domain:felipec.substack.com
jake
1hr ago
What does it mean to hold yourself in what you think is the right way if there is an absolute standard for righteousness?
What does it mean to hold yourself in the right way if righteousness doesn't exist?
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
2hr ago
You see, kids, in 1999 there was an album released with songs performed by a bus-killed Afro-Jewish man by the name of Marvin Pontiac. One of those songs was a bit of nonsense about tiny farmers going on a Swiftian journey to the land of the normals to find out why the stars were shining. They never did find out, but they had had a nice day.
In reality, Pontiac was alive, definitely not Afro-, practically not Jewish, and most notably (to me) the future painter of the immortal превед медвед. But this isn't important.
What is important is that I came across this reworking of the original song about the tiny farmers. In this one, the fake Afro-Jewish man is replaced by a fake Afro-American man and the backing music is pared back and groovy. Self-recommending, as they say.
I have only one thing to say to you, I have only one thing to say to you, I have one thing to say to you. And that is the next time you are not feeling so well try remember the day the farmers, the little grey farmers went out on a long drive.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
3hr ago
Don't.
Treat video games as you would sugary drinks, staying up past midnight, sleeping until mid morning. Delay the acceptance of these habits as long as possible, until the likelihood of them becoming habits dwindles and a certain ability to self-regulate has developed. The trade-off is simply not worth it.
I never played video games growing up (well we didn't have them, although I played Adventure and Pong on my friend's Atari), not even was I allowed in principle to buy comic books, which were seen as brain rotting by my parents. By the time I could buy them on my own I just wasn't that interested.
Others may disagree. My sons now are fixed to their phones and often playing some game which, because of its design, not only pulls in their attention but cannot be, as in the old days, simply paused, without suffering some in-game loss. Predictable tension occasionally ensues.
In any case the toothpaste will make its way out of the tube, it's only a matter of time. In Japan I'd never homeschool as the socialization aspect of school is vital to functioning in society, but I am no longer very savvy how anything works in the US.
ArmedTooHeavily
3hr ago
Appreciate it. Looks like I'm bumping it up my reading list.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
3hr ago
It prominently features the iconic Windows 95 startup sound famously created by Brian Eno on commission from Microsoft.
Shrike
3hr ago
Amazing. I almost wish I was a motivated enough person to fake tens of thousands of things!
Shrike
3hr ago
One of the things that I think is true of life in general is that your faith will be tested. And sometimes logic, no matter how prettily written down, is not what comforts the heart. Sometimes no amount of clear reasoning and pat answers can prepare you for the devastation life has to offer or teach you how to respond to life's frustrations.
I think it's interesting that we can have these sorts of conversations where, if we are willing to wrestle with the text in faith, we are rewarded - not always with clear answers, but with a reason to be encouraged and to continue engaging. (As I certainly have been here, thanks to you and other Mottizens!) I don't think a book that only has crystal-clear answers can do that - only a text with problems, or one that is often unclear or mysterious or even seemingly paradoxical can do that.
And when the times come in our lives where syllogistic arguments fail, that process of being rewarded for being willing to engage in faith even if the results are unclear might be the thing that shows you how to hold fast to what you believe in. The process of wrestling might be the thing that unbeknownst to us was teaching us how to hold on. I wouldn't say this process is limited to religious texts, either! Perhaps looking for perfect clarity in a book that aims to build character is like looking for a textbook without unsolved problems.
Food for thought (for me as much as anyone!)
anon_
3hr ago
I mean, that's just a matter of framing. The other way of framing it is:
- I don't have to fill out this form (with copy-pasta language) to change my name, but it's easier and clearer for everyone when (not if, because the judge never denies these) a judge issues your order. Hence for the sake of simplicity and ease, I'm going to do a thing that I'm not strictly required to do.
This is a fairly common way of approaching one's relationship with the world. Most people do not do the bare minimum of things that they are strictly required to do but the things that makes everything the most straightforwards.
It might be edgy to post online about how you have every right to do this without a legal proceeding and therefore that is somehow preferable. My view here is that it's very evidently not preferable in any actual sense that matters.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
3hr ago
I think you can almost make a purely secular argument for the Crusades, to be frank, and the same is true for a number of seemingly religious conflicts. Many states are inherently expansionist, the Seljuk Turks in particular as a faction made their name and wealth off of military expansionism to start with (their jihadist ideologies were certainly there too but we can't ignore the physical and practical), and who ended up answering the majority of the obviously self-interested call for aid? Not the immediate fellow Christian neighbors, no, it was mostly bored warrior castes from farther Western Europe (and some peasants and minor nobles too at first with other reasons to leave home). Yep, people fighting for money and a share of the spoils. I don't want to overstate the case, here, religion is still all over this, but it wasn't a conflict completely unique to religion. Honestly war happens with or without religion's help, is my view, and in some cases religious commonalities also prevent war, though that kind of thing doesn't explicitly show up in history without additional scholarship.
