domain:inv.nadeko.net
problem_redditor
1hr ago
No worries, I imagined that would probably be the case - it is just a forum after all and I'm not a super consistent poster, especially not lately. Mostly I just come up with a very long essay-style post every now and then on a hobbyhorse of mine, and then I drop out. Just got curious and thought I might ask.
I'd say that summary of my preferences is largely accurate, though it's not a long or obscure web novel actually. It's a piece of fiction I think most people here are familiar with.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
1hr ago
I was more interested in why someone would change their axioms based on seeing the politically-compromised Science-as-Institution, since that was the literal reading I took from the OP
Why would someone change their axioms? Because you grow up in our culture hearing Science as an institution say it has all the answers. They promote orthodox materialism. And as you grow older and realize that Science actually has a lot of flaws and lies quite a bit, you lose confidence/faith in their answers. You begin to question. Ultimately, you question materialism.
Can you explain a bit more where this doesn't make sense to you? I'm confused as to how you're confused.
sun_the_second
1hr ago
The Rings are singular artifact though. I meant more like a hypothetical setting where everyone does Satanism for a living.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
1hr ago
Why is this seemingly so impossibly difficult to explain/implement to people? I genuinely don't understand unless people are using immigrants as a scapegoat to vent their rage upon.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
1hr ago
Anyways, symbolic beliefs are false. The Christians here are actually Christian, so why would they engage with symbolic (false) beliefs?
You are misunderstanding what symbolism means. The Church Fathers constantly referred to the symbolic meanings in Genesis and other Old Testament texts. When I say symbolic I do not mean "miracles aren't real they are symbolic in ways that fit a materialist framework." I mean that the symbol, which is the word meaning "the place where Heaven and Earth meet," is an important frame for understanding religious tradition.
"Actual Christians" should in fact understand symbolism on a deep level, if they are serious about understanding their faith. If they just want to practice theosis and try to be more like Christ, that's fine too of course.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
1hr ago
I wish you had linked this comment instead, you do a great job here! To pick out some important bits:
We can make choices, every minute of every day. We can directly observe ourselves and others making those choices, and have direct insight to the apparent cause of those choices, which appears to be individual will and volition. We can observe that the behavior of others is not perfectly or even mostly predictable or manipulable, and that the degree predictability and manipulability that does exist varies widely across people and across contexts. All of our experiences conform seamlessly with the general concept of free will, none of them conform with Determinism of any sort.
There is no evidence that humans are "machines", ie deterministic chains of cause and effect. This claim is not supported by any direct, testable evidence available to us, and is in fact contradicted by our moment-to-moment experience of making choices freely. Many predictions have been made on the theory that humans are machines, and all of those predictions, to date, have been falsified. Even now, you form the claim in a way specifically designed to be untestable, because you are aware that such a machine cannot now be made. You only believe that it will be possible to be made at some indeterminate point in the future, perhaps ten years hence; ten, twenty, fifty, a hundred years ago and more, your predecessors believed the same thing for the same reasons.
You do not believe in Determinism because it has been directly demonstrated by evidence. You believe in Determinism because you are committed to Materialism as an axiom, and because any position other than Determinism evidently breaks that axiom. Beliefs are not generated by a deterministic accretion of evidence, but are rather chosen through the exercise of free will, by a process that is easily observed by anyone with a reasonable memory and a willingness to examine one's own thought-process dispassionately. As I said before, this is how all human reason works, how all beliefs and values are formed and adopted. The mistake is only in failing to recognize the choices being made, to allow oneself to believe that the choices are anything other than choices.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1hr ago
Do you not understand that this is just like fourth wall breaking and pointless?
What is your understanding and assessment of the loaded phrase "just asking questions"?
I think what you are seeing here is a more general application of the ideas behind the phrase.
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
1hr ago
I'm sorry, but I don't recall enough of your posts to form an educated guess! (Nothing personal though, there are at most a single digit number of "characters" here where I feel like I have some model of their personality.)
