This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
HYPERtheticals - Questions for Insane Conversations (27 of 50)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Magician22773
However, I halfway suspect they were all drunk
I am going for #2.
And to support my choice, I suggest you listen to anything by Metallica prior to St. Anger.
In their earlier years, Metallica was well know as Alcoholica, yet some of their earlier music is considered by many, myself included, to be the best examples of Heavy Metal.
Prior to recording St. Anger, James Hetfield, their lead singer and songwriter, quit drinking. St. Anger was the first album recorded by a sober Metallica....and it is HORRIBLE.
All kidding aside, some of the greatest rock and roll music was recorded and performed by artists that were smashed. Just have a listen to anything by the Doors or Hendrix.
Post by
b4xx
However, I halfway suspect they were all drunk
I am going for #2.
And to support my choice, I suggest you listen to anything by Metallica prior to St. Anger.
In their earlier years, Metallica was well know as Alcoholica, yet some of their earlier music is considered by many, myself included, to be the best examples of Heavy Metal.
Prior to recording St. Anger, James Hetfield, their lead singer and songwriter, quit drinking. St. Anger was the first album recorded by a sober Metallica....and it is HORRIBLE.
All kidding aside, some of the greatest rock and roll music was recorded and performed by artists that were smashed. Just have a listen to anything by the Doors or Hendrix.
0: I love St. Anger xD I'd still probably go with the first one though.
Post by
asakawa
There's a new one chaps.
It's an easy one though. While it's an interesting invention and is, I'm sure, likely to forward some psychological research, I don't have any particular compulsion to re-view my dreams so I wouldn't be particularly interested even without the caveat.
Post by
gamerunknown
I rarely remember my dreams, but I'd either bore my family to death or terrify them. So nah, not too interested.
Here
's how Aesop Rock put it.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
When I do remember my dreams, they're generally nonsensical. I don't put a whole lot of stock in dreams personally- I don't think they mean anything other than maybe reflecting what's been on your mind lately, and I do a lot of self examination anyway in that respect. However, I DO think that some other people have the tendency to over-analyze dreams, and if they were watching another person's would attribute it to all sorts of things that may or may not be true. I think that at best the machine, if viewed only by myself, could be mildly entertaining but would be something I'd get bored of pretty quickly. I think that when viewed by family, it has a great capacity to cause drama. So no- not really interested.
Post by
355559
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Sas148
A Life in Film
For whatever the reason, two unauthorized movies are made about your life. The first is an independently released documentary, primarily comprised of interviews with people who know you and bootleg footage from your actual life. Critics are describing the documentary as "brutally honest and relentlessly fair." Meanwhile, Columbia TriStar has produced a big-budget biopic of your life, casting major Hollywood stars as you and all of your acquaintances; though the movie is based on actual events, screenwriters have taken some liberties with the facts. Critics are split on the artistic merits of this fictionalized account, but audiences love it.
Which film would you be more interested in seeing?
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I would prefer to see the documentary, with all my actual friends and family. I love all that candid camera stuff at parties and weddings and stuff, and I think my real friends and a lot of my family are really funny, and they'd be fun to watch. I think that there's a quality to off-the-cuff candid humor that is unrepeatable and not easily re-created in the movies, that I prefer to anything scripted. Plus, it would be cool to see people (even if only on screen) I haven't seen in a while- high school and college friends, old co-workers, etc. I'm really bad at staying in touch with people, but I always have fun when I actually do see them. Plus, any footage they showed would most likely be of a younger, thinner me :P(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##ElhonnaDS##DELIM##
Post by
Squishalot
I would actually like to see the fictionalised one. It would be telling to see the concept of how other people saw me, presumably, the liberties with the facts would relate how I'd been seen in the broader community.
Post by
gamerunknown
I think I'd spend half the time sleeping or cringing through either, but the latter would hopefully have explosions.
Post by
lonewolfe31705
Think I would have to go with the documentary. Just to look back and see what people REALLY thought of me versus how I perceived them to. Also, just to be able to go back to key moments in my life and see them again would be pretty amazing.
Post by
Sas148
Shaquille in the Shower
You come home from an afternoon of shopping, expecting your residence to be empty. However, upon entering your front door, you immediately sense that something is strange: The entire place smells like marijuana and roses. There is a briefcase sitting in the middle of your living room floor, filled with diamonds and Christmas cookies. You can hear the shower running, and -- when you open the door to the bathroom -- you realize that the man using the shower is basketball legend Shaquille O'Neal. A naked Shaq peers at you from behind the shower curtain and smiles enthusiastically, but says nothing. He then returns to washing himself. When you ask O'Neal what he is doing in your home, he simply says, "I don't remember."
Do you call the police?
Post by
322702
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
What a fabulous scenario- LOL. I don't even know what I would do. I would think I was dreaming, probably, and it would be so absurd, I don't even know that I would have the presence of mind to call the cops, even though that's what I probably should do.
Post by
lonewolfe31705
As I am a licensed gun owner who open carries, if I came home and found the following things in my house, I would shoot first and ask questions later. I don't care who is in the shower. My safety, the safety of my home, and the safety of my family had been violated so I am protecting myself, my property, and my family.
The entire place smells like marijuana = drug user
briefcase full of diamonds = thief
shower running and no one is supposed to be there = intruder
Edit:
After I took the intruder down, then yes, I would call the cops.
Post by
Sas148
Rudimentary Magician
Let us assume you met a rudimentary magician. Let us also assume that he can do five simple tricks: He can pull a rabbit out of his hat, he can make a coin disappear, he can turn the Ace of Spades into the Joker card, and he can do two others in a similar vein. These are his only tricks and he can't learn any more; he can only do these five. However, it turns out that he's doing these five tricks with real magic. It's not an illusion; he can actually conjure the bunny out of the ether and he can move the coin through space. He's legitimately magical, but extremely limited in scope and influence.
Would this person be more impressive to you than Albert Einstein?
Post by
322702
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
gamerunknown
He'd be different from Einstein. Both fundamentally changed our understanding of the universe, but in wholly different ways.
Post by
Izichial
No.
Albert Einstein, even if he got a few things wrong and his ideas led to things that some people including himself regretted, was as far as we know and define it a true genius and contributed immensely to science through his own efforts both in work of his own and in cooperation with others.
Even if he's legitimately magical the magician can just do tricks. In detail: Even being generous and crediting this magician for working out the principles behind it
and
assuming that doing so took as much genius as went into Albert Einstein's contributions to science
and
assuming those principles are universally applicable it either means he only worked out those tricks regardless of what else is possible to do with magic or that those are the only things possible to do with magic, neither of which is particularly useful. We also cannot discount the possibilities that he simply got lucky working it out, had a single clever idea or was unique in being able to use magic. Einstein's contributions to science on the other hand are well documented to be numerous, important and consistent.
Post by
asakawa
Yeah we don't know enough about where this guy's ability came from. Did it come from years of research into quantum science? If he's a savant who can just
do
this then it's fascinating but not
impressive
per sé. What Einstein achieved in the time he achieved it is downright impressive because we know the amount of opposition there was to his progress both in terms of things like World Wars going on but also academically and the number of advances he made due to his own hard work.
Essentially a single action is fascinating while it takes a story or at least an understanding of the advances made to be impressive.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.