In fact much of humanity was still religious during WWII with the exact same weaponry... but honestly the track record isn't that bad overall in the last 100 years for religion. The major ones I can think of are like, India-Pakistan conflicts, obviously everything to do with Israel (though ethnicity also factors in too), maybe a few minor civil wars and a few revolutions? But not even that many.
anon_
3hr ago
Presumably one doesn't challenge the illegal actions of the government unless they are both illegal and have some specific articulable harm to someone.
The harm here (if there is any) seems trivial enough not to
Incidentally, one could make the inverse of a slippery slope argument -- if you cry "fascist" at every government overreach no matter how minor, it detracts from the real battles. Save your powder and so forth.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
4hr ago
You kind of do, though, to some extent, at least for the kind of standards you're hinting at.
I mean, since we're already talking about Catholics, you could plausibly say the same thing there, no? Maybe less so for non-denominationals, but most churches have some history or niche beliefs that might be relevant to "actual beliefs". It's my understanding that a potential Catholic convert (who, by your own standards, would need to spend years of time on historical research to find out what they "really believe") is expected to spend about six months going through a catechumen. That doesn't sound too crazy or too unusual. LDS baptismal standards vary across region, but the overall new convert experience from baptism to what you might call a "full member" is mandated to last at least one full year.
And if you read the Book of Mormon, which is basically mandatory for those wanting to be baptized, exactly what you describe is found in the Introduction right in front of you... where even a quick skim would quickly demonstrate several factual errors in your summarization. I mean, if you call the literal introduction to a mandatory and fundamental text of the entire religion "hidden" I have no idea what to tell you other than that's not what the word means.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
4hr ago
Ugh, that's really shitty. That's a bummer. :/
ABigGuy4U
4hr ago
80 percent of the Indian flag posters on 4Chan seemed to suddenly disappear so I think it was legit.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
4hr ago
For what it's worth, I totally agree with you on the temple ceremony thing (though very specifically for members who have already experienced the modern version), and have been censored on faithful reddit forums for even suggesting faithful members consider looking at them. That could plausibly change in the future, but who knows. At that point anyways it's a little... I mean I dunno, almost not a big deal however, in the sense that assuming for a second the LDS faith is true, then the most one would gain from looking at the past would be more insights for the present? And if you believe, then doctrine says the most recent version is all you really need for salvation and exaltation, so there's no major downside.
In a more general sense of talking about the past, although the LDS faith did go through a low-key phase of "don't talk about it", the Joseph Smith Papers Project has done a pretty excellent job of surfacing plenty of stuff for interested members and non-members alike in the historical record, credit where credit is due.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
4hr ago
That was me. Looking back I made my point pretty clumsily and also in poor taste, given especially how it came across as a "dunk" or something, so for that again I apologize. The point I was trying to make was the one that was drawn out a little bit better later about how Tradition - at least to some extent - forces Catholicism to treat potential changes to Tradition with more seriousness than other religions might, with my own as a bit of an extreme example. It wasn't my intent to focus on the alleged inconsistencies as much as to comment on how from the outside alleged inconsistencies seemed like theoretically kind of a big deal for Catholics. I appreciate Oracle's replies and your own self-control both in that respect.
Great comment, very informative.
I did have the thought recently that some of the conservative trends people observe in the Catholic Church could make reunion harder. If the Spirit of Vatican II wanes, East and West would become more aligned in worship and practice, but at the same time a confidently traditional Catholic Church might assert its dogmatic claims more vigorously.
Comparable vibes: Tabernis - Alveus Umbrae, original music on bagpipe + drum by French guys dressed as medieval beekeepers.
The best claim to Mormons being Christian is the everyday practical reality of being Mormon. At night you pray to “God the Father”. You ask for forgiveness of sins, something you believe is only possible through the sacrifice of “Jesus Christ”, and a request you believe is mandatory to receive “salvation”. I mean if you had to pick like ONE thing that defines Christianity, wouldn’t you say that it’s more or less exactly this thing? Either you think Jesus died for your sins, or not?
Also, gosh, you can go to the literal official website, not even the one dedicated to explaining our beliefs, and whaddaya know, right there on the front page is a section "What We Believe", with the first link in the section "Learn About Jesus Christ". Clicking this link contains such totally heretical (/s) topics such as:
-
Jesus’s Divine Mission
-
His Ministry Gave Us the Perfect Example
-
His Teachings Show Us the Way to Salvation
-
His Sacrifice Means You Can Live with God
-
Jesus Made Forgiveness Possible
-
Because of Jesus We Will Live Again Someday
-
You Can Follow Jesus
If you wanted details, although it's dated in a literal sense, Joseph Smith wrote out exactly an answer to this question ("What do you believe?") in 1842 and we call them today the Articles of Faith which are relatively succinct and also has the advantage of doubling as a primary source.
