Tell me a secret about the phenomenon of chance, phenomenon

I dunno much about chance, but the gamblers are dear to Krishna and the I Ching works every time

>>9440392
Gamblers in a literal sense, or just anyone dabbling in chance?

>>9440366
>>9440400
Got two dubs in a row btw. Dubs dubs.

>>9440366
Over and over again we experience coincidence, but forget the details almost immediately.

Though liberal-seeming, chance is actually a very conservative notion.

These guys are in the know.

Ananke and Tyche are the same deity

>>9440366
>>9440392
>>9440514
LMAO. Chance and coincidences don't exist. It's all determined. It all goes according to the laws of physics. Read a physics book, you plebs.

why is it a major part in kids game

File: spurdo meltdown.png (10KB, 689x448px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 689x448px

>>9441772
why do you think they operate with probability densities at the lowest level?

>>9441772
>what is quantum mechanics

>>9440366
The greatest trick that God ever pulled was convincing us we matter

>>9441772
You place belief in your senses as a method of exegesis upon the world.

>>9440366

We often experience a coincidence of thinking about something and then seeming to encounter it more frequently, seemingly as if it were connected. For example learning a new word and then noticing it everywhere. But this is a fallacy known as frequency illusion, or the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon

>>9440446
>dubs
The odds of which are exactly one in ten, completely meaningless given the sheer number of comments

>two dubs in a row
The odds of which are exactly one in a hundred, again inevitable (given how many comments each of us makes) and meaningless

>>9441817
why wouldn't he? it works insofar as structuring a coherent metaphysical narrative with high predictive capabilities; that's not to say it's true, but claiming anything else is doesn't even merit calling it false.

>>9441800
It teaches them the meaninglessness of their actions in a subtle manner. The game aspect teaches the necessity of whimsy. Repeated play confirms the universal randomness, it unites the children.

>>9441835
does anyone know a good book about games/toys/etc.

>>9441834
That is distinctly Brechtian - Yes, it could be done that way but it is done this way.

>>9441840
and why do you think that is? would you rather go the other way?

>>9441844
My problem is not with science as a method of interpretation but with those that believe it to be an explanation.

>>9441839
homo ludens?

>>9441846
your problem is retarded and qualifying it as a problem is affirmative-action at best. simmer down

>>9441849
Perhaps I should restate it as an idea of science as truth, when it is only true within its own framework.

>>9441857
ugh, sure, come up with something else worthy of being called a framework and I'll listen. Goes without saying that you can't. The scientific method is descriptive of all human cognition, recognising its limits and conjuring ontological masturbation is fine, but stops there.

>>9441863
A framework of viewing the world? What about art as a picture of reality?

>>9441872
I'm listening...

>>9441876
Consider a painting as a model of the world, a depiction of reality. The reality of the painting represents the existence and non-existence of facts. The truth or falsity of the painting is in its agreement or disagreement with reality.

So, we discover the metaphysical truths, the necessary facts for the painting to represent reality for instance.

>>9441883
sure, but discovering those metaphysical truth involves an applied fragmentation of the scientific method at best, or an involuntary corruption at worst. and revealing metaphysical truth does not leave you with a framework. The limitations of cognition and the fact that the scientific method is predicated on it, therefore they can't escape each other, is a metaphysical truth and leads to ontological arguments, not frameworks.

>>9441893
I would argue that it is a different framework as science, abstracted, deals with the regularities of our world whereas any two individual's reaction to art is irregular, as is two separate reactions of a single individual.

Art can express the metaphysical but it is the observer that determines, for themselves, whether it does or does not.

Read Jung

>>9442006
Is he a serious author? There's a 'Paulo Coehlo' air about him, I dunno.

>>9442106
Yes, absolutely.

A troupe of spirits called the Lobbyists for the Coincidence Guild appeared. Vivec understood the challenge immediately and said:
'The popular notion of God kills happenstance.'
The head of the Lobbyists, whose name is forgotten, tried to defend the concept's existence. He said, 'Saying something at the same time can be magical.'
Vivec knew that to retain his divinity that he must make a strong argument against luck. He said:
'Is not the sudden revelation of corresponding conditions and disparate elements that gel at the moment of the coincidence one of the prerequisites to being, in fact, coincidental? Synchronicity comes out of repeated coincidences at the lowest level. Further examination shows it is the utter power of the sheer number of coincidences that leads one to the idea that synchronicity is guided by something more than chance. Therefore, synchronicity ends up invalidating the concept of the coincidental, even though they are the symptomatic signs that bring it to the surface.'
Thus was coincidence destroyed in the land of the Velothi.

>>9442106
>Jung
>a 'Paulo Coehlo' air about him
stop that

>>9440366
Coincidence is only a result of the mind's assumptions.

>>9442281
What if it's not tho?

>>9442291
Then, like, whoa

>>9442291
Then you assume coincidence is not a coincidence. You've taken a stable neutral and tipped it in favor of assurance in your life. You experience more coincidence because you believe to, so you're subconsciously more open to coincidental interpretation.

Certain experiences made me doubt coincidence is just a coincidence.

>>9440366
feedback loop

>>9440366
Good players get lucky more often

>>9441772
Nice bait

>>9441848
Great book. Concerns play aspect at all 'levels'. Huizinga himself competent in other phases: the short bio of Erasmus, The Autumn of the Middle Ages.
Burkert's Homo Necans good as well!

>>9441772
Learn to read, fool. The post above yours says almost the same thing. And two above that concerns it with appropriate indirection. This is, after all, /lit/. Back to /sci/ with your imbecile's countenance..