|
Post by rational on Oct 24, 2013 18:30:50 GMT -5
I've never gambled because I thought there were better ways to spend my entertainment budget. But I may have been wrong. You make it sound like fun... and inexpensive. Playing the video games is isolating. And I always feel I al simply trying to beat someone's program! I like to lose my funds to another human being! Roulette is a slow game. A lot of spinning and waiting. Perfect for slow spending and multiple drinks. And once in a while you can come out ahead with the money!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Oct 24, 2013 18:36:18 GMT -5
I've never gambled because I thought there were better ways to spend my entertainment budget. But I may have been wrong. You make it sound like fun... and inexpensive. Playing the video games is isolating. And I always feel I al simply trying to beat someone's program! I like to lose my funds to another human being! Roulette is a slow game. A lot of spinning and waiting. Perfect for slow spending and multiple drinks. And once in a while you can come out ahead with the money! Is it allowed to sit down at a roulette table and tell the host (or whatever he/she is called - dealer?) that you have absolutely no idea how to play or what to do? Do they offer tutorials?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 24, 2013 18:43:56 GMT -5
Playing the video games is isolating. And I always feel I al simply trying to beat someone's program! I like to lose my funds to another human being! Roulette is a slow game. A lot of spinning and waiting. Perfect for slow spending and multiple drinks. And once in a while you can come out ahead with the money! Is it allowed to sit down at a roulette table and tell the host (or whatever he/she is called - dealer?) that you have absolutely no idea how to play or what to do? Do they offer tutorials? Come on Gene. I play! It is a game that requires no skill. Put your marker on a number. If you did a good job you will get a reward of many markers. You are quick - a glance at a www page will tell you more than enough to get started! You can even play black/red and have an almost 50/50 chance of winning/losing!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2013 18:47:31 GMT -5
Random reinforcement from Skinner's "'Superstition' in Pigeons," 1948, Experimental Psychology. Someone followed this up with prayer, obviously! Isn't is sad that they wouldn't let the pigeons guide the bombs/missiles? They were so diligent! Can't you see the headlines? Pecking pigeons bring an end to WW II!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Oct 24, 2013 18:58:59 GMT -5
Is it allowed to sit down at a roulette table and tell the host (or whatever he/she is called - dealer?) that you have absolutely no idea how to play or what to do? Do they offer tutorials? Come on Gene. I play! It is a game that requires no skill. Put your marker on a number. If you did a good job you will get a reward of many markers. You are quick - a glance at a www page will tell you more than enough to get started! You can even play black/red and have an almost 50/50 chance of winning/losing! What?!? I thought a moment ago you said it was a 96/4 chance of winning/losing!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 24, 2013 19:51:40 GMT -5
Come on Gene. I play! It is a game that requires no skill. Put your marker on a number. If you did a good job you will get a reward of many markers. You are quick - a glance at a www page will tell you more than enough to get started! You can even play black/red and have an almost 50/50 chance of winning/losing! What?!? I thought a moment ago you said it was a 96/4 chance of winning/losing! The edge the house has on roulette is 5.26%. That means, all else being equal, you will spend $100 and walk away with $94.74. The edge the house has on video games is around 4%. You see - the odds for a red/black bet pay as 50/50. And that seems fair until you notice that there are 2 green numbers. So you are betting on black and thinking it will hit 50% of the time but it will really only hit 47.37% of the time. You don't have to worry about this! Just pay and play and enjoy the sights!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Oct 25, 2013 10:01:16 GMT -5
I think the term you are looking for is intermittent reinforcement. Works well on the slot machines which provide about 70% of a casino's revenue. They state, usually right up front, that their slots pay some percentage - say 96%. If every time you bet $1 you got $0.96 you would stop playing. It is the frequent payouts of small amounts, less frequent payouts of medium amounts, and the promise of very large, but very, very infrequent large amounts. Small and medium winnings are often re-bet. However, at the end of the day the average person walks away with about $0.96 for every $1.00 they bet. The fun thing about random reinforcement is that it does cause superstitious behavior. Skinner demonstrated it in Pigeons. (I think the phrase you were looking for was operant conditioning.)So I can get $1000 worth of entertainment for only $40? That's actually a pretty good deal! I may have to take up gambling. Why bother? Just buy a new HP computer and they provide a variety of Solitaire games for free.....then spend all the time you want to relaxing in proving how dumb the computer is!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Oct 25, 2013 10:04:31 GMT -5
Isn't is sad that they wouldn't let the pigeons guide the bombs/missiles? They were so diligent! Can't you see the headlines? Pecking pigeons bring an end to WW II! Ahahahahaha......that'd be better then being the loser where the great white Albatross hangs around one's neck!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2013 12:08:02 GMT -5
