has a limit. That also goes for proof, evidence, reason, logic, objectivity and all the rest. In effect the falsification of that everything is real according to the model of the really real, is that, I do the unreal and I can do that, because I have learned to do it. The unreal has to be real, otherwise you wouldn't know it.
So here it is with cultural science: The word "real" doesn't really have an objective referent, just like God or truth and what not. Even reality doesn't have an objective referent.

Regards
Mikkel

Describe reality. What you think is reality might be totally different in other MINDS of MEN ( male and female ).

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Actually it is a beer volcano and is apparently promised in the FSM's heaven.
Flying Spaghetti Monster - Wikipedia
See the bit about the afterlife in above Wiki reference

Well, I will treat that not as literally but as figuratively. But that is how that works.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Describe reality. What you think is reality might be totally different in other MINDS of MEN ( male and female ).

I can't without the act of describing reality as being a part of reality. Check your own post and now drop describe, think and all the other words that requires a mind including mind, other, different, totally.

That absurdity is that the claim I am objective in understanding reality, is subjective, otherwise I couldn't be objective.
The describing of reality is a part of reality, unless the description is not a part. For the latter one, you can't apparently do that without you being in reality and being subjective. I have tried and I can't. It doesn't work unless you believe in strong non-causal duality. I don't.

 

[IAMinyou]

I can't without the act of describing reality as being a part of reality. Check your own post and now drop describe, think and all the other words that requires a mind including mind, other, different, totally.

That absurdity is that the claim I am objective in understanding reality, is subjective, otherwise I couldn't be objective.
The describing of reality is a part of reality, unless the description is not a part. For the latter one, you can't apparently do that without you being in reality and being subjective. I have tried and I can't. It doesn't work unless you believe in strong non-causal duality. I don't.

You have no idea what objective means. There is only ONE objective but with many subjective MINDS involved.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You have no idea what objective means. There is only ONE objective but with many subjective MINDS involved.

No, that is a belief. There is a minimum of 2 minds involved, you and the rest. That the rest is more than one mind, requires that God is fair or that you are not in a certain variant of a Boltzmann Brain universe.
(1) All truth is relative to a certain limited standpoint.
(2) All claims about what objective reality really is, other than being different than you is a belief.

 

[SomeRandom]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real and then make up my own subjective interpretation to fit me.
We all do that as for how we deal with reality in practice. Including all the different sects of the believers in truth. Religious as well as non-religious. So for the absurd as both solipsism in all its variants and absurdism I can do the same. I subjectively choose how to make sense of reality and the apparent truth is that it is real absurd to some of the other members here. I get that, but here is the explanation with cultural science:
All unreal beliefs have real consequences.

I have just tested that and as along as my unreal beliefs apparently work(real consequences, whether that really is), I have figured out, that apparently I am still a part of reality.
How do I know that? Well, the members of the forum, who know, what reality really is, keep telling me in effect, that I don't understand the real reality, because my beliefs are in effect with truth really absurd.
But for them to answer me, requires that I am either a part of the real reality or that I really exist as really not existing in reality. I have been told so for over 20 years now, that I really don't understand reality and to me, that qualifies for some sort of evidence that I am a part of the real reality, otherwise how can they answer?
Yeah, I know. It is absurd that unreal beliefs can have real consequences, but the joke is that you are apparently looking at it now. So is that real?

So for you how ever you in effect believe, that you know the truth, I don't and that works fine for me. And I hope it works for you to believe in the truth.
So if you have to use the truth in answering me, I will just do it differently. You don't have to agree with me and I hope your life works for you, but you might want to learn to accept that even the truth has a limit. That also goes for proof, evidence, reason, logic, objectivity and all the rest. In effect the falsification of that everything is real according to the model of the really real, is that, I do the unreal and I can do that, because I have learned to do it. The unreal has to be real, otherwise you wouldn't know it.
So here it is with cultural science: The word "real" doesn't really have an objective referent, just like God or truth and what not. Even reality doesn't have an objective referent.

Regards
Mikkel

May his noodly appendage touch you. Ramen!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real and then make up my own subjective interpretation to fit me.

Good to know.

 

[Nimos]

I have just tested that and as along as my unreal beliefs apparently work(real consequences, whether that really is), I have figured out, that apparently I am still a part of reality.

A bit confused here, might have misunderstood you. But if you know you have unreal beliefs then you know yourself they are wrong, so you are just intentionally lying to yourself and you have no issues with it, is that what you mean by this?

 

[bobhikes]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.
.

Regards
Mikkel

Through out the OP your definition of Real and Reality change chaotically. That's OK because you are indicating that they are subjective but it makes it had to understand and respond.

 

[ChristineM]

Disclaimer:
If you really don't like the meaningless, absurd and so on, don't read on. If you then choose to make a complaint in a post that it is absurd, then that is your problem and not mine.

