A challenge to Philosomasizers

Regina · **#21** by **Regina** » Apr 17, 2012 5:01 pm

Cito wrote:

And... where are the Big Bangers to go with the egg and toast?

Here you go. I got you the saucy ones. :shock:

[Reveal] Spoiler:

Animavore · **#22** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 5:13 pm

Shrunk wrote:
amkerman wrote:

Is she turning to the left, or to the right? And once you've decided, can you make her turn in the other direction?

I have never been able to see her do anything but go clockwise. I can't imagine how it could be the other way. If I were to imagine the person and not the silhouette that is how I would imagine the person creating that silhouette would be turning.

Animavore · **#23** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 5:21 pm

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Animavore wrote:The Tao symbol looks cool an' all but I've two problems.

The symbol is symmetric but good and 'evil' aren't.

Lao Tsu wrote:
When people see some things as beautiful,
other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good,
other things become bad.

Being and non-being create each other.
Difficult and easy support each other.
Long and short define each other.
High and low depend on each other.
Before and after follow each other.

Therefore the Master
acts without doing anything
and teaches without saying anything.
Things arise and she lets them come;
things disappear and she lets them go.
She has but doesn't possess,
acts but doesn't expect.
When her work is done, she forgets it.
That is why it lasts forever.

Secondly, in Taoism this symbol is used to represent the universe as a whole. They make the classic mistake of projecting mankind on to the cosmos.

There is no anthropomorophism in Taoism.

I would need another circle for the universe. A blank one, not even white, with no boundry.

http://seansturm.wordpress.com/2009/07/ ... -to-wanwu/

Well yes. There is no overt anthropomorphism but the diagram highlights the point. It has created a universe of opposites. This just seems a human way of looking at it. The universe itself knows no such thing. It likely doesn't know anything.

Hmm. Maybe that's the point of it.

Doubtdispelled · **#24** by **Doubtdispelled** » Apr 17, 2012 5:21 pm

Animavore wrote:
I have never been able to see her do anything but go clockwise. I can't imagine how it could be the other way. If I were to imagine the person and not the silhouette that is how I would imagine the person creating that silhouette would be turning.

Try concentrating on the hands, Ani. I can make her change direction at will, but it takes concentration, and does my head it when it happens.

Animavore · **#25** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 5:27 pm

That's interesting. As I checked over my post above I could only see her legs from above the knee and they were going to other way. Anti-clockwise. I tried keep it that way as I scrolled slowly up and lost it once I reached the hips.

The silhouette looks, to me, the way I'd expect it to look with a person going clockwise.

Shrunk · **#26** by **Shrunk** » Apr 17, 2012 5:30 pm

Animavore wrote:That's interesting. As I checked over my post above I could only see her legs from above the knee and they were going to other way. Anti-clockwise. I tried keep it that way as I scrolled slowly up and lost it once I reached the hips.

The silhouette looks, to me, the way I'd expect it to look with a person going clockwise.

I find if I concentrate on the legs, I will "see" one of them in front of the other. If I imagine the back one is now in front, she instantly switches directions. But it's still hard sometimes.

Animavore · **#27** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 5:34 pm

Hmmm. Even more interesting. When the page reloaded after the last post I made the woman (the gif), due to the temperamentality of the Playstion, was going twice the speed and I could easily flip the image back and forth without effort. I reloaded and it was at normal speed and she was clockwise again.

Cito di Pense · **#28** by **Cito di Pense** » Apr 17, 2012 5:46 pm

Animavore wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
amkerman wrote:

Is she turning to the left, or to the right? And once you've decided, can you make her turn in the other direction?

I have never been able to see her do anything but go clockwise. I can't imagine how it could be the other way. If I were to imagine the person and not the silhouette that is how I would imagine the person creating that silhouette would be turning.

If you concentrate on the shadow of the pivot foot, you can get reversals pretty easily. Or the pony tail. The point is to hypnotise yourself, but just a little.

Regina · **#29** by **Regina** » Apr 17, 2012 5:50 pm

Funnily enough, it only works for me when I concentrate on her shadow. :scratch:

edit:Oops, just saw you posted the same, Cito.

