sun_the_second
No bio...
User ID: 2725
sun_the_second
18hr ago
Hence the "not getting caught" clause.
sun_the_second
20hr ago
It fails often enough with the possibility of divine punishment!
In my view this means that vows are unserious things, not that promises are.
sun_the_second
22hr ago
It is often difficult to distinguish a vow from an oath. A vow is an oath, but an oath is only a vow if the divine being is the recipient of the promise and is not merely a witness.
TIL. However, I assume Capital_Room is among those who don't care about the distinction.
sun_the_second
1d ago
The purpose of the bail is for it to be realistic to raise. If the purpose of the bail was to not be realistic then there wouldn't be such a thing as bail.
sun_the_second
3d ago
How can you both be heretical and blasphemous? Kratos didn't touch any Hindu gods yet.
sun_the_second
3d ago
Ironically, it might be more fun on the highest difficulty setting. I haven't compared how quickly the enemies die, but defenses-wise you're gonna have to dodge/parry a whole lot more, so that's something to do at least instead of just mindlessly sending attacks.
sun_the_second
6d ago
If the concept of ownership were not in effect, burying a perfectly good tool with the dead would not be a thing at all…
A common speculation is that the tools were buried because the dead person would need them in the afterlife. That doesn't require that the person had owned the tool in life.
Conversely, even if the dead person had owned it, why bury the tool when the living inheritor could use it?
sun_the_second
10d ago
In a traditionally masculine society, it is solely the responsibility of the foe to acquire sufficient social standing so that he can start a fight while unarmed and expect his opponent to match him. What kind of a man calls out "judge??? judge???????" as he's stabbed for picking a fight with someone he shouldn't have?
sun_the_second
10d ago
I just saw it recently and can second the recommend. It looks about twice as good as Avowed wanted to be (I imagine).
sun_the_second
11d ago
I'd imagine that in those manlier days anyone who challenged you to an impromptu fisticuffs duel and wasn't a gentleman like yourself was liable to get whacked with a handy and fashionable cane you carried without any loss of social standing to yourself. Granted, my knowledge of manlier days mostly comes from Fallen London.
sun_the_second
11d ago
I suppose "I didn't care to fight this guy and I didn't see anything wrong with killing him if he insisted" wouldn't go over so well with the jury.
sun_the_second
11d ago
I wouldn't call it effeminate when most women seem to be absolutely averse to carrying a gun/knife, let alone ready to stab a motherfucker.
sun_the_second
11d ago
I don't doubt that they're currently not in favor of it, but give me a reason to believe that when their vanguard decides it's time to push that particular door open, they'll refuse.
I don't think any words will convince you that normies actually can't be convinced of anything anyone wants at any moment regardless of current belief if you're determined to believe that they can.
I do not know of any place on Earth where a woman or a weaker guy pulling a knife in response to someone bigger "unconsciously clenching their fists" would be seen as anything but an unstable psycho as opposed to "acting proportionally". It is not in fact ridiculous to expect people to prefer being slightly intimidated rather than go for mortal threats.
sun_the_second
12d ago
I recall seeing this post the first time it was published (or something close to it), and just like back then, I fail to see how this observation about the leftists of 1980s squares with the present day. I see normal people (that is, leftists, ranging from basic reddit just be a decent person-ists to transhumanist plural Marxists) quite a lot (admittedly mostly on the internet). In no spaces is any hint of any indulgent relationship between an adult and a child seen as more abhorrent than those normal people (leftist) spaces. The border between adult and child is far from being erased, it is shifted to mid-twenties. And I know how people act when there is something they really think but can't say (I've been on the Motte when it was on reddit), so I do not believe all of them are merely pretending to dislike any crossing of the 18-/18+ barrier.