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real and then make up my own subjective interpretation to fit me.
We all do that as for how we deal with reality in practice. Including all the different sects of the believers in truth. Religious as well as non-religious. So for the absurd as both solipsism in all its variants and absurdism I can do the same. I subjectively choose how to make sense of reality and the apparent truth is that it is real absurd to some of the other members here. I get that, but here is the explanation with cultural science:
All unreal beliefs have real consequences.

I have just tested that and as along as my unreal beliefs apparently work(real consequences, whether that really is), I have figured out, that apparently I am still a part of reality.
How do I know that? Well, the members of the forum, who know, what reality really is, keep telling me in effect, that I don't understand the real reality, because my beliefs are in effect with truth really absurd.
But for them to answer me, requires that I am either a part of the real reality or that I really exist as really not existing in reality. I have been told so for over 20 years now, that I really don't understand reality and to me, that qualifies for some sort of evidence that I am a part of the real reality, otherwise how can they answer?
Yeah, I know. It is absurd that unreal beliefs can have real consequences, but the joke is that you are apparently looking at it now. So is that real?

So for you how ever you in effect believe, that you know the truth, I don't and that works fine for me. And I hope it works for you to believe in the truth.
So if you have to use the truth in answering me, I will just do it differently. You don't have to agree with me and I hope your life works for you, but you might want to learn to accept that even the truth has a limit. That also goes for proof, evidence, reason, logic, objectivity and all the rest. In effect the falsification of that everything is real according to the model of the really real, is that, I do the unreal and I can do that, because I have learned to do it. The unreal has to be real, otherwise you wouldn't know it.
So here it is with cultural science: The word "real" doesn't really have an objective referent, just like God or truth and what not. Even reality doesn't have an objective referent.

Regards
Mikkel

Believe what you want but use the correct words to describe your belief and people will understand you better.

The FSM is as real as any other god, i.e. not. I am sure many god believers will disagree with that statement, they are welcome to present real evidence in favour of their case.

Yes you are real, your OP here shows it was posted by a real person.

And your post also explains some or the real arguments we have had on the subject of reality.

As a general rule, if it can be seen to exist, (brick, tree, elephant, banana etc) then you can assume its real.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

A bit confused here, might have misunderstood you. But if you know you have unreal beliefs then you know yourself they are wrong, so you are just intentionally lying to yourself and you have no issues with it, is that what you mean by this?

No. It is an absurd take on real as only objective. Subjective real is always unreal, because the real is objective, physical and what not.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Through out the OP your definition of Real and Reality change chaotically. That's OK because you are indicating that they are subjective but it makes it had to understand and respond.

Correct. I do it sometimes in the same sentence. I use 2 different contexts and link them as seemly one without unpacking what I have done. Good observation.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Believe what you want but use the correct words to describe your belief and people will understand you better.

The FSM is as real as any other god, i.e. not. I am sure many god believers will disagree with that statement, they are welcome to present real evidence in favour of their case.

Yes you are real, your OP here shows it was posted by a real person.

And your post also explains some or the real arguments we have had on the subject of reality.

As a general rule, if it can be seen to exist, (brick, tree, elephant, banana etc) then you can assume its real.

You really want to play that game. Well, if I have to I can find an explanation of how real have no one correct definition.
Real is as word not objective but subjectively context dependent.
Now I know what can happen. You could find a google definition of real and claim that is the end. It is not, it only shows the common usage among most humans of that language, but that doesn't make it true. It only shows how people understand the word.
We have done this before. So if you do the same as last time, I will respond in the same manner. Find an explanation of the word "real", which tells you that it has no objective referent. To use the word real, you only have to learn how it subjective works and then use it as you see fit in regards to what really matters. E.g. in your case scientific evidence.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

If I have to choose a organized, real religion, I would choose The Flying Spaghetti Monster and treat it as real

The problem is, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a real religion. For something to be a genuine religion, it must have believers. People who sign up for FSM don't actually believe in any FSM. Rather, they are atheists who use the FSM to mock religion.

 

[ChristineM]

You really want to play that game. Well, if I have to I can find an explanation of how real have no one correct definition.
Real is as word not objective but subjectively context dependent.
Now I know what can happen. You could find a google definition of real and claim that is the end. It is not, it only shows the common usage among most humans of that language, but that doesn't make it true. It only shows how people understand the word.
We have done this before. So if you do the same as last time, I will respond in the same manner. Find an explanation of the word "real", which tells you that it has no objective referent. To use the word real, you only have to learn how it subjective works and then use it as you see fit in regards to what really matters. E.g. in your case scientific evidence.

What game?

I was being friendly but never mind, respond how ever the hell you want, i am done

 

[ChristineM]

The problem is, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a real religion. For something to be a genuine religion, it must have believers. People who sign up for FSM don't actually believe in any FSM. Rather, they are atheists who use the FSM to mock religion.

It is as real as any other religion, just because most government dont recognise it as a religion for tax breaks. It is recognised as a religion in at least 3 countries that i am aware of