The philosophy of sacred space: Designing for the divine?

.. what does it even mean to be "from here"..?

.. if a person actually had the chance to be from somewhere else entirely .. how can you even prove they weren't..?
(.. damn .. I'm leaning towards him not being from here either .. and honestly, the Yankees would probably agree .. they’d blame him for everything, including divorcing such an incredible woman .. one of those rare ones you just can't find twice..
.. and .. what about Tesla ..? .. was he maybe .. a little too far out there..?
.. reading his stuff again ..)

.. if a man can't ever be anyone else .. besides just someone from this earth..
.. then we're pretty much screwed, no matter how you look at it..?
.. is that really what you're trying to tell me..?

.. the idea that God saw he was a good man .. that's a totally different story than yours..
(.. I have a hunch .. I'll tell you about it sometime .. I just don't know how to put it into words right now..)

.. random thought .. I finally figured out why the devil in that painting has hooves..
.. things are just starting to click for me lately..

.. my internet crapped out on me last night.. I was right in the middle of typing more..
.. that point about the chaos was spot on .. really sharp..

.. so what do you mean by "screwed up"..?
(.. they say God plays dice.. but maybe those dice are just following laws that dictate exactly how they land..? )

.. there are no dice.. everything that happens has to be this way.. there simply isn't any other option..
.. and he was right about that..

.. but.. that kind of absolute determinism—it isn't entirely of this world.. and no physicist could ever admit to that space.. that exists outside our reality yet still acts upon it.. because if they did, they wouldn't be a physicist anymore..
.. it's impossible for Einstein to say.. it's possible to turn water into wine, and here’s how.. you transform yourself into Jesus.. Jesus turns the water into wine.. then you transform back from being Jesus into yourself.. and suddenly, you're standing there with wine that used to be water..

... man, I don't know... maybe he was just some kind of physics freak show... who knows...
.. just kidding...

.. what even is this world... anyway...
.. and in your eyes, what would God actually look like?

... besides that... I cut out randomness when it comes to the dice rolls... did you catch that..?

Nicole Rogers46 said:Seriously, you’re just repeating yourself.
Don't you realize how embarrassing it is to keep saying the exact same thing over and over?

I have no clue what you're even trying to say here.
I said what I thought. Period.

redtinker36 said:... anarchy ... red and black ...

... you ever actually read "The Red and the Black" by Stendhal? .. well .. that isn't anarchy ..
.. look .. it's all about the order .. those old priests and revolutions .. that sequence .. priests then revolution ..
.. it's like that little guy who knew his Bible .. that book .. and the whole point of the book is what .. created itself .. well .. it didn't create jack .. but you could argue it .. created something .. and that's already .. one hell of a joke ..
.. if you start reading, just watch out for the little things ..
.. you can't wrap your head around American elections unless you understand the little things ..

.. you aren't an anarchist? .. then why the hell are you acting so damn important?

.. anarchy is the opposite ..
.. it's basically the order .. going from red to black .. darkness stained by blood .. .. didn't you know?
.. and the letter .. do you even know which letter? .. you don't?
.. man .. it can't be 'A' .. because 'A' is both Allah and Elohim ..
.. even though 'A' is also the howling of wolves .. so watch your step ..
.. anarchy is 'N' .. like night, like nuit, like note, like nothing, like no hope .. you didn't even know that? And the most important part, I haven't even told you yet .. you can't hear it .. damn it ..

.. you aren't an anarchist? .. I'm looking for people .. damn it .. don't you know them?

And I understand you even less.
If you're even talking to me, because you definitely don't seem like someone who's actually present in this world.

I like colors, and I like pentagrams too, because of the golden ratio.

I'm just messing with you to see how you'll react. Even if you're probably insane, there's a tiny chance you're just trolling or experimenting with wordplay.
In other words, I can't tell if your communication is just a series of monologues following random thought patterns. Given the way you structure things, it's hard to be sure.

I don't care for political options—honestly, we can't change anything anyway, so it's better just to sit back and watch. 😉

steelsurfer33 said:but this:

2. exceptions indicate more complex laws

isn't phrased very well.
Exceptions point to the existence of laws that exist above the ones we know.
And the question is, do they really have to be more complex?

Science is always trying to strip things down, making everything as simple and broad as possible. But the second they stumble onto something that doesn't fit their little general rule? They just cook up a new one to swallow the exception. It’s just adding layers of unnecessary complexity to cover their tracks.
But hey, there's a catch. When the actual data is thin and people start trying to force a "universal truth" out of nothing, that's when you get those massive, useless complications. 😁

Why don't we just move this whole discussion over to Philosophy? Oh, wait, I forgot—those same authors are already cluttering up the threads over there. 🙄

placidjackal36 said:Why don't we just move this whole thing over to Philosophy? Oh wait, I forgot—that sub already has plenty of threads like this from the exact same crowd. 🙄

Well, newsflash: this actually drifted over from Philosophy in the first place.

And here I am, the poor, uneducated moderator of this corner of the internet, too terrified to toss this straight into the Trash bin because I was worried I might be accidentally deleting some profound cosmic truth essential to the enlightenment of the entire human race.

So, instead, I let the thread breathe and wander, while simultaneously attempting to figure out what kind of massive ego trip we're actually dealing with here. 😕

Still haven't cracked the code, though. 😢 I know that I know nothing. See how that sounds? Deep. Very philosophical. Yeah. 🙂

.. in my view .. if you were some nobody or just lacked polish back when you were picked as a moderator .. that history gets wiped clean ..
.. think of it like a mayor .. once you hold the office - you are the authority - you have the stature - nothing else really matters anymore ..

.. and as for .. deleting the old stuff .. that would be for the best .. if it were up to me, I'd vote to wipe it all out ..
.. I actually asked for that once before .. requesting they clear the slate .. but they wouldn't budge .. claiming it was for the "greater good" .. do you honestly think this falls under the greater good?
.. what kind of nonsense is that .. god help us ..

Look at this
these total idiotsdid it just because
they wanted to show off how much bigger the next thing is
the moderator
man, hecanjust decide

Look, I know you aren't writing this for the masses, but just so you know, some of us really get where you're coming from. Truly valuable stuff is always rare.
You nailed everything here. You're a genius, honestly—you clearly realize most people won't get it, and I guess you don't even care.

.. neither fascist nor communist .. just .. Catholic and a drinker .. ? .. reminds me of the good old days ..
(.. by the way .. I noticed a hint of genius in you right away too .. what can I say .. we're cut from the same cloth .. we recognize our own ..)

redtinker36 said:. I mean, what can you do? That's just how we roll... we recognize our own.

We might be a small crowd, but we're spread out pretty well.

.. so .. I guess we're picking this back up here ..
(.. I was going to say something yesterday .. but then I thought .. nah, forget it .. he just wants to argue ..
.. though honestly, this place is a much better spot for a real talk than that Philosophy thread ..)

.. anyway .. let's get to it .. Nicole Rogers46 actually managed to pinpoint exactly what you noticed earlier .. and put it out there .. props to her .. that's what you call perception .. and concept ..

.. but .. let me turn my attention to my colleague for a second ..
(.. come on, help a guy out ..)

steelsurfer42 said:Science always tries to explain things as simply and broadly as possible. Whenever they hit something that doesn't fit the general rule, they just invent a new one to wrap that exception into, which just ends up adding more complexity.

No, it’s actually the exact opposite—realizing when something has become needlessly complicated and moving back toward simplicity.

But making that jump? That can be a messy process.
People use complexity to hide stuff, and they hate letting go of it. Simplicity always leads to stripping things down

(.. meaning .. shedding the junk .. getting to the core of it ..

.. whereas trivializing something would be a different kind of stripping down .. like those pop singers or strip clubs .. showing off skin and cleavage to distract people ..
.. you get the .. subtle .. difference ..?)

Man... there was this wedding thing going on in the neighborhood... some loud-ass crowd... what can I say... total musical sadists.
...and you had this singer climbing all over the table in some dive bar...
...meanwhile, a few folks from out of town—some people visiting from Chicago—were passing by and spotted the chaos...
...so they started snapping photos of everyone from a frog's eye view...
...you know, playing the tourist role, trying to document the local landmarks...

...so yeah... the whole situation just sort of... forced itself on me as an example.

steelsurfer33 said:No, that’s exactly the opposite! It means realizing you were making things way more complicated than they needed to be and finally just switching to something simpler. Why do we even bother overcomplicating everything?

But man, that transition? It can be a total nightmare. Seriously, it’s never as simple as people make it out to be. You think you've got it figured out, and then—bam! Everything goes sideways. Why does it always have to be this complicated?
Complications are just masks for things people are too scared to face. People cling to them like a security blanket, but why? It’s all just a way to hide the truth. Honestly, simplicity is the only thing that actually works—it strips everything down and forces you to see things for what they really are. Why make it harder than it needs to be?

It’s all about stripping away the fluff, isn't it? Getting rid of all that useless noise just to finally uncover what actually matters. You know what I mean? Cut through the nonsense, find the core essence, and stop wasting everyone's damn time.

Making it trivial would just be another way of stripping it all down—like those pop singers or those damn reality shows. It’s the same old trick, isn't it? Just showing off skin and cleavage to distract everyone from the fact that there's absolutely nothing underneath.
Do you even get it? That... subtle... difference...?

Look, let's just say I'm more on the science side of things than the Philosophy side. That’s just how I work. I need to start with something concrete before I can even begin to abstract. The only exception? When I'm actually enjoying a puzzle or trying to crack a riddle. Otherwise, don't expect me to float around in thin air. 😁

I could try to pull this whole thing together using Newtonian laws. But before we even get there? We’re just staring at a massive, disorganized pile of empirical observations—half-baked rules that are either way too complicated or just plain incomplete. What are we even supposed to do with that?

And then Isaac goes and drops his movement model on us.
If nothing’s acting on a body, it either just sits there or keeps cruising at the exact same speed. Simple as that. Newton's laws don't care about your excuses!
Look, if some force actually acts on an object, then acceleration is just that force divided by the mass. It's basic physics! Simple enough, right?
If one object pushes on another, that second object is pushing back on the first with the exact same amount of force, just in the opposite direction. It’s basic physics! Newton's Third Law, plain and simple. Why is this even something people struggle to wrap their heads around? It's fundamental!

And that right there? That’s the entire foundation for classic mechanics. Simple as that.

Look, when we’re actually trying to describe something real—something specific—those basic laws just don't cut it. They aren't enough! You need way more than that simple stuff to get the full picture, and that’s where all the complications start creeping in.

It basically boils down to this: people take everything and strip it down to the absolute bare bones just to make it simple, and then—as if that wasn't enough—they immediately start overcomplicating the whole damn thing by throwing in a bunch of new variables! Why do we do this? Seriously!

....maybe....in the heat of the battle itself, we'll stumble upon that glitch in the heavens....if we just peer deep, deep enough....beneath the surface of who we think we are....
....but can we actually say for certain....that the laws we know still hold sway down there?....
....is pure randomness the only rule left....in that kind of meta-space?....

redmarlin3 said:....perhaps....in the heat of battle we might find that rift in the heavens....if we only peer deep, truly deep....beneath our own surface....
....can we say with any certainty....that even there, our familiar laws hold true?....
....is perhaps randomness the only rule....within that meta-space?....

Come on, don't troll me ☕

if such a rift actually existed, NASA would have found it by now.

You're full of it, steelsurfer42.

You can't just move the goalposts while you're mid-sentence.

Simplification goes one way—upward—and complication goes the other—downward.

Your signature clearly points toward upward simplification. You can't claim the opposite direction just to argue that those laws in your bio are somehow more complex.

northernwalker0 said:Cut the trolling...☕

If that hole actually existed, NASA astronauts would have stumbled upon it by now.

Just spread 'em wide and you'll find it soon enough. ☕