Here's an extension of a list posted earlier. If anybody can think of

  • Thread starter Thread starter Raskolnikov
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Extension List
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a humorous and creative list of perspectives on the concept of a glass, exploring various philosophical, political, and professional viewpoints. Participants are invited to contribute additional perspectives or amendments to the existing list, which touches on themes of perception, belief, and interpretation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants appreciate the original list and express enjoyment, suggesting it is one of the best they have read.
  • One participant questions the rationale behind the atheist perspective, proposing that an atheist could be convinced of the glass's existence with appropriate proof.
  • Another participant suggests an amendment to the atheist perspective, questioning the certainty of the glass's existence.
  • Additional perspectives are introduced, including those from deists, pantheists, and various types of engineering managers, each adding their own humorous take on the glass concept.
  • Some participants challenge the original engineering perspective, suggesting corrections and alternative interpretations regarding the glass's design and safety factors.
  • A participant introduces a promotional message for an actuary platform, which is noted as potentially off-topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express enjoyment of the list and contribute additional perspectives, but there is no consensus on the interpretations of the perspectives, particularly regarding the atheist viewpoint and the engineering claims. The discussion remains open-ended with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the perspectives may depend on specific definitions or interpretations of terms like "glass" and "water." The discussion includes humor and speculative reasoning, which may not align with conventional definitions or understandings.

Raskolnikov
Messages
193
Reaction score
2
Here's an extension of a list posted earlier. If anybody can think of any additions to the list, please post :D!

Perspectives of the world:
-------------------------------
Optimist – The glass is half-full.
Pessimist – The glass is half-empty.
Existentialist – The glass is.
Fatalist – The water will evaporate.
Futurist – The water is in the wrong half of the glass.
Feminist – All glasses are equal.
Narcissist – Look at me in the water!
Polygamist – The more glasses the merrier.
Nudist – The glass isn’t wearing anything. Why should I?
Baptist – The Lord in His infinite wisdom hast giveth us only half a glass of water for a reason!
Evangelist – The glass must repent.
Atheist – There is no glass.
Egoist – My glass is bigger than yours.
The Obsessive/Compulsive – There’s a smudge on the glass.
The Government – The glass is fuller than if the opposing party were in power.
Opposing Party – It is irrelevant because the present administration has changed the way such volume statistics are collected.
Republican – Hey, who drank half of my glass of water?
Anarchist – Break the glass.
Revolutionist – Dump the glass out and fill it again.
Socialist – Share the glass.
Capitalist – Sell the glass.
Corporatist – That glass is ours, and only ours.
Market Consultant – Your glass needs resizing.
Actuary – Personally, I think you paid too much for the glass.
Attorney – The glass is half-empty since it believes its compensation is never enough.
Psychiatrist – What did your mother say about the glass?
Psychologist – How does the water feel about the glass?
Philosopher – If the glass was in the forest and no one was there to see it, would it be half anything?
Sociologist – I don't know, but it was nice talking about it.
Engineer – The glass is twice as large as its necessary parameters.
Physicist – The cylinder is neither full nor empty. Rather, each half of the cylinder is full, one with a liquid, one with a gas.
Logician – Please define 'glass' more precisely.
Mathematician – I don't know if it's half-full or half-empty, but I can tell you an answer exists!
Combinatorialist – The task of choosing an arbitrary water molecule has been reduced to 2 subcases.
PC User – Let's restart it and maybe it will fill up this time.
Mac User – I swear! Apple invented water…or at least made it much better!
Linux User – I’ll turn the water back into oxygen and hydrogen, then take a glass cutter and cut off the top half of the glass. Finally, I'll recompile the water, then drink it…and eat the glass.
Microsoft – The rest of the water will be in the next release.
Pascal Programmer – Well, what type of water is it?
C Programmer – I drink straight from the tap.
Assembly Programmer – I drink straight from the river.
Multimedia Author – That glass is free; the next one you have to pay for.
Copyrights Protection Fanatics – Somebody drank my water and didn’t pay for it!
Free Software Foundation – The water is Nature’s gift to all mankind!
CIA – What makes you think that’s water?
NSA – We know what it really is.

--------------------------
What do you think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Due to popular request, I have made this post a thread.
 


yup...that's great!
 


oh yay, I'm glad people like this :).
 