UndercoverElephant · **#30** by **UndercoverElephant** » Apr 17, 2012 5:52 pm

Animavore wrote:
Well yes. There is no overt anthropomorphism but the diagram highlights the point. It has created a universe of opposites. This just seems a human way of looking at it.

It's also the scientific way of looking at it. The same pattern appears throughout nature, especially physics. How can something come from nothing? The best answer science can give involves particles and anti-particles appearing out of nowhere. And that's just one example of many.

UndercoverElephant · **#31** by **UndercoverElephant** » Apr 17, 2012 5:55 pm

I can only see the woman go clockwise. Tried for five minutes to reverse it. Got bored...

Cito di Pense · **#32** by **Cito di Pense** » Apr 17, 2012 5:55 pm

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Animavore wrote:
Well yes. There is no overt anthropomorphism but the diagram highlights the point. It has created a universe of opposites. This just seems a human way of looking at it.

It's also the scientific way of looking at it. The same pattern appears throughout nature, especially physics. How can something come from nothing? The best answer science can give involves particles and anti-particles appearing out of nowhere. And that's just one example of many.

That just indicates a problem with naive concepts of 'something' and 'nothing'. Is all in how you look at it. There still ain't a free lunch, no matter which way you look at it, except for scam artists. Like that dancer, it's kind of boring, depending on how you look at it.

Regina · **#33** by **Regina** » Apr 17, 2012 5:59 pm

Back on topic:

Animavore · **#34** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 6:05 pm

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Animavore wrote:
Well yes. There is no overt anthropomorphism but the diagram highlights the point. It has created a universe of opposites. This just seems a human way of looking at it.

It's also the scientific way of looking at it. The same pattern appears throughout nature, especially physics. How can something come from nothing? The best answer science can give involves particles and anti-particles appearing out of nowhere. And that's just one example of many.

But particles and anti-particles aren't symmetric either otherwise there'd still be nothing. So the symmetric symbol is still inaccurate

NamelessFaceless · **#35** by **NamelessFaceless** » Apr 17, 2012 6:15 pm

I mostly see her going clockwise, but if I scroll up so that I can only see her feet, I can sometimes make her switch directions. But then I have a hard time switching back.

Animavore · **#36** by **Animavore** » Apr 17, 2012 6:18 pm

NamelessFaceless wrote:I mostly see her going clockwise, but if I scroll up so that I can only see her feet, I can sometimes make her switch directions. But then I have a hard time switching back.

It's like once you've been with an African.

Little Idiot · **#37** by **Little Idiot** » Apr 17, 2012 6:25 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:

Ah, a simulation, but in not so many words. A two-dimensional simulation. Of spoon-bending! Or should we call it a 'stimulation'? Prepare to jettison!

Err....eh?

Simulation?

Spoon-bending??

I think lobawad's challenge is a bit disingenuous, but works as a kind of object-lesson. I've always really liked that animation, but I don't know exactly why. I like the colours and the sinusoidal repetition, but I'm not about to hypnotise myself with it.

It's a two-dimensional simulation of, among other things, the way opaque solid objects eclipse each other in three dimensions, but it depends on that (and a specified angle to the illumination of the objects) to look cool. Basic facts for draughtsmen.

You mean 'she' is naked, admit it!

NamelessFaceless · **#38** by **NamelessFaceless** » Apr 17, 2012 6:26 pm

Animavore wrote:
NamelessFaceless wrote:I mostly see her going clockwise, but if I scroll up so that I can only see her feet, I can sometimes make her switch directions. But then I have a hard time switching back.

It's like once you've been with an African.

Mr.Samsa · **#39** by **Mr.Samsa** » Apr 18, 2012 3:40 am

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
UndercoverElephant wrote:
lobawad wrote:Let's have idealism, solipsism, pick your ism, jettison your jism, expressed in a non-verbal manner.

Ah, a simulation, but in not so many words. A two-dimensional simulation. Of spoon-bending! Or should we call it a 'stimulation'? Prepare to jettison!

Err....eh?

Simulation?

Spoon-bending??

I found a cartoon which seems to sum up Cito's position in these threads quite well:

Spinozasgalt · **#40** by **Spinozasgalt** » Apr 18, 2012 4:01 am

Checkmate.

A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Ads by Google

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Ads by Google

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Ads by Google

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Re: A challenge to Philosomasizers

Who is online