Go Back   Project64 Forums > General Discussion > Open Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 19th May 2011, 07:02 PM
Wodd's Avatar
Wodd Wodd is offline
Project Supporter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 13
Default A Reality, Eh? (or lack thereof?)

As far as I can see, hear, tell, etc., Project64 1.7 is a reality. There is no need to wait for it to become a reality anymore. In fact, it has been a reality since its first thought (since this was when it first existed). It was not always a truity, however. There is a lot of real stuff (as well as a lot of fake stuff) in the world that people are unaware of though. Of course, this is not in accordance with common logic. Common logic considers fiction not real. I consider it real, but intangible. Common logic may consider an object fake (and thus not real). I consider fake objects real, but the reason for them being fake depends on the object. Common logic considers imaginary objects not real. I consider them real, but again, intangible (though not necissarily fictional) (although I do think of dreams as taking place in the world of fiction prior to them becoming true). Common logic considers virtual objects not real. This shares the same principle with fictional and imaginary objects.

Consider these:
1. If fake things are not real, then there are plenty of things (such as technology and jewelry) that are not real (especially according to the onlinie Merriam-Webster dictionary).
2. If imaginary things are not real, then the reality of objects dealing with spiritual matters (such as God, Heaven, and Hell) is eliminated.
3. If virtual objects are not real, then the reality of operating systems beyond the disc point and the reality of e-mail, e-books, e-checks, etc. is eliminated.

"Wow, o (where o can be anything, but is typically a person) looks so real!" That is because o is real! I think that most people think of reality and existence in relation to the world of nonfiction only (as a minimum) (Some people limit them even further.) I think of them in relation to both the world of nonfiction and the world of fiction.
__________________

I love Daisy!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 19th May 2011, 07:04 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

wtf is this redundant bs.



XD sorry couldn't resist

Nah, I agree with you. Making a beta emulator a reality in the context of publishing in a more complete state is probably more the sense they meant, though yeah some of the semantics were pretty confusing.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 20th May 2011, 02:42 AM
Wodd's Avatar
Wodd Wodd is offline
Project Supporter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 13
Default A Reality, Eh? (or lack thereof?)

There seems to be many people "in that same boat." I feel fortunate that I am not in it and I hope that I never find myself in it. I have a great distaste for profanity. When trying to teach somebody a new concept, remember this: "Gentle words work better than hard ones." (Daysies, October 10)
Something that I find interesting: Consider this comparison:
"Let us not love only in words or in talk, but let us put our love into action and make it real. (John 3:18)" (Daysies, May 5) (The reference is actually incorrect, but it is an accurate paraphrase using common logic.)
"My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth." (1 John 3:18, King James Version Bible)
I find this to be interesting because I substitute the term real with the term true math of the time.
Here is something that boggles my mind. If common logic categorizes fiction as "fake" or "nonexistent" and nonfiction as "real" or "existent," then why are books categorized as fiction and nonfiction instead of either fake and real or nonexistent and existent?
__________________

I love Daisy!

Last edited by Wodd; 20th May 2011 at 02:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 20th May 2011, 03:32 AM
Natch's Avatar
Natch Natch is offline
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nowhere near you.
Posts: 5,075
Default

Nice quotes

Fiction and fiction as apart from the other sets of names, most likely because there's historical fiction, and science fiction, and it wouldn't make any sense to call it "historical fakeness" or "fake science" Then there's Fantasy, which is fiction.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 20th May 2011, 03:54 AM
squall_leonhart's Avatar
squall_leonhart squall_leonhart is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,918
Default

did someone just quote the greatest fiction ever written (bible)
__________________

CPU:Intel Xeon x5690 @ 4.2Ghz, Mainboard:Asus Rampage III Extreme, Memory:48GB Corsair Vengeance LP 1600
Video:EVGA Geforce GTX 1080 Founders Edition, NVidia Geforce GTX 1060 Founders Edition
Monitor:ROG PG279Q, BenQ BL2211, Sound:Creative XFI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro
SDD:Crucial MX300 275, Crucial MX300 525, Crucial MX300 1000
HDD:500GB Spinpoint F3, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Red, 1TB WD Black
Case:NZXT Phantom 820, PSU:Seasonic X-850, OS:Windows 7 SP1
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 20th May 2011, 04:13 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

man wtf xD

Normally I can't stand reading this shit, but now I'm not actively trying to whore up the other threads in the forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wodd View Post
Consider these:
1. If fake things are not real, then there are plenty of things (such as technology and jewelry) that are not real (especially according to the onlinie Merriam-Webster dictionary).
That's like saying, if a, with respect to m is true, then a with respect to n is true. m is different from n, i.e. there is no proof in there saying that technology and jewelry are fake things, too. You also can't switch definitions or contexts of the word "fake" inconsistently across both m and n, defining them differently while using the same word ("fake") to describe them both as interchangeably linked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wodd View Post
2. If imaginary things are not real, then the reality of objects dealing with spiritual matters (such as God, Heaven, and Hell) is eliminated.
So, instead of saying that anything spiritual is imaginary, you're saying that anything interactive with anything spiritual is imaginary, including religious people? Emotions count as spirit, too, you know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wodd View Post
3. If virtual objects are not real, then the reality of operating systems beyond the disc point and the reality of e-mail, e-books, e-checks, etc. is eliminated.
Hmmm...logical fallacy?

You said if "virtual objects" are not real. You didn't say if all virtual objects are not real, just that if virtual objects are not real. See, I could say numbers aren't real. That's a true statement--some numbers (between negative infinity, through zero, and up to positive infinity) are real, while others (imaginary or complex numbers, infinity-based numbers, anything you could make up, whatever) aren't real. It's still a true statement in the inclusive sense because some numbers, in fact, aren't real, therefore it's correct to say that numbers aren't real. They also are real; it could go either way.

I'm sure if you look up "e-mail, e-books, e-checks, etc." in the dictionary, it'll say, "the only virtual objects that could be real".
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 20th May 2011, 07:00 AM
Wodd's Avatar
Wodd Wodd is offline
Project Supporter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart
did someone just quote the greatest fiction ever written (bible)
Many people do believe that the content of the Bible is not true. It seems that you are one of those people. If the Bible was not true, then why do we make mistakes? the Bible was not true, then where did the universe come from?
Logic fallacy indeed: Imaginary numbers are real. This is because they exist. Where those terms (real numbers and imaginary numbers) came from, I am unsure. E-mail, e-books, e-checks, etc. are not "could be real" objects. They are indeed real as well for the same reason. For the first one, thank the writers of the online (and perhaps the physical) (Note how I didn't use the term real.) Merriam-Webster dictionary.
__________________

I love Daisy!

Last edited by Wodd; 20th May 2011 at 07:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 20th May 2011, 06:40 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wodd View Post
Imaginary numbers are real. This is because they exist.
no hentai allowed.

ban plz.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 20th May 2011, 07:08 PM
ExtremeDude2's Avatar
ExtremeDude2 ExtremeDude2 is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 3,112
Default

Well numbers are infinite.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsx! View Post
are you american or something
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 20th May 2011, 07:32 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,236
Default

So is the length I'll have up this person's ass for posting this shit.

heh...no hard feelings Woddy
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.