Thanks Evo, good job. :approve:

NOW, the real question is who do you agree with the most? :biggrin:

Mine is... Well, not on that list... But seriously-- Both are transparent. :biggrin:


How would you classify that?
 


Raskolnikov said:
oh yay, I'm glad people like this :).

Really pal, this is one of the best list I have EVER read!
 


Why would an atheist disavow the existence of the glass? I'm sure if he (or she) were presented with appropriate proof he could be easily convinced of the existence of said glass!
 


Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

so, it's used here...in a way...
 


The legend said:
Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

so, it's used here...in a way...

Fine, I propose an ammendment.

Atheist - What makes you so sure there is a glass?
 
  • #10


reminds me of this video



 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11


FlexGunship said:
Fine, I propose an ammendment.

Atheist - What makes you so sure there is a glass?

lol! :smile:
 
  • #12


Deist - There once was a glass but it no longer holds water.
Pantheist - Anything is a glass which can hold water; and anything is water which can be put in a glass.
Deuteronomist - No glass shall exist which is capable of holding more water than it can hold.
Agnostic - I'm pretty sure this is a glass and that could be water... but I'm reserving judgement!
Christian - Looks like water, but could be blood!
 
  • #13


Awesome Engineering Manager - I trust your judgement regarding the holding capacity of this glass.
Good Engineering Manager - Are we sure we've optimized the holding capacity of the glass?
Bad Engineering Manager - I don't understand why we have to limit the amount of water the glass holds to the volume of the glass.
Terrible Engineering Manager - The glass doesn't hold water? Ship it. We'll fix it with software.
 
Last edited:
  • #14


FlexGunship said:
Awesome Engineering Manager - I trust your judgement regarding the holding capacity of this glass.
Good Engineering Manager - Are we sure we've optimized the holding capacity of the glass?
Bad Engineering Manager - I don't understand why we have to limit the amount of water the cup holds to the volume of the glass.
Terrible Engineering Manager - The glass doesn't hold water? Ship it. We'll fix it with software.

haha...these were good
 
  • #15


Raskolnikov said:
Actuary – Personally, I think you paid too much for the glass.

amritakhanna9 said:
Hi.. Are you an Actuary or Interested in becoming an Actuary?

We have just started a platform for Actuaries and Actuary Students who can come together and Interact - actuaryclub.com. There are many features like Discussion Forum, Social Community just like facebook - making friends, creating groups and Job Portal will also be made available in a week.

If you visit our facebook page - www.facebook.com/actuaryclub[/url] or our platform - [url]www.actuaryclub.com[/URL], You'll be able to get more detail and We are sure that with the features of easily Interacting with fellow actuaries, you won't be unsatisfied.

We are just 15 Days old and hence, to spread a word about us, we are forced to message you and others. Please forgive if this message has bothered you.. and If it didnt, please be part of our platform and start interacting. Telling your friends about us will be heartily welcomed. actuaryclub.com

We are also on facebook - [url]www.facebook.com/actuaryclub[/url]

Looking forward to see you.. [url]www.actuaryclub.com[/url]

We are just quite new and so following just one post one day motto will be very thankful in order to make actuaryclub.com a treasure of actuarial information only in few days.. Thank you.[/QUOTE]

Not sure if this is considered "on-topic" for this thread; this is a big stretch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16


Engineer – The glass is twice as large as its necessary parameters

This is wrong.

Correct version:

Engineer - The glass has a factor of safety of 2.

Note: The glass would probably drain faster if you put the hole on the bottom instead of the top.
 
  • #17


BobG said:
This is wrong.

Correct version:

Engineer - The glass has a factor of safety of 2.

Note: The glass would probably drain faster if you put the hole on the bottom instead of the top.

But would the glass even need an SF of 2? I think it may have been over-engineered. An SF of 1.2, 1.5 max, should do it.

And let's make the glass out of plastic.

Edit: either that or the glass is underutilized w.r.t design capacity.
 
Last edited:
  • #18


jhae2.718 said:
But would the glass even need an SF of 2? I think it may have been over-engineered. An SF of 1.2, 1.5 max, should do it.

And let's make the glass out of plastic.

Edit: either that or the glass is underutilized w.r.t design capacity.

Depends on whether the glass is sitting in a farm field or in the middle of a city. A SF of 1.3 is sufficient to protect farmland. Unfortunately, as was demonstrated by the levees in New Orleans, applying those same safety standards to water restraint systems in a city can have disasterous results.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K