I assume it's something related to sci-fi, based on your other recent comment. Probably a very long web novel that I've never personally heard of. I imagine that a lot of earlier 20th century works weren't intricate and hard-SF enough for you.
atelier
Jimmys: unrustled
1hr ago
Make all business payments to any individual that didn't use eVerify no longer deductible expenses.
PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
1hr ago
Yes, some people assume materialism from a position of faith. Other people make no such assumption. I was more interested in why someone would change their axioms based on seeing the politically-compromised Science-as-Institution, since that was the literal reading I took from the OP. Maybe the OP was not trying to draw a causal arrow and was just doing the Journalist thing putting words together in a vaguely grammatically correct way.
Deportations can be done easily and cheaply without any government involvement.
Require some proof of being legally in the US for opening a bank account. I highly doubt the banks don't know exactly who people are already. Make sure digital forms of payment as well as credit is impossible without legal paperwork.
Limit the time window that a Latin American driver's license is valid in the US and make Latin Americans registers when they start using that driver's license. Driving without a proper license should be punished.
In order to buy alcohol and cigarettes with a latin American passport there should be an American passport stamp in the passport.
Companies should be investigated for tax fraud if they hire illegals.
Make at least larger landlords verify the identity of their tenants.
Make it impossible to register illegals at schools, universities or other institutions.
When I was in the US I had to fill out information to register who I was when I stayed at a hotel. Make that process only go through for people legally in the US.
Create a miserable user mode for illegals in the US and they will leave. The US has millions of illegals because the US facilitates illegals in their country. Stop facilitating them and it will stop being fun to be an illegal in the US. Mexico is not Sudan, life there is not that bad.
Tenaz
1hr ago
(and to a lesser extent the other rings are)
...is it though? The elven rings seem to be simply useful; there's no risk there.
And Gandalf seems to have let Bilbo run around with what he thought was a simple "magic ring" for about a hundred years, before he got suspicious that it was actually the One Ring.
SSCReader
1hr ago
Was the media that politically correct in 1964? The Times that did the Genovese story also published this in 1965:
An investigative article by The New York Times claimed a connection between the Fruit Stand Riot and militant bands of anti-white youth gangs "trained to maim and kill" and "roam the streets of Harlem attacking white people"
Which doesn't exactly seem like they were shying away from reporting on black on white violence at the time.
40 people being unwilling to intervene seems like on it's own is a more eyeball catching story than a stabbing and rape regardless of racial dynamics. Which is basically what the journalist said, when asked about it privately. It made for a more interesting story.
Remember clickbait journalism is not new.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1hr ago
Huh? I've never seen anyone (on the right or elsewhere) go from "the institutions are politically compromised" to "there is nonphysical stuff."
It is trivial to demonstrate the existence of "non-physical stuff" from within a strictly materialist framework. With an understanding of the political compromise of institutions, and an awareness of the historical record of those institutions, it is fairly trivial to peel the consensus materialist framework like a banana.
gilmore606
1hr ago
If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1hr ago
Been considering it, but something about them spooks me out.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
1hr ago
I continue to await for the rationalist crew to (re)discover Freemasonry, which offers a combination of a possibility for a Deist belief in an Universal Creator, cool mystical rites with actual historical heft, plenty of chances for networking, and a focus on personal development.
I mean, incentives rule everything around me.
The fact that new border encounters have dropped to almost nil tells you the story.
If it was generally known that you could easily hop the border into the U.S., get handed enough resources to subsist on for a while, get paying work, and possibly even qualify for some charitable or governmental programs to bolster you, and the chances of being abruptly snatched up and chucked back to your country of origin was small (if only b/c the courts are hopelessly backed up), then the risk/reward ratio is pretty low.
If the risk of getting deported doubles or triples, then it becomes less worth it. If the programs and institutions that previously promised support for you are shut down or become hostile, then it is even less worthwhile.
