State of the Game

Just

Just
Several Puffins said:
Going by your definition here my freedoms are both restricted by looking before crossing the road (because for some reason safety has to be excluded from freedom) and by being hit by a truck, because it will leave me unable to pursue other things that come to mind. Words are tools, and abstract words tend toward semantic drift depended on the cultural context of the speaker, but I this version of freedom seems too semantically light to have much use.
Click to expand...
Of course, because freedom doesn't exist.
It can't exist in this reality, you'd have to be a god in a solipsistic world.

​

 

Just

Just
Robbie84 said:
I did a few relogs in Update 5 to get some Weapon Schematics from Irregular Markers.

Relogging at POIs doesn't work anymore. Tried on Impact Sites, Irregular Markers, etc... Don't know if it works via SC but just relog is dead.

Thanks Frontier... thanks.
Click to expand...
Try blue, mission POIs.
 

Several Puffins

S
Just said:
Of course, because freedom doesn't exist.
It can't exist in this reality, you'd have to be a god in a solipsistic world.
Click to expand...
Or we can use the word differently and retain its ability to mean something. To avoid being Socratic (i.e., to avoid acting like nit-picking other people's positions is a whole, legitimate school of thought) I think a good definition accepts that all freedom is relative, and that in increase in freedom means an increase in opportunities to choose something that will enrich and make better your experience of life. If a multitude of choices were all unpleasant it certainly wouldn't seem like a good candidate for a free situation. This means that incarceration is less free than (ho ho) freedom, that laws can exist to balance, rather than just to curtail freedoms, and that there is space to discuss autocracy and tyranny sensibly as being generally less free than, say, total democracy, as well as the denial of opportunity through poverty being a meaningful denial of freedom.

Also, everyone should read Ursula LeGuin's The Dispossessed (but you're free not to!).
 

Just

Just
Several Puffins said:
Or we can use the word differently and retain its ability to mean something. To avoid being Socratic (i.e., to avoid acting like nit-picking other people's positions is a whole, legitimate school of thought) I think a good definition accepts that all freedom is relative, and that in increase in freedom means an increase in opportunities to choose something that will enrich and make better your experience of life. If a multitude of choices were all unpleasant it certainly wouldn't seem like a good candidate for a free situation. This means that incarceration is less free than (ho ho) freedom, that laws can exist to balance, rather than just to curtail freedoms, and that there is space to discuss autocracy and tyranny sensibly as being generally less free than, say, total democracy, as well as the denial of opportunity through poverty being a meaningful denial of freedom.

Also, everyone should read Ursula LeGuin's The Dispossessed (but you're free not to!).
Click to expand...
Thank's but I have never read a single philosophical book or in my life and I purposely restrain myself from this.
Nor summaries of philosophical models/theories, with exception of definitions of some terms.

Still, in my 20s, when I was "partying" a lot what brought me to many hours of pointless blubbering on after-partys I was "inventing/improvising" some pretty sophisticated models/ideas describing reality, that after sharing them with someone from "humanistic" background turned out to be another already created model, that made some guy famous at some point.

Really, philosophy is so overrated, if an intoxicated guy can expel content that others DENY to accept as his own, because they are one of philosophy classics.'

EDIT: well, LeGuin is more into anthropology, sociology and psychology then philosophy, so I can actually follow your advice, thanks.
 
Last edited:

Just

Just
Several Puffins said:
Ooooooooh Eeeeeeeeee manuel Kant was a real pi**ant who was very rarely stable, Heidegger Heidegger was a boozy beggar who could think you under the table...
Click to expand...
Well, it can explain a lot.

I used to be interested and "gifted" in physics and mathematics and had absolutely no idea what all those "humanistic" people are blubbering about in my early life.

And then I started to intoxicate my brain in different ways and suddenly it turns out I not only started to understand them, but became creative enough to make other doubt all those ideas, schemes and models I am describing are my own.
 

WhiteShadow

WhiteShadow
Rat Catcher said:
Easy-peasy... You are awake and active during the hours I can play - so all it takes is the suggestion here ;)
Click to expand...

nemolomen said:
Oh, so THAT'S the power of suggestion. "all it takes..."

If only that were true; then Elite Dangerous would be the game that "everybody" wants it to be. ;)
Click to expand...

Rat Catcher said:
Only if those players wished to fly / walk / die alongside another player or two...
With us being on opposite sides of the pond, timing is a little more 'difficult' then being in the same part of the world ;)

ETA: ED 'could' be the game 'everybody' wants it to be, all it takes is a willingness to play it - and to play the version best suited to the playmates: Misha can't play Odyssey currently, so rather than exclude a squadron mate I'm very happy to play on the version both of us can enjoy.
Really that is all it takes - a little willingness to make a small effort to get along!
Click to expand...
And not a single mention of "Would you kindly"...

Now there's the power of suggestion we need!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom