Shila

--> @Shila

Because objectivity means not subject to opinion. So everyone sharing the same opinion is irrelevant.

Are you saying when people agree and share the same opinion they become irrelevant?

Please explain how you came to this understanding of what I said

--> @SkepticalOne

Do they? Can you give examples of 'unjustified' knowledge?

can you perhaps provide an example of "justified & true" knowledge ?

So far, no correct answers :)

--> @Vici

The question of Gods existence is something that’s never going to be resolved. If the God that exists is a personal God who chooses not to reveal Himself and end the question once and for all why would we assume that our puny minds could ever override this divine decision. The way I view it the world is filled with hints or “Easter eggs” about God but never enough to definitively answer the question. That’s the point of faith which wouldn’t be worth very much if we could prove God existed with a syllogism 

Every mind is unique. I’ve always believed in God, just more or less strongly depending on the time, but in the last few years I’ve become much more religious and confident that God exists. But I know pretty much for a fact that the train of thought that led me to that conclusion wouldn’t be convincing to a lot of people. Not because it’s stupid but because I’m my own person. If a person opens themselves to God He will come in the way that makes the most sense to them. I guess some people might find God through a syllogism or something but not very many. No disrespect but youre pretty much wasting your time and would make more progress winning people over to faith by being a positive influence in your community, helping people, basically living your faith than poasting online

--> @Shila

Nope a smartphone is indicative of material evolution.

Christianity was a phase within human intellectual evolution.

Christians owning smartphones is perhaps indicative of inevitability.

And nihilism as a philosophical concept is already out there for all to partake of. Though the instinctive reality of the species, dictates that meaning tends to be something we are all programmed with.

The exercise of assessing nihilistic data and the development of actual physiological nihilism are two different issues. Though that is not to say that the human condition could not one day be reprogrammed.

Currently a smartphone is just another data transfer system.

The Genesis narrative is about the genesis of consciousness, the birth of something new, it is a new beginning that represents a new life, with new potential and new opportunities to move beyond all previous limitations and constraints, and along with that new life come the deepest truths of human essence.  It is therefore a necessary preface to the Bible that introduces the birth of “free will” and sets an explanatory stage for exploring its attendant consequences and associated moral responsibility.

Is entropy inherently evil?

Discuss.

--> @Shila

Christians sing of Adam's sin being a happy fault and necessary to God's plan, just as nature would sing.

What help would you give, given that if they sin, they profit?

Any help would likely harm them more than any good from no longer sinning or competing as evolution would call it.

Regards

DL

-> @Shila

I mean, if you think voting is going to change anything, then you already picked a loser

If there exists... non-material planes of being or levels of consciousness that everyone can experience, the highest of these being the spiritual plane......then how to define these terms and concepts?

1}  " non-material planes of being" to me, means that which is beyond occupied space --- physical reality{ Spirit-2 }, Gravity{ Spirit-3 } and Dark Energy Spirit-4 } ---, and that leaves only two possibilities for defining ' beyond the material plane ‘;

......1a}  the macro-infinite truly non-occupied space, that embraces our finite, occupied space Universe, and/or,

.......1b} Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego i.e. that which exists beyond our finite, occupied space  Universe and the truly non-occupied space, that, again exists outside/beyond/Meta our finite occupied space Universe.

So with the above in consideration, ' non-material ' to me, would mean Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego, that, I also label as Spirit-1. However, the word ' beings ' is included in that statement of belief. Traditionally/customarily we think of ' beings ' ex human beings, as an occupied spac  e.

This latter means we need to make an adjustment to our  defining of the word ' material '. So an alternate to the above conundrum caused by the word ' beings ',  I would propose that ' material ' means our physical reality { Spirit-2 }, and what is beyond that occupied space of quantised and quantified physical reality  is the non-quantised and non-quantified, Spirit-3, occupied space of Gravity{ mass-attraction/contraction }, and Spirit-4, Dark Energy { expansive acceleration aka cosmological constant }.

So then we come to the last part of the statement of belief, '  highest plane of these being the spiritual plane '.  Above I lay out my belief of four primary kinds of Spirit { 1, 2 3 and 4 }.  Since Spirit-1 Meta-space, is not a cartesian, 2D area { plane } as in XY part of a 3D { XYZ } volumetric occupied space, I would have to say the highest plane is Spirit-3, Gravity { mass-attraction/contraction }.

