hunh. well, theologians like to talk about supernatural/extranatural stuff in this context, which might be anything or nothing, but not that many of the non-nothing cases would much give a shit about the theologians' work
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime @sage_like_grace
then you have actual gods, which are emergent phenomena in social behavior, which theologians mostly avoid talking about but philosophers discuss sometimes. when theologians do talk about them, it's usually to try to identify them with supernatural/extranatural stuff
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @sage_like_grace
those exist in social pattern space so the work of the theologians and philosophers is relevant to them, though "determine" would be a strong word. if you piss in the river, you're involved in the waterfall, but saying you determine it would be a bit much
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime @sage_like_grace
the theologians' and philosophers' work is part of the phenomenon of gods determining things about themselves, which is mostly real wacky shit like a five-year-old determining he's Superboy
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sage_like_grace
yeah, there's that kind of feedback, what certain people call hyperstition. i don't understand what you're asking in the second bit
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sage_like_grace
enh, i don't think quantum phenomena or quantum computers are nearly as magical as people want them to be tbh
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
i don't really pay enough attention to the area to have useful feedback, i don't think
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.