If a huge portion of the population of the host country are actively and happily declaring how they want you removed, it would really make the risk quite unappealing.
I'm sure the calculus is different for those already here, especially if they've been here a while and managed to tie up much of their wealth in the U.S., but if the prospect of keeping your head down for ~4 years seems unpalatable, then unwinding the entanglements you have and returning home significantly wealthier than when you left could also be enticing.
Although add in the complication of Sanctuary cities making it seem possible to stick around and slightly reducing the risk of being caught.
CrispyFriedBarnacles
1hr ago
Here's what I keep bumping into with lines of thought like this.
Like many others, I did the angry atheist thing. But I was never really able to get past the wisdom present in Christ saying "By their fruits shall ye know them" - and indeed, one of the things I appreciated about abandoning the conservative, constricting faith of my youth on exactly those lines is that I could read, say, stuff from zen Buddhist thinkers and appreciate them morally on a deep level without having to decide whether they were really devil worshippers or not, for example, as my home tradition would have insisted. But, speaking of fruits, over time I think I became really discouraged by the behaviors, habits, and world views of many people who were most vociferously anti-theist, whether that was through New Atheism, or whether (and worse) it was from various cultural strands through university influence that were all downstream from the biggest anti-theism of them all, French enlightenment philosophy from the last 250 years. Meanwhile, many, many people will look at, say, Mormons they know, or the Amish, and they're say, "They believe a lot of silly things, and they sometimes seem quite naive about the broader world, and yet at the level of behavior, they can be the nicest, most selfless, most family and community oriented people I know."
I appreciate the project of trying to reconcile science (but less so "reason") with the great world religious traditions that have shaped the bones of different civilizations. I think as a practical matter, fundamentalism's insistence on loudly proclaiming anti-hard science positions has often been deeply counterproductive. And yet it seems to me that much of the strange power of real, historical religious traditions often has something deeply to do with their shared status as being beyond reason and evidence, and the shared authority that comes from that, and especially the common knowledge that comes from that shared authority.
And the shared authority aspect is really key. Speaking entirely from a secular game designer perspective here (because that's where my brain mostly lives), the game theory of Mormonism, say, working makes total sense to me. You believe that God exists, is all knowing, is all powerful, and is all good. And you know that God specifically commands you not to lie. And because God is all knowing and all good, this means there is no way of weasle-ing or lawyering your way out of this. You might as well try to lie your way out of obeying the law of gravity. And just like knowing that gravity exists, you believe, deep in your bones, that you've been freed by this knowledge - that there was a deep, powerful, important rule about the universe that hurt you for not knowing it, and you've been liberated by knowing it now. People who believe in Foucault might see this story as a panopticon, meant to police and and imprison you, but to believe this tradition, really, is to believe that you started out in the prison of your own self-destructive moral error (no different than not understanding gravity or the empirical germ theory of disease), and this knowledge (through faith) frees you from that prison. But then something much more complicated happens once you're in a shared community that also overwhelmingly believes these things - because (and this is where game theory and my game designer sense kicks in) you also have the common knowledge that everyone around you also has been liberated in exactly this way, and you know that they know that God knows, with perfect knowledge and perfectly benevolent judgement, exactly what they're doing too, and they can't weasel their way out of it either, no matter how much money or worldly power or social status they have either. And to the extent that this belief is truly pervasive, and the authority of this belief is respected, people truly do become different, and something real comes into a being - a community, or a world view, a way of being, that actually didn't exist before, but does exist now. A kind of high trust society comes into being because of that shared common knowledge about everyone else's metaphysical beliefs.
I guess this is something like a William James-ian pragmatism at play, because I feel like the word "truth" is tugged in different directions here. What does it mean if a myth isn't materially true, but believing it nevertheless brings into being something true and real and good - and meanwhile, this insistence on the assumption of materiality itself as the final arbiter is also possibly unjustified - based on an untruth, if you will, and its own faith commitments that precede it?
