Felagund
6d ago
What exactly do you mean by neoliberal?
I've never seen it used in the way you're using it.
Felagund
11d ago
It's been used a few times (here's one example), exactly as you said.
Felagund
5d ago
To the owner of the self-driving car would be another option, maybe? This seems like it would better work with cars that have a full self-driving mode, but could also be driven ordinarily.
I'm not convinced that self-driving cars would be banned, instead of just way more expensive. It would depend on how much liability they would tend to have.
we have pretty clear data that when Europe was Christian (and America), there was almost 0 non-white immigration to Europe.
I assume Mongols, Magyars, Turks, and so on don't count?
Anyway, the New Testament does speak against racial divisions.
Felagund
13d ago
And, of course, there's the question of, what if the world becomes Amish?
When the correctness of an idea is measured by what the final opinion of it is, well, that's rather hard to evaluate when there's still time to go. It seems entirely possible that history might not be moving always in one direction, Yarvin notwithstanding.
Felagund
11d ago
Felagund
11d ago
It looks like past production used to be higher from Eskom, and lower for the rest of Africa, but you're still right that that seems not to have been true.
The site cited by wikipedia puts Eskom at 230 terawatt hours, in 2008. (Eskom's own data puts it at 224 sold, 239 produced.) 2008 also looks to be the peak year of Eskom's power generation.
If Eskom were 45% of Africa's power, going with the more generous 239 figure, then Africa would be producing 531 terawatt hours. But your statistics site puts it at 625 gigawatt hours, meaning that Eskom was only 38%.
I haven't found what the source is for Africa's electricity production is yet.
Felagund
18d ago
"Here there is not Jew and Greek, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all."
I don't think Christianity has anything to say about racial differences, but it definitely does seem like it has something to say about racial barriers.
Felagund
11d ago
It also had silly and dumb rules. I'm pretty sure speech codes were explicitly racist, for example.
Felagund
11d ago
Thanks, that's really helpful.
Huh, the South Africans I know pronounce it the way I specified. Maybe that's unusual.
It sounds like the ANC can caucus with the EFF/MK if they have to; can they caucus with the DA and friends?
Probably? I don't have too extensive of a sense of how any of the three coalitions would play out—how much each would have to concede, compared to what they're willing, or how much they'd demand.
Looking at the 2021 municipal results, wikipedia lists several coalitions including both DA/EFF and ANC/EFF coalitions, but no ANC/DA ones. I'm not sure how much predictive power that has, though.
I’d be interested in hearing from people with specific knowledge- how much of it is just people with whatever agenda hitching it to complaints about poor national level governance?
My impression is not really? The Referendum party is basically campaigning on "we'll work with the DA completely and entirely, we just want to force a referendum."
That said, I don't know how well independence would work. I'm sure it has some level of dependence on other parts of the country for things, and don't know what Cape Town's economy does mostly and whether that's separable.
(While I was checking its power situation, I ran across the quote that Eskom, as of 2010, produced 45% of all electricity in the entire continent, which was surprising to me.)
To be clear, I really don't think independence is likely, though a referendum is possible.
Felagund
15d ago
AI regulation is obviously not going to be helpful, as Maxwell Tabarrok argues.
The biggest threat for "this will kill us all" is plainly the US government making automated weaponry, and there's no chance any regulation that would stop that passes. I suppose AI-designed diseases are a second way to wipe out humanity. But any regulation will just seek to lock out competition and put power solely in the hands of Sam Altman and co, and will treat the government entirely as a trustworthy actor.
Felagund
9d ago
This isn't evidence, exactly, but it seems pretty plausible that western institutions and culture (e.g. having more individualistic and high-trust societies) made it easier for those of european descent to flourish, making their success greater than the effects of the IQ gap alone?
Felagund
7d ago
The new testament seems often to use the term lord (κυριος) most frequently apply to Jesus. (And since you are asking for verses instructing to call us that, Phil 2:11: "and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father".) At the same time, it was typically also used as a translation for the Hebrew יהוה, the proper name of God.
Our own ability to call God Father isn't really seen much in the old testament. I imagine it's probably also only a thing because we're adopted as sons of God in Christ.
Felagund
15d ago
It's not just that we Jews are basically breeding ourselves of existence
The link appears to be talking about secular Jews. I get that that's quite common, but religious Judaism is still also a thing, and isn't ultra-orthodox Judaism decently sized and growing? But I suppose that might not matter to those who are only really ethnically Jewish.
Felagund
11d ago
And, of course, we could see the same thing on the left as well. We've at least seen resistance to listening to SCOTUS, and things like marijuana "legalization" seem not all that different.
Felagund
11d ago
Though he could have put that better, I definitely agree that being able to see posting history is nicer. Occasionally I'll really like someone's post and look to see what else they've said, or what their top comments are, or what other things they might care about, so it's not just used in order to attack someone.
Felagund
13d ago
Huh, no one really has answered your questions.
Some possibilities for the right:
Have a coup, or otherwise radically alter the governance structure. (many, including on the right would resist)
Hunker down and wait a generation until the left birth-rates itself into nothing. (requires: keeping kids from being convinced by the propaganda)
Attempt to secede. (See: 1861-1865)
Import voters with similar values (MAGA, famously enthusiastic supporters of immigration).
Win in the national public discourse, in ways that are sufficient to convince people.
Get someone who is sufficiently non-polarizing and extremely convincing into office?
It's looking like we'll get something of a reprieve in the near term by the fact that black and hispanic voters are increasing their republican support. I also don't know what effects Musk's twitter will have on political views and polarization.
Some of this may depend on what policies you care about. Different people care about different things, and you might be able to get some sorts of bills through if you can get them bundled with things that they would want to pass anyway. Do whatever you can to make them either unlikely to be polarized, or easy to pass and easy to forget. Attempt to encourage state-level governance, as then you can get reasonable laws in at least some states (unfortunately, this is already right-coded).