The worldview of an average left-leaning normie is "no viewing anyone under the age of 18 as a sexual being at all". A minimal detached clinical acknowledgement is allowed, so as to be able to know teens could have unsafe sex, for the purposes of thwarting said unsafe sex. The attitude of the queer community towards educating children on sexuality is, at the worst of it, myopic and selfish, caring more about bolstering their political alliance than the livelihood of those children, but I don't see calling it pedophilic as anything but mental gymnastics.
sun_the_second
12d ago
Well - not quite random, according to the website,
More than 80% of the cures recognised as miraculous have been women.
So I guess either God loves women 4 times as much as he does men, or they get sick 4 times as much.
sun_the_second
12d ago
It wouldn't be religion the same way electricity isn't magic.
My credence in them will understandably be quite low
No, I don't understand why your credence in a random bum promising hell/heaven to you is not hypercharged to infinity the same way a religion's credence is hypercharged to infinity. My credence in religions is quite low, I consider them at best a way for people to epicycle their existential dread away and at worst a way for social egregores to keep downtrodden people downtrodden.
As long as we worry about different levels of infinities, consider Blarg, the god that will send you to hell of cardinality aleph(n+1) where aleph(n) is Christianity's hell, and vice versa for heavens.
Do you think that it's reasonable for me to think that Christianity is more reasonable at least than most other religions (of those that promise infinite rewards)?
I think it is unreasonable to rate religions higher based solely on the infinity of their rewards. Based on what I observe in life, it is much easier to deceptively promise infinite rewards than actually deliver on them, and this should hold for all agents in general. Thus you leave yourself open to all sorts of malicious agents who merely have to promise infinite rewards (or punishment) to capture your attention (but what if!..)
Of course, I suspect that you will not actually up-rate any random beings who promise infinite rewards (or punishment) without showing any hint that they could deliver on it. I suspect that is because Pascal's Wager is a post-hoc rationalization of Christianity for you and not something you could come to Christianity through from zero.
To answer your question: I think that as long as we're picking between gods a non-omnipotent, non-omnibenevolent, non-singular one is more likely than an omnipotent and omnibenevolent single one, so I'd start with the pagan gods of my homeland.
There's also the snag that even if I swallowed Pascal's Wager hook, line and sinker, it would not be Christianity I'd want to follow, because as far as I've been told (aggregating the opinions) the Christian God is merciful and would eventually forgive me anyway. If he wouldn't, then the God is not Christian, and not the kind of God I could worship out of love and faith. We need a new religion for people who hate the very idea that there is an omnipotent being threatening to plunge them into torment for all eternity if they don't follow its whims during their lives that simultaneously don't matter and are all that matters. Perhaps we could style its prayers off The Two Minutes Hate.
sun_the_second
12d ago
"...you fucking kikes are making us Jews look bad!" (c) a joke about Jews.
I've heard it also works for black people.
I suppose we'll have to disagree here because those don't look anywhere near reasonably strong. Any religion can "claim" to be a revealed religion, but if it really was revealed, I'd expect to see some of that revelation for myself. Otherwise, why wouldn't I follow any of the numerous kook cults whose originator managed to swindle 100-1000 people? Or millions, even.
As for largeness, well, many Christians claim their religion is just plainly better for building strong societies, and I grant that, but that's evidence against it being true (since people would have incentive to spread it because it's pragmatic for materialist matters even if they doubted it was metaphysically true).
Did you become familiar with Pascal's Wager before you became Christian, or after?
sun_the_second
12d ago
But is the expected value of investigating other options higher than that of trying to live out a pious Christian life?
Why are you so much more sure that it isn't compared to living a virtuous atheist life, or unitarian, or w/e?
sun_the_second
12d ago
Being in a dominant position follows from it, unless the authorities are powerless.
sun_the_second
12d ago
Wouldn't crybullying require that you're actually in a dominant position while pretending not to be?
Islam is a fargroup conservative belief, Orthodoxy is an outgroup one. If my country went full Handmaid's Tale, it would be the Orthodox putting the women back under the boot sooner than the Muslims, despite the sizeable Muslim subpopulation.
More options
Context Copy link