Jiro
1yr ago
It’s as though we’ve gotten to a point where supporting the Jewish religion is equivalent to being a moral person.
The problem here is the reverse: supporting the Jewish religion is treated as not being a moral person.
Jiro
1yr ago
The discussion itself is about a Christian, but it implies a generalization about non-Christians.
Jiro
8mo ago
That's help combined with condescension. Condescension is a type of hostility.
Jiro
2mo ago
but honestly in this scenario I am going to start wondering why they want the power that badly.
Probably for the same reason they'd want a job that starts with the letters Q through Z: because you need to have a job to live, and you're better off when a big chunk of the possible jobs aren't automatically barred from you in advance. Expecting someone to go to Russia to be jailed or drafted, before you'd hire them, is unreasonable.
She's metaphorically choosing to leave God, not Narnia. And people in real life don't "choose to leave" God in the same way that one might choose to leave a place. They certainly don't "choose to leave" God in any way resembling denying the existence of a place.
Narnia is something that's all around you that you can't deny without being arrogant or insane. And if you leave it, you are doing so knowingly. Believers wish that God was like this and make metaphors that imply it, but he isn't.
Jiro
3d ago
In general I'd prefer to see high quality, well written posts that address the substantive thesis of the parent post, instead of posts that nitpick on a single sentence.
The more people do that, the more it gets gamed by throwing in single sentences of objectionable material. So it's unsustainable.
Jiro
5mo ago
Is that "because of the bombs" or "because Hamas uses hospitals as human shields for military bases"?
Jiro
6mo ago
I wasn't actually asking you to steelman the KKK. I was pointing out that steelmanning is a bad thing to do here because that kind of steelmanning ignores the actual facts. It just isn't possible to honestly steelman Hamas or the KKK, any more than I could honestly steelman homeopathy or creationism.
Jiro
6mo ago
I've often asked people not to steelman attacks.
I never expected I'd have to say it about literal physical attacks.
Jiro
7mo ago
Strongly agree about there not being enough toplevels and post length not being an ideal filter, strongly disagree about 'ideological adherence' (they let the holocaust deniers and white nationalists keep posting.)
If you are a moderator and you want to wage the culture war while pretending not to, letting the holocaust deniers and white nationalists through is useful, because they have no chance of convincing anyone--but if you let through an ordinary conservative, they might actually convince people.
As a bonus, you get to associate normal non-leftist views with Holocaust deniers and white nationalists because those groups disproportionally are permitted to post such views.
Jiro
10mo ago
Let me now go through his claims one by one.
I think you're being too charitable. "Unexceptional idea, therefore absurd idea" shouldn't count as having 50% of his claims right.
And if you still think it's incoherent, then we will have to agree to disagree.
The problem is that this isn't just some academic thing. Remember why I'm pointing it out--you made the argument that it's not oppressive to avoid original sin. If I have to believe nonsense in order to avoid original sin, and I'm unable to believe the nonsense, that's pretty darn oppressive. It's not like not understanding calculus.
I'm also not sure why you are picking on transubstantiation in particular as a flaw of Christianity in general.
Because it's probably the most well known example of Christianity requiring belief in nonsense. Yes, only some Christians believe it. If you are not one of them, I'd be happy to discard the example while talking to you, and use the Trinity instead. If you are one of them, however, I think it's fair to bring it up even if other Christians don't believe in it.
Jiro
1mo ago
The algorithm was fine. You saying it's 'unintentional' is just you saying it because you don't feel good about it.
I'm saying it's unintentional because it's unintentional.
Same is true for 'conservatives'? What is your problem here with anything exactly?
"Not shown to people who want something else" doesn't apply. Many people do want conservative viewpoints.
There are more people who don't believe in the holocaust than there are American 'conservatives'.
Google is not aimed at Saudi Arabia or Iran.
Jiro
2mo ago
By that reasoning it's fine to bar him from taking part in any job whose name starts with the letters Q through Z. After all, even with that restriction there are many jobs he could take.
But it's totally arbitrary. Why do we have an interest in preventing someone from taking some jobs just because they refuse to put themselves in physical danger by going to Russia?
Jiro
6mo ago
That reasoning would still apply for the KKK trying to attack someone in order to create anti-KKK backlash.
Jiro
6mo ago
If either side was in each others position they would be extreme ultranationalists/hardcore identitarian tribalists as they are now.
You are making this up.
Jiro
8mo ago
Some dude wants to sell me his vote for an ice cream? That’s fine, he clearly wasn’t interested in it, and I am.
Laws affect third parties. Having the guy sell you his vote instead of not voting or voting randomly dilutes the vote of third parties. The third parties may be interested.
Also, poor people would end up all selling their votes and the resulting government would be bad for poor people.
Jiro
9mo ago
The magic steps in to turn Narnia from [decades of firsthand evidence] into something much less tangible and much easier to convince yourself to forget.
The stereotype is that atheists have good reason to believe in God, but reject him anyway.
To fit this stereotype, people can't magically forget Narnia--that eliminates the "have good reason to believe in" part.
Jiro
9mo ago
I have personally seen myself inexplicably forget very substantial evidence for the existence of God.
I don't believe that you actually had very substantial evidence for God, though you may have thought you did.
Jiro
10mo ago
since this does not seem to clearly violate any existing rules.
Low effort isn't a rule?
Also, if it doesn't violate any rules, but it's obviously something bad for the group, you should add it to the rules so that you can give out a warning next time someone does it.
Jiro
11mo ago
I'm not interested in going round and round with your whining about why I modded Suzy but I didn't mod Johnny.
There are some things that moderators should be doing regardless of whether they are interested in them or not.
It's like having a restaurant owner who's "not interested" in making sure his food is stored at the right temperature.
If the classical paradigm of an excellent human life requires that you not be a Jew, I want no part of it.
More options
Context Copy link