Nathan, if they are 3 separate entities, then there must be at least 3 Gods. That is called polytheism. If God were a physical being what you express could well be true. However, God is a Spirit with the Spiritual properties of being three separate yet one substance, even as water, fire, and wind are singular substances with a plural existence each of them. That you will not recognize this or cannot recognize this as true identifies you to me for who and what you are and believe. God allows each their own belief about Him. My belief is as I express, and different than yours. The two different beliefs simply can never become one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2013 13:19:57 GMT -5
Nathan, if they are 3 separate entities, then there must be at least 3 Gods. That is called polytheism. If God were a physical being what you express could well be true. However, God is a Spirit with the Spiritual properties of being three separate yet one substance, even as water, fire, and wind are singular substances with a plural existence each of them. That you will not recognize this or cannot recognize this as true identifies you to me for who and what you are and believe. God allows each their own belief about Him. My belief is as I express, and different than yours. The two different beliefs simply can never become one. I'm not sure what you consider my belief about the properties of God to be, but I'm perfectly fine that you maintain yours as it is. That is usually the purpose of my involvement in these trinitarian theological discussions: to encourage trinitarians to be more accepting of those who see the unseen differently. Back to your beliefs, so you are saying then that God has three and only three separate properties? That God is limited to those three only? Based on your theory, then God cannot speak to people through a donkey, nor can he speak through the design of nature. It seems like a theory that rather limits God's being and puts him in a box.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 25, 2013 14:17:15 GMT -5
Nathan, if they are 3 separate entities, then there must be at least 3 Gods. That is called polytheism. If God were a physical being what you express could well be true. However, God is a Spirit with the Spiritual properties of being three separate yet one substance, even as water, fire, and wind are singular substances with a plural existence each of them. That you will not recognize this or cannot recognize this as true identifies you to me for who and what you are and believe. God allows each their own belief about Him. My belief is as I express, and different than yours. The two different beliefs simply can never become one. That you will not recognize this or cannot recognize this as true identifies you to me for who and what you are and believeWow, that seems judgemental. Who and what I am is one who is "earnestly contending for the faith once delivered to the Saints and trying to separate it from the traditions of men." Scripture teaches that God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 25, 2013 14:19:38 GMT -5
Back to your beliefs, so you are saying then that God has three and only three separate properties? That God is limited to those three only? Based on your theory, then God cannot speak to people through a donkey, nor can he speak through the design of nature. It seems like a theory that rather limits God's being and puts him in a box. Using the example that Dennis provided, there is the wind but the wind mad also come through a window and it is still the wind. Could not the spirit of god speak to people through an animal? (I will admit, I am not well versed on what capabilities/limitations people attach to the paranormal.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2013 14:53:43 GMT -5
Back to your beliefs, so you are saying then that God has three and only three separate properties? That God is limited to those three only? Based on your theory, then God cannot speak to people through a donkey, nor can he speak through the design of nature. It seems like a theory that rather limits God's being and puts him in a box. Using the example that Dennis provided, there is the wind but the wind mad also come through a window and it is still the wind. Could not the spirit of god speak to people through an animal? (I will admit, I am not well versed on what capabilities/limitations people attach to the paranormal.)Under the trinitarian theory, Jesus spoke to mankind as God the Son, not as the Spirit speaking through a man to mankind. It would be a logical follow through that if the donkey spoke as God, it would as God the Donkey. As far as I know, the spirit isn't considered to have a physical voice or physical presence at all, but I could be wrong. Legion is recorded as speaking demons, so whether or not Legion was a Demon(s) or just a man with demons speaking through him would be a matter of debate. The point remains the same.....the Trinitarian belief seems to limit God tremendously. These theoretical constructions can get quite complex. It's just unfortunate to see all the judging it needlessly creates when others don't quite follow the party line.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 25, 2013 15:57:58 GMT -5
As far as I know, the spirit isn't considered to have a physical voice or physical presence at all, but I could be wrong. What about the burning bush? Some time it was an angel but then claimed to be god. I consider the leading theory to be Maggi Dawn!As are so many things.
|
|