Can Second Life be even considered a "Game"?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Nalytha wrote:

I like you idea of "wake." I watched my father die, over the course of a week. I had a week to contemplate his life and death (in a way, a gift as I'm sure many wish they could have the same opportunity). You are right. I feel his "wake" in my life, in things I do and think, etc. It is comforting.

 

Much more comforting than "Don't worry. He is super happy in heaven with his loved ones (So, which of his three wives or the four other children that chose to lose contact with him?) . You will see him again.

---

Tell me a story about him sometime.

;-).

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

As I said, I am not aware of any evidence supporting the existence of God. The existence of the universe may appear to you as clear evidence of a creator. That's a leap of faith I find unnecessary.

---

It's only unnecessary if there's no interest. But, if there is an interest, then it's an essential.

---

 

I suppose that's approaching tautology. If you have an interest in believing things absent evidence, then of course it will seem essential for you to believe in things absent evidence. That, in a sense, makes you the creator. This is the problem I've had since childhood with people who express unwavering certainty. That doesn't come from actually knowing anything, that comes from believing you do.

---

I think you misunderstood, Maddy. I meant that, if someone is interest in whether or not there is a god, then how the universe came into being is an essential.

---

My interest in whether there's a god or not gets lost amongst a lot of other interests. I am, however, pretty interested in how the universe came into being. That's intellectually stimulating and entirely awesome. I don't care what the answer is, it will be what it will be.

If someone has an elevated interest in whether there is or isn't a god, I suppose they might look to the origins of the universe for evidence. But, if they jumped to the presumption that the existence of the universe proves the existence of a creator (I'm using that term interchangebly with god), then they've satisified their curiosity by making up an explanation, and that seems to me like interest in a thing leading to ignorance of it.

It is to me more intellectually satisfying to simply try to figure out how the universe came into being, not to figure out if a god was responsible. We have a long history of pawning off the unexplained on supernatural beings, only to be proven wrong, and refusing to believe the proof. A thousand years from now, people may look back and say that religion was a quaint (and dangerous) belief system of terribly ignorant people. They might also say the same about science. I suppose I could bet on both horses (Pascal's Wager), but that just doesn't work for me.

[Nalytha]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

Tell me a story about him sometime.

;-).

---

He had a leg amputation years prior. Before he was given a fatal diagnosis, they attempted to save him by telling him they should remove his second leg. After the proceedure (and after he was told it was not enough to save him), he asked a nurse, "Wanna dance?" 

[Madelaine McMasters]

I like him already.

I inherited my sense of humor from my Dad. I once (okay, more than once) watched him make a stupid mistake while designing something for a client.

"Dad, do people really pay you to do stupid things like that?"

"Yes they do. Only your Mother gets my stupidity for nothing".

;-).

[DamienKorday]

Um. it is like a live facebook with game elements. There actually is some game play elements. ultimately it is a game. its not RL its virtual. And most virtual things are considered a game.