On a more practical level, i.e. wondering what modern practice is like, I would direct you toward the resource Gospel Principles which has 47 chapters and honestly? Having both read through it and taught lessons from it, I personally consider it the perfect balance of succinct and descriptive for probably 95% of all purposes, as well as quite honest. I'd be extremely surprised it if missed even a single notable modern doctrine or practice, because for many years it was the basis for the first year of lessons for recent converts, so there's obviously not much reason to "hide" anything there, because most of the people using the book were already baptized members. The book is also extremely careful of its wording, and contains some handy scripture (Bible and otherwise) references that offers some further clarification
Looks like I was clearly wrong with an earlier 'this will probably blow over' Thursday post.
Still, did a cyberattack really take down the grid? India says it's fake news while 'Mashriq news' says it did but wouldn't we be able to see it from space? My Brave AI bot says it was real but I don't think these browserbots are up for wars and the absolute explosion of fake news that comes with it. The beginning of the war in Ukraine was like this too, lots of fantasy.
anti_dan
5hr ago
If any federal regulation actually exists which would prohibit REAL ID cards from being issued in a person's actual legal name, when that name was acquired by a common-law name change—and so far this is just speculation, no-one has found any such rule*—then
REAL ID requires you submit one of many documents with your current name, which would be your common law legal name in such a case. But to do that you need to get a passport or one of various other documents that only is issued by the US government under that name, or a birth certificate issued to your name. OR a chain of custody set of documents from your birth certificate name to your current legal name. Those are:
- Certified marriage certificate.
- Adoption documents that contain the legal name as a result of the adoption.
- A certified name change document that contains the legal name both before and after the name change.
- A certificate, declaration or registration document verifying the formation of a domestic partnership/civil union.
- A certified dissolution of marriage/domestic partnership/civil union document that contains the legal name as a result of the court action.
All 5 workarounds also appear to require a federal passthrough document. Basically a SSN, or the equivalent. At this point the other way to Alabama being REAL ID compliant is known as the ridiculously stubborn way.
So what I'm seeing is, there is probably an easy way to get a non-Star ID that is presumably legal under this interpretation of the law, but there is no good faith reason to challenge the Star ID reqs, but you wouldn't have standing to do that, because its cheaper to do the thing that makes you eligible.
**I seriously expect these will never be discontinued anyway, because discontinuing them would harm the voting block of “people who live a lifestyle rendering them incapable of fulfilling the REAL ID requirements”.
I disagree. If the Republican coalition continues to go more working class, maybe, but if it veers back in the 2012 direction without picking up urban blacks, any Republican state would have good reason to end this. Not only would it disenfranchise legitimate enemy voters, it would make the fraudsters that vote using the information of people who dont vote significantly harder.
veqq
5hr ago
https://youtube.com/watch?v=yig8pTFBULI?si=11Qu7wUkT9184Ds5&t=1800
Some fund managers talk about capitalism without bankruptcy akin to Christianity without hell, meaning a loss of accountability, leading to nihilism etc. This is something we often discuss here "Elites have no skin in the game" etc. which I've been mulling over for a long time. It's interesting to see them arrive at it from a distinct intellectual framework.
stuckinbathroom
5hr ago
Unfortunately, their Erdo’s number wasn’t sufficient
TheBailey
soapy mop
6hr ago
Right now it seems to be "this section of the code says A, that section says B, who gets to juggle the hot potato?"
- I'm not aware of any code that actually says either “A” or “B”.
- It seems the court clearly stated that “A, unless otherwise specified” is their interpretation of § 1-3-1.
- I'm not aware of any court cases that either overturned that ruling, or named “B” as their interpretation of any existing piece of the code.
Either go to court so a judge makes a ruling or the state legislature clears this up. What is happening right now is ripe for all kinds of problems.
We are “ripe for” exactly 3 outcomes that I can see: (1) situation stands, sovcits suffer slightly; (2) a lawsuit is filed, probably by the ACLU; or (3) someone opens this can of worms in the legislature.
You seemingly named the latter two as desired outcomes, and I don't get the impression you consider the first outcome to be particularly problematic, so I'm interested to see what “all kinds of problems” you scry here... Am I misreading you? Do you actually sympathize with the plight of a person who wants to change their name, but isn't eligible or can't be bothered to file for a $50 name change?
Or do you just mean that the situation cannot stand, and every possible outcome is going to be slightly problematic?
Is this what having a stroke feels like?
More options
Context Copy link