Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Lucky or not?

  1. #21
    Heartlessfang is offline Senior Member Long Time Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    The heart of all worlds


    I believe in certain kinds of luck, yeah.....but I think its one of those things you cant really measure scientifically.......or increase or decrease either....unless its a video game.

    "You have other hearts trapped within you as well, dont you?"
    "You're that guy from last time! What are you talking about?!"
    "The other Hearts within you."
    "Hearts trapped within me....?"

  2. #22
    MadDogMike is offline Senior Member Always Around
    Join Date
    Oct 2005


    Quote Originally Posted by sakura_hana View Post
    ^ xD

    believing you are lucky or not does not imply believing in methods of increasing your luck. Sicne it's "luck" you're theoretically talking about, it's something that one cannot control.
    My point is that luck is seen as a supernatural force, while chance/probability is science. It's not hard to understand that, or are you just trying to be difficult? o_0

  3. #23
    Bahmunt is offline Senior Member Frequent Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2005


    Quote:"Our estimate of the importance of luck is inherently biased: we know when we benefit from luck, but in the nature of things cannot asses how often bad luck deprives us of the chance of making what might have been an important discovery."

    I think the above quote from the OP needs to be carefully read. In essence, what it is saying is that our minds tend to recognise when something goes right and the first thing our 'free' mind does is to attempt to attribute this to abstract happenings in the physical world around us. This is most likely an evolutionary by product of a primitive brain. Granted, the human brain is the most complex organism we have yet to understand totally but the fact is, it still holds a lot of neanderthal and primitive instincts which an intelligent mind should have phased out.

    For example:

    A fisherman is fishing (as you do) in his favourite spot for 3 days... catches nothing where previously he caught 6 fish. The next day he wears his lucky fishing necklace and catches 8 fish in the same spot. He attributes this to the supernatural luck of the necklace.
    But the fish were feeding up river the day before because of an abundance of flies/nutrients from a fallen tree. It took the fish 3 days to move on (not likely as a scientific test I'll admit, put philosophically the example works).
    So was it bad luck that he caught no fish for 3 days or good luck that he caught fish while wearing the necklace.... Any observer from the outside would have to admit it was neither. It was just a sequence of events that would have happened with or without the 'magic' necklace.

    The other qoute from the OP:

    Quote:"Nearly all successful scientists have emphasized the importance of preparedness of mind, and I want to emphasize that this preparedness of mind is worked for and paid for by a great deal of exertion and reflection. If these exertions lead to a discovery, then I think it would be inappropriate to credit such a discovery to luck ."

    I'm not sure if this quote is trying to give credit to readiness of mind to accept the luck given or if it's saying the 'preparedness of mind' is working as a phsycic ability, I'd like to see the context it was written in.

    This aside, luck is as much an abstract belief as time. The passing of time is scientifically relative to each seperate person who experiences it. There is no "absolute constant" value for the speed at which time goes (don't believe me? google it - don't be bitching at me). In the same way, the concept of luck is a very relative thing. Luck, however, seems to be more akin to religon and superstition in it's concepts and is an outmoded way of looking at the world for beings as supposedly superior as we are!

  4. #24
    sakura_hana is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    over there!


    The passgage talks about an experiment the author carried.

    "...Obvioulsy, we were lucky, but our scientific training enbled us to recognize the significance of the accident. I think, therefore, that there was no need for the distinguished neurophysiologist Hodgkin to refer to his <<feeling of guilt about suppressing the part which chance and good fortune played in what now seems to be a rather logical development.>>
    I honestly do not think that blind luck plays an important part in science or that many important discoveries arise from the casual intersection of two lines"
    the rest is irrelevant.

  5. #25
    Ziazca is offline Senior Member Long Time Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    an overpacked prison


    Good luck is when I find a trail of $20 bills. Bad luck is when it leads me into a big white van.


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBulletin Skin by:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79