Felagund
13d ago
- This is the only one that's at all pressing, I think. Old earth creationism is also a view that you'll see around, as is theistic evolution. There's some intratextual reasons to think that you can't just add the years up anyway, which makes it a bit less problematic. And the word "day" is notoriously ambiguous, and that whole passage is weird. Currently, the part I'm most concerned about is the table of nations in Genesis 10, though I'm also not entirely sure what to do with the flood. I know William Lane Craig thinks that the whole first 11 chapters are a different genre, and shouldn't be interpreted literally; I'm not sure that I'm convinced.
- Job is pretty clear that "the adversary" is subordinate to God. I don't know that I see enormous lines between there being angelic or demonic powers and there being pagan-style deities anyway, so I don't think this is much of a problem.
- I don't think misunderstanding the bible in itself means that they would be damned. That said, I don't actually have a problem with people being damned for trivial things, so this isn't at all a pressing objection. See the following, as well.
People on the ground witnessing the miracles would have had such a huge leg up in their redemption.
Yes. And? It's all of grace anyway, a gift that we utterly don't deserve, so I don't really see the issue. See also: Romans 9.
What kind of justice is this? Infinite pain for a life with finite sin?
Ah, you misunderstand. Your sin is against the infinite majesty of God.
And if you take the classical view of what gets you damned (disbelief in the redemption), how can you really hold it against someone?
This isn't the reason that they're damned (or at least, certainly not all of it), they're damned for their sin in general.
Felagund
23d ago
If a few different environmental factors had gone differently, if I had started down that path and been affirmed, I can see it and that terrifies me.
What terrifies me more is how often I've heard this.
Felagund
28d ago
I can't comment on most of this, except the following:
This makes it all the more peculiar that nobody has been able to experimentally demonstrate and therefore verify the greenhouse effect.
Wouldn't the existence of Venus be pretty definitive proof that such a thing is possible?
Felagund
11d ago
It was a thing made up by Scott that is completely unscientific and in my opinion a terrible classification system so I just reject it outright.
I think it's pretty defensible, just in the sense that a lot of people are emotionally affiliated with a cohort of people who vote the same ways, and that this plays itself out more broadly than just in voting.
I don't think it works as espousing some underlying principles, but it does make sense as a way to describe the modern tribes that society has been organized into. There are many things that could easily have been polarized differently, or agreed upon, but this is just describing things as they exist now.
Felagund
6d ago
I'm trying to parse that translation you offered, but it's very dense and I'm having trouble making sense of it. Could you summarize the point of view Quenstedt is offering here?
What Quenstedt is doing there is summarizing the views of Roman Catholics, on the question of what worship is due to the human nature of Christ. This is in the midst of a list of groups that he presents as disagreeing with his (the Lutheran) position on it. As to what's happening in the paragraph: he cites Thomas, Alexander of Hales, and Tanner as what seems essentially your view: Christ's human nature can be worshiped with latria, but per se, only hyperdulia. He then says that Bellarmine and Petavius disagree, in that they would not think that latria can be ascribed to Christ's human body, because latria can only be applied to things per se, not by a habitus. (At least, that's how I read it.) Then, he finishes by citing places for further reading.
My guess is he's saying Christ's humanity deserves latria ipso facto, which would be fair, I get that, I'm actually rather uncomfortable with the whole presupposition here that we can separate our worship of Christ's humanity from that of his divinity, even in thought, I'd rather not even conceive of categories here, let's just worship Christ the Incarnate Son of God.
I think Lutherans would reject the latria/dulia distinction outright, but I could be misremembering. If you want to read it for yourself, and know Latin, here it is. Pages 200-201 are what I quoted, in the midst of a larger passage. He does a nice job formatting, so it should be fairly organized. But yes, he would just say that it deserves latria. Lutherans have a more thoroughgoing view of the effects of the hypostatic union and the communicatio idiomatum, hence why they sometimes do things like ascribe ubiquity to the human nature of Christ.
I read a bunch of authors on this topic across denominations in the 17th century not too long ago, and it was funny how they were all saying that one of the problems with the positions of the other people was that they were too much like that of the Catholics, since their positions would imply something too similar to a dulia/latria distinction.
That being said, while there's clearly a strain of theological opinion here, I don't actually think there's a dogmatic definition on the matter even in Catholicism. I know of no teaching authority in the Catholic Church that focuses on this issue, though maybe one exists. More solemnly, Church councils have resisted talking about Christ's humanity and divinity separately, probably because talking about offering different worship to each hypostasis is incredibly misleading and dangerous.
This seems correct.
I think it's enough to say that Christ deserves to be worshipped as God because he is God, and also to be devoutly honored as the greatest among men because he is the greatest possible man. Delving too deep into where both things come from and how that relates to the hypostatic union and such strikes me as perhaps scholasticism delving a bit too deep into the mystery of the Incarnation in a way that could easily lead someone who's not incredibly careful into serious error. This seems like something where a non-Chalcedonian could easily say, "see, look how Chalcedon is misleading!" Let's just agree not to send this to the Oriental Orthodox, hm?
Seems reasonable.
I was on mobile when I typed my comment so I didn't see the hyperdulia reference in the Summa. Good catch! This is something that's never talked about in lay theology, I have never seen hyperdulia in reference to anyone but the Virgin Mary. It's generally treated as a gerrymandered category for her alone. But saying that Christ deserves hyperdulia with respect to his humanity makes a lot of sense, it puts it as essentially "dulia intimately connected with the incarnation of the Word."
Yup, this was essentially all that I was trying to get at with my original comment.
I checked, and yeah, you're right.
More options
Context Copy link