So, finally, returning to the initial discussion... The thing that I wonder about a lot is the impact of this move to make Christianity, say, "make sense", or any of these traditions. Based on what I just said about, it's not clear to me that the shared, common knowledge authority of these traditions, and the game theory results of that, really survive when authority is shifted over to "reason", to "making sense". Because the reality of this turn towards the insistence on myths surviving reason and making sense is that most of the game theory I just discussed seems to dissipate immediately - if I know that I am hopelessly biased and self-dealing, and I know that you are hopelessly biased and self-dealing too, once we both turn to our own personal reason as the final arbiter of these traditions, we might all reasonably expect that each of us is going to lawyer the beliefs until their authority is threadbare, and what they compel of us will be minimal. And that sounds appealing for me, in my selfishness, but it doesn't sound so good to me for the rest of you, who have all sorts of selfish designs for me. And eventually the whole thing collapses. One might very well arguing that this exact process has been exactly what hollowed out mainline Protestantism.
I'll be honest, though - I really do feel muddled here. Because the response that "doesn't it matter if these traditions really are materially true, though" certainly feels compelling, too, and I can't actually set that aside. I can say all of the above, and honestly believe it in broad strokes, I think, about how these various systems likely work socially. I can absolutely find the actual human results of some other, theoretically more sophisticated, more cynical belief systems pretty corrosive and sometimes disastrous, and wonder what that actually does mean about their truth content. But at the end of the day, it's very hard to actually pull myself out of a strictly material belief system, too, I guess.
hydroacetylene
1hr ago
Congrats, you’ve… reinvented liberal Protestantism? At least teilhard had an actual belief system when he did that.
Of course, given that Christianity itself correctly points out that the belief in the literal incarnation of the supernatural is load-bearing, you are unlikely to improve on Unitarian Universalist results.
DenpaEnthusiast
1hr ago
roystgnr
1hr ago
Just to round out the space of anecdotes a little more: when I've called out LLMs in the past I've sometimes had them "correct" their incorrect answer to still be incorrect but in a different way.
(has anyone seen an LLM correct their correct answer to be correct but in a different way? that would fill the last cell of the 2x2 possibility space)
They're still very useful in cases where checking an answer for correctness is much easier than coming up with a possible answer to begin with. I love having a search engine where my queries can be vague descriptions and yet still come up with a high rate of reasonable results. You just can't skip the "checking an answer for correctness" step.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1hr ago
they use LLM's to search through documents
I ask it to include page #s or text snippets so I can CTRL-F and confirm they exist (sometimes they don't!)
get ideas for how something works
This is more situational. A lot of the time I am trying to re-remember something I already knew, so I know if the answer is wrong or right once I read it and my buried memory of the thing resurfaces. Where I can't fact check internally, usually the LLM has given you enough info you can quickly hop onto google/youtube and corroborate the thing with a non LLM source.
professorgerm
You shall love your crooked neighbor, with your crooked heart
1hr ago
It certainly is an interesting chart! I don't think any of the "not-cis top 10%" results are particularly surprising. Slightly surprised zombies are less taboo than blood but maybe that's because they're fictional. Slightly surprised executions are female-preferred but maybe that makes sense as an extreme fantasy-kink of submissiveness.
I very much am in the process of investigating it. My big concern with it right now — and this may just be a result of the strenuous efforts of Freemasonry’s modern public-facing advocates to massively downplay its esoteric beliefs and emphasize its compatibility with normie Christian-inflected liberalism — is that it seems to demand a commitment to hardcore Enlightenment ideas of universal human equality and the centrality of the liberated individual. Since I think a lot of these ideas are wrong/incomplete, I’m wary of committing myself to an institution which treats them as bedrock axioms. I’m still doing my research, though.
More options
Context Copy link