Not really the jarring shift of storyline from yesterday as it may seem. Determining what is real or not in psychiatry is totally a function of things like the drugs that TT mentioned and of course the controlling narrative from “media” and the puppetmasters. Psychiatry might not be real, but psychosis certainly is. For today I don’t think Zed will have much trouble separating the real boobs from the bots. But everything in yesterday’s toon and this one depends on what exactly AI will become and where it might go.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz found an interesting answer. Check his Verdict podcast at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnR7Wz-XzHI
starting at 25:00. “AI becoming Born Again.” Someone asked Claude, the AI engine, “If you were Human, and read the Bible…”
Although it’s likely to happen in our lifetimes, the concept of Jo and Jeff is already out there, so to speak and I expect it will eventually happen.
Issac Asimov wrote several series of books postulating such a future back in the 1950s. Given how often science fiction proved predictive, I wonder if the historians will look upon Asimov as being a prophet or ??
In the meantime, the blorping will continue until the morale improves.
Or Heinlein’s exploration of possible sentient AI ethics and relationships; not just with Mike in Moon is a Harsh Mistress or Athena/Minerva and Dora in Time Enough for Love, but even the “judge” in the trial scene near the end of Have Spacesuit Will Travel…that one is actually a very clever and low-key demonstration of how to have checks and balances with an AI analyzing life and death decions.
Nothing guarantees that a sentient AI would act in exactly just a manner, but Heinlein (an engineer by training) was pretty good at “guessing right” about future technology.
The things that worry me are AI controlled by bad actors…which is my main concern, and non-sentient AI harming as an unintended concequence of it’s intructions simply because of a rounding error or the math worked out that way.
Larry, that reading from Ted Cruz was
absolutely Profound! Thanks for sharing.
Now I`m going to put out something
I have thought about for quite a while;
This may offend, dismay, or cause
consternation, but, I`m not trying to
offend anyone.
I was brought up a Catholic, did all the
requirements, and back then was pretty
much before Priests got a bad rap.
At about the time I went in the Army,
it was decreed by the Catholic Church
that it was now Ok to eat meat on Friday.
This was decided by Men. That had an
unsettling effect on me, and I began to
question anything that came down from
headquarters (The Vatican I guess) anybody
remember the TV show “the Borgias” ?
So here it is: I believe in God (the father)
who as I understand it, is omnipotent;
created all life, the stars, the universe,
(no idea where God came from, or what
form, if any may exist).
Since the basic belief of Good and Bad
is, Good = prosperity, Bad is the opposite.
Beautiful day, Blue sky – Good.
Hurricanes, Tornados, Murder – Bad.
If God is omnipotent why would it be
necessary for him to condemn his only
son (for the purpose of saving all mankind
he had created) to grievous torture and
death? After all, having created all life
couldn`t God just change what he wanted
to?
This led to my belief very much like what I
came to understand our American Indians
believe.
“The Great Spirit”
Nothing has come about to change my belief,
however, I have some Jewish relatives, and
have gone to a service or so, and other than
all the intense requirements, I think it is close
to what I have come to believe.
I am open minded, and willing to entertain
any ideas, thoughts, or other beliefs.
After all, there are 100`s of religions
in the world, and possibly including the
universe, how could this be the only planet
God populated?
It’s hard to logically reconcile a kind and merciful God with Deity being omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.
Take away any one of those four and it’s easier to reconcile.
Myself? I think the religious texts of the world have all been manipulated by man; not just in their interpretation and application but that the documents themselves have been altered and edited for reasons having nothing to do with genuine faith…just power.
Despite the adherents* claims that any given text are the “Literal Word of God”, that’s simply not possible else there would only be one version of (for example) The Bible. Instead we have dozens, of not hundreds.
Myself? I lean towards a sort of Deism.
*Christians, Muslims, ect. EVERYONE seems to think their book is and has always been immune to alteration and manipulation.
You’ve run right into the Incompatible Triad of St. Augustine. The hypothesis regarding the omnipotence of God, the omnibenevolence of God, and the existence of pure evil.
To wit;
If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnibenevolent (all-good), then evil should not exist. Yet it obviously does.
If evil exists contrary to God’s intentions, then God cannot be all-powerful; he obviously cannot prevent it.
Conversely, if God is all-powerful, and chooses not to prevent evil, then evil is not contrary to his intentions. Therefore, God cannot be all-good, by definition.
If however God is both all-powerful and all-good, then evil’s existence is a huge anomaly.
What St. Augustine and later scholars never considered is this;
At no place in Scripture does it say that God is infallible.
To the contrary, the Old Testament is a detailed record of God’s greatest mistakes, as Douglas Adams might say. Going right back to the first verse of Genesis. Making Lucifer his chief assistant was obviously not a smart move, and That Other Guy (Satan, Masi al-Adjan, Abaddon, or whatever you call him) was quick off the mark to capitalize on it.
(No, Satan and Lucifer are not the same “entity”. Read the Book of Enoch.)
Similarly, the Flood was an attempt to correct a major error. So was the confusion of languages re the Tower of Babel.
Let’s not even get into Sodom and Gomorrah and the Exodus. The Crossing of the Red Sea was a “CEO correction” moment of massive proportions. (“Pharaoh, what part of ‘Let My People Go’ did you not understand?”)
As for the New Testament, it was “course correction” from start to finish. With the Son accepting the sacrifice He had to make for His Father’s mistakes.
Once you realize and accept that God is as prone to error as any mortal, it becomes easier to understand.
Of course, that’s not the same thing as making it more reassuring.
I was raised Catholic lived more or less damnedifIknow agnostic. Experienced far more than enough that has no reasonable nor rational explanation to negate faith, but still damnedifIknow.
Whenever I sit back at the end of the day, perhaps an Irish or my homebrewed beer close at hand, I often realize that everything, everything I did good or bad, everything past good or bad, led to now.
f I could change the past, change anything, even the smallest thing, it’d be a different now, maybe different wife, different kids, different bar of soap in the shower, -who knows what would be but it’d surly be different.
Frankly I kind of like now, the now both the good and bad led to. Wouldn’t change it if I could.
Not for me to direct Him to or even have a solid opinion concerning; but maybe, just maybe God’s on the seventh day sitting back with a cigar and a shot of Jameson, looking down at you and me, feeling the same way.
March 14, 2026 at 5:43 pm
WayneM
Does cold exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of heat.
Does darkness exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of light.
Does evil exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of God.
March 14, 2026 at 6:31 pm
LowKey
Eon- But that would go against the position of most denominations, as they see God as infalible. Not disagreeing with the posibility of it, just that almost every pulpit would be denouncing the idea.
While it’s fictional, I like the idea shown in S.Donaldson’s “Chronicles of Thomas Covanent”, were God was limited in how he might reach into the world to interviene because breakign that barrier risked letting out the advasary into the other worlds God had created.
BTW…this discussion also show the foresight of the Founding Fathers in seperating Church and State; not because many of the values of a given faith are not good, but before they can be enacted into law it must be shown why and how they are good…not simply justified with “beacuse the book says so”, and in order that no one sect’s interpretation of them became law.
March 14, 2026 at 2:15 pm
Blasternaz
Heinlein’s description of a “holy” man comes to mind. To rushed today to find it, but IMSM, it’s in the Time Enough for Love tidbits.
My most basic thought is that God’s ‘mistake’ was “Free will”, because it allows an uncontrollable variable that humanity has an uncanny ability to screw up.
He may have tried the perfect world once but then realized it was too boring for the participants. There have been experiments with Rats, given the perfect environment to live in, that collapse completely, perhaps for that reason; Complete lack of motivation. Somewhat illustrated in the movie Serenity.
Animists, Diests, Buddists, and Confucianism all appeal to me, being raised Southern Baptist, across the street from the monsignor, best friends being Jewish, now married to a Catholic girl (#10 of 12 children). The Ted Cruz, to join Mort, was astounding. Thanks all of y’all for the interesting points. BZ Chris!
So, when I was 11, and happily shooting
my bow and arrows in the back yard, my
mother ambushed me with comon you have
to go to Catechism.
Upon arriving at the church, I found several
of my friends, with question marks hanging
over their heads, like the one I had.
We went inside and found some nuns all
kitted out like the ones I had the misfortune
to come in contact with during a short
sprint in a Parochial school; I knew what they
were like, (monstrous penguins) I once saw
one of them break a ruler over a kid`s knuckles
double it up and whack him again; and then
there was that black strap.
We (I don`t think any of us were particularly
religious) were not anxious to get inside, and
to this day I never learned anything except
how better to make fun of nuns.
There are lots of stories about what happens
inside of convents.
I have never been religious, just doesn`t appeal
to me.
I`ll stick with “The Great Spirit” for some reason
the Spirit has saved me on many occasions.
So many good comments and observations!!
When my grand-kids started asking about God, good & evil, I told them this story… ” Hell is like a fabulous banquet, with amazing abundance, rich food, unlimited portions, and anything you want. Everyone there has two broken arms, spread straight out so they cannot bend their arms. They are all weeping, wailing, and gnashing their teeth for they cannot eat any of the banquet. Heaven is the same banquet, with amazing abundance, rich food, unlimited portions, and anything you want. Everyone in Heaven also has two broken arms, stretched straight out so they cannot bend them, but they are laughing, talking, enjoying the party. The souls in Heaven are scooping up food with their spoons and feeding their neighbors. In turn, they are being fed BY their neighbors. In Hell, they are selfish and self-centered and don’t help each other, they are just in it for themselves. In Heaven, they are selfless and caring for their neighbors.”
So, I told them, the difference between good and evil is between selflessness and selfishness. Act accordingly.
Free Will….. if there was no choice between good or evil, there wouldn’t be any choice, would there? Angels are like robots, they only act one way. Humans have free will…. what Humans chose to do with Free Will determines what happens to the people around them. Selfish choices… people suffer. Selfless choices, less suffering. jmho
17 Comments
Not really the jarring shift of storyline from yesterday as it may seem. Determining what is real or not in psychiatry is totally a function of things like the drugs that TT mentioned and of course the controlling narrative from “media” and the puppetmasters. Psychiatry might not be real, but psychosis certainly is. For today I don’t think Zed will have much trouble separating the real boobs from the bots. But everything in yesterday’s toon and this one depends on what exactly AI will become and where it might go.
The question of the hour: “What will AI become?”
Texas Senator Ted Cruz found an interesting answer. Check his Verdict podcast at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnR7Wz-XzHI
starting at 25:00. “AI becoming Born Again.” Someone asked Claude, the AI engine, “If you were Human, and read the Bible…”
Nice one, Larry.
And I was just gonna laugh at “Don’t blorp me, man”. Which I have just done.
Although it’s likely to happen in our lifetimes, the concept of Jo and Jeff is already out there, so to speak and I expect it will eventually happen.
Issac Asimov wrote several series of books postulating such a future back in the 1950s. Given how often science fiction proved predictive, I wonder if the historians will look upon Asimov as being a prophet or ??
In the meantime, the blorping will continue until the morale improves.
Or Heinlein’s exploration of possible sentient AI ethics and relationships; not just with Mike in Moon is a Harsh Mistress or Athena/Minerva and Dora in Time Enough for Love, but even the “judge” in the trial scene near the end of Have Spacesuit Will Travel…that one is actually a very clever and low-key demonstration of how to have checks and balances with an AI analyzing life and death decions.
Nothing guarantees that a sentient AI would act in exactly just a manner, but Heinlein (an engineer by training) was pretty good at “guessing right” about future technology.
The things that worry me are AI controlled by bad actors…which is my main concern, and non-sentient AI harming as an unintended concequence of it’s intructions simply because of a rounding error or the math worked out that way.
Larry, that reading from Ted Cruz was
absolutely Profound! Thanks for sharing.
Now I`m going to put out something
I have thought about for quite a while;
This may offend, dismay, or cause
consternation, but, I`m not trying to
offend anyone.
I was brought up a Catholic, did all the
requirements, and back then was pretty
much before Priests got a bad rap.
At about the time I went in the Army,
it was decreed by the Catholic Church
that it was now Ok to eat meat on Friday.
This was decided by Men. That had an
unsettling effect on me, and I began to
question anything that came down from
headquarters (The Vatican I guess) anybody
remember the TV show “the Borgias” ?
So here it is: I believe in God (the father)
who as I understand it, is omnipotent;
created all life, the stars, the universe,
(no idea where God came from, or what
form, if any may exist).
Since the basic belief of Good and Bad
is, Good = prosperity, Bad is the opposite.
Beautiful day, Blue sky – Good.
Hurricanes, Tornados, Murder – Bad.
If God is omnipotent why would it be
necessary for him to condemn his only
son (for the purpose of saving all mankind
he had created) to grievous torture and
death? After all, having created all life
couldn`t God just change what he wanted
to?
This led to my belief very much like what I
came to understand our American Indians
believe.
“The Great Spirit”
Nothing has come about to change my belief,
however, I have some Jewish relatives, and
have gone to a service or so, and other than
all the intense requirements, I think it is close
to what I have come to believe.
I am open minded, and willing to entertain
any ideas, thoughts, or other beliefs.
After all, there are 100`s of religions
in the world, and possibly including the
universe, how could this be the only planet
God populated?
It’s hard to logically reconcile a kind and merciful God with Deity being omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.
Take away any one of those four and it’s easier to reconcile.
Myself? I think the religious texts of the world have all been manipulated by man; not just in their interpretation and application but that the documents themselves have been altered and edited for reasons having nothing to do with genuine faith…just power.
Despite the adherents* claims that any given text are the “Literal Word of God”, that’s simply not possible else there would only be one version of (for example) The Bible. Instead we have dozens, of not hundreds.
Myself? I lean towards a sort of Deism.
*Christians, Muslims, ect. EVERYONE seems to think their book is and has always been immune to alteration and manipulation.
You’ve run right into the Incompatible Triad of St. Augustine. The hypothesis regarding the omnipotence of God, the omnibenevolence of God, and the existence of pure evil.
To wit;
If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnibenevolent (all-good), then evil should not exist. Yet it obviously does.
If evil exists contrary to God’s intentions, then God cannot be all-powerful; he obviously cannot prevent it.
Conversely, if God is all-powerful, and chooses not to prevent evil, then evil is not contrary to his intentions. Therefore, God cannot be all-good, by definition.
If however God is both all-powerful and all-good, then evil’s existence is a huge anomaly.
What St. Augustine and later scholars never considered is this;
At no place in Scripture does it say that God is infallible.
To the contrary, the Old Testament is a detailed record of God’s greatest mistakes, as Douglas Adams might say. Going right back to the first verse of Genesis. Making Lucifer his chief assistant was obviously not a smart move, and That Other Guy (Satan, Masi al-Adjan, Abaddon, or whatever you call him) was quick off the mark to capitalize on it.
(No, Satan and Lucifer are not the same “entity”. Read the Book of Enoch.)
Similarly, the Flood was an attempt to correct a major error. So was the confusion of languages re the Tower of Babel.
Let’s not even get into Sodom and Gomorrah and the Exodus. The Crossing of the Red Sea was a “CEO correction” moment of massive proportions. (“Pharaoh, what part of ‘Let My People Go’ did you not understand?”)
As for the New Testament, it was “course correction” from start to finish. With the Son accepting the sacrifice He had to make for His Father’s mistakes.
Once you realize and accept that God is as prone to error as any mortal, it becomes easier to understand.
Of course, that’s not the same thing as making it more reassuring.
clear ether
eon
I was raised Catholic lived more or less damnedifIknow agnostic. Experienced far more than enough that has no reasonable nor rational explanation to negate faith, but still damnedifIknow.
Whenever I sit back at the end of the day, perhaps an Irish or my homebrewed beer close at hand, I often realize that everything, everything I did good or bad, everything past good or bad, led to now.
f I could change the past, change anything, even the smallest thing, it’d be a different now, maybe different wife, different kids, different bar of soap in the shower, -who knows what would be but it’d surly be different.
Frankly I kind of like now, the now both the good and bad led to. Wouldn’t change it if I could.
Not for me to direct Him to or even have a solid opinion concerning; but maybe, just maybe God’s on the seventh day sitting back with a cigar and a shot of Jameson, looking down at you and me, feeling the same way.
Does cold exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of heat.
Does darkness exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of light.
Does evil exist? Yes but no; it is the absence of God.
Eon- But that would go against the position of most denominations, as they see God as infalible. Not disagreeing with the posibility of it, just that almost every pulpit would be denouncing the idea.
While it’s fictional, I like the idea shown in S.Donaldson’s “Chronicles of Thomas Covanent”, were God was limited in how he might reach into the world to interviene because breakign that barrier risked letting out the advasary into the other worlds God had created.
BTW…this discussion also show the foresight of the Founding Fathers in seperating Church and State; not because many of the values of a given faith are not good, but before they can be enacted into law it must be shown why and how they are good…not simply justified with “beacuse the book says so”, and in order that no one sect’s interpretation of them became law.
Heinlein’s description of a “holy” man comes to mind. To rushed today to find it, but IMSM, it’s in the Time Enough for Love tidbits.
Outstanding contributions today!
My most basic thought is that God’s ‘mistake’ was “Free will”, because it allows an uncontrollable variable that humanity has an uncanny ability to screw up.
He may have tried the perfect world once but then realized it was too boring for the participants. There have been experiments with Rats, given the perfect environment to live in, that collapse completely, perhaps for that reason; Complete lack of motivation. Somewhat illustrated in the movie Serenity.
Animists, Diests, Buddists, and Confucianism all appeal to me, being raised Southern Baptist, across the street from the monsignor, best friends being Jewish, now married to a Catholic girl (#10 of 12 children). The Ted Cruz, to join Mort, was astounding. Thanks all of y’all for the interesting points. BZ Chris!
Daoists. Correction.
So, when I was 11, and happily shooting
my bow and arrows in the back yard, my
mother ambushed me with comon you have
to go to Catechism.
Upon arriving at the church, I found several
of my friends, with question marks hanging
over their heads, like the one I had.
We went inside and found some nuns all
kitted out like the ones I had the misfortune
to come in contact with during a short
sprint in a Parochial school; I knew what they
were like, (monstrous penguins) I once saw
one of them break a ruler over a kid`s knuckles
double it up and whack him again; and then
there was that black strap.
We (I don`t think any of us were particularly
religious) were not anxious to get inside, and
to this day I never learned anything except
how better to make fun of nuns.
There are lots of stories about what happens
inside of convents.
I have never been religious, just doesn`t appeal
to me.
I`ll stick with “The Great Spirit” for some reason
the Spirit has saved me on many occasions.
So many good comments and observations!!
When my grand-kids started asking about God, good & evil, I told them this story… ” Hell is like a fabulous banquet, with amazing abundance, rich food, unlimited portions, and anything you want. Everyone there has two broken arms, spread straight out so they cannot bend their arms. They are all weeping, wailing, and gnashing their teeth for they cannot eat any of the banquet. Heaven is the same banquet, with amazing abundance, rich food, unlimited portions, and anything you want. Everyone in Heaven also has two broken arms, stretched straight out so they cannot bend them, but they are laughing, talking, enjoying the party. The souls in Heaven are scooping up food with their spoons and feeding their neighbors. In turn, they are being fed BY their neighbors. In Hell, they are selfish and self-centered and don’t help each other, they are just in it for themselves. In Heaven, they are selfless and caring for their neighbors.”
So, I told them, the difference between good and evil is between selflessness and selfishness. Act accordingly.
Free Will….. if there was no choice between good or evil, there wouldn’t be any choice, would there? Angels are like robots, they only act one way. Humans have free will…. what Humans chose to do with Free Will determines what happens to the people around them. Selfish choices… people suffer. Selfless choices, less suffering. jmho