The above is simplest way I know to explain the statement of belief  ' the highest ', however, if any were to delve deeper in to my cosmological scenarios, Gravity is the outer peak of encoded consciousness, and it is intimately related to the inner peak of encoded consciousness as Dark Energy.  Between the outer and inner is our  quantise-able and quantifiable physical reality consciousness. ( * * ).

My simple iconic and 2ndary symbolism  for these three is based on a 3D torus and this is the 2D bisection, as follows. ......space(>*<) i  (>*<)space....., wherein, the italicised i is Meta-space ego, that, exists outside/beyond the occupied space of Gravity (  ), Dark Energy )( and the sine-wave associated physical reality /\/\/\/ that is inbetween Gravity and Dark Energy, and actually a resultant of the invaginations { >< } from the outer peaks and inner peaks  (>*<)(>*<) that in its most complex evolution is that of bilateral human consciousness { * * } with access to Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego.

Einstein talked about how Gravity could be made to be  contractive or expansive, so Einstein inserted into his general relativity,  this mathematical factor he called the cosmological constant { expanding Universe }. Then later said it was greatest blunder of his life. Then along came Hubble who observed an expanding Universe, and then in 90's cosmologist observed the accelerating expansion of Universe and inserted a name for this phenomena, Dark Energy.

-> @Tarik

How so? Care to “substantiate this position”.

Because objectivity means not subject to opinion. So everyone sharing the same opinion is irrelevant.

--> @Shila

For sure, religion was one aspect of intellectual development. 

Inevitable really, when searching for answers in the absence of more complex scientific understanding.

Nope. Ongoing religion embraces ongoing material development.

I bet that most young Christians own a smartphone, for example.

Meaning is what we attribute to our existence, irrespective of a pointless Universal outcome.

Very few people are absolute nihilists.

--> @Double_R

The weather is what it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it.

And Morality is what it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it.

And once you’ve done that, explain how getting into heaven is an objective basis for morality.

Because everybody loves heaven.

--> @Sidewalker

if it is not your position that an external realm doesn't exist, then it is your position that an external realm does exist (don't bother to say you didn't say that, simple logic applies)

That’s not how logic works.

You’re confusing the actual with the question of what one believes regarding the actual.

An external realm either exists or it does not exist. There are no other options.

I do not need to take a position on whether it does or does not exist. I can simply say “I don’t know”, and reject either claim as irresolvable since we have no access to such a realm or any product of it if something such as it were to exist.

A simpler way to think of it; a man in Texas has been accused of beating his wife. Do you believe he did it, or do you believe he didn’t do it?

If you are anything resembling a rational person, your response to this is something to the effect of ‘neither, because I do not have the information needed to make such an assessment’

This is the same thing.

I'm fully aware of the articles of faith for your fundamentalist atheism. Perhaps your scholarship could include using a dictionary;

Faith:

2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof:

"To know a person's religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance." - Eric Hoffer

This has absolutely nothing to do with anything a I just said.

--> @Shila

polytheist-Witch: That you're a liar and pussy

--> @Shila

The oligarchs in Russia operate almost the same as American Oligarchs. Whoever is in charge answers to the Oligarchs in both cases.

--> @Avery

Well, in the brief times I’ve been there, you can see older folks trying to sell things on the street. Evidently, when taken in the context of the high cost of living there, Singapore’s version of Social Security isn’t enough to get by, and most citizens don’t financially plan for retirement properly.

Here’s one of several articles:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/singapores-retirement-system-worth-studying/

--> @ADreamOfLiberty

For decades the deep state treated Russia like a geopolitical enemy without the excuse of ideological differences and I very much doubt this invasion would have happened in any other case.

This is an important point which suggests there is no guarantee Russia will change its policy course even if it changed leaders. In fact, there is a sizable contingent in Russia from the loyal hardliners that claim Putin is being too soft and not as committed. Removing Putin could have very unexpected consequences.

I’m somewhat confused. There are two types of spending bills. There’s Democratic bills that would be good to pass at some opportune time (e.g., the infrastructure bill). Those, I fully support. And there’s bills which don’t really make major productive investments, whose main goal is to stimulate the economy. That was the first big spending bill in 2021, and I think $1.9 trillion was way too big.

Passing a trillion dollar stimulus bill in 2016–2019 would have been stupid, because the economy didn’t need stimulus. In 2020, while Trump was president, they did pass a stimulus bill, and it was great. In 2021, the economy didn’t need a stimulus bill of that size -- they should’ve gone with Summers’s $450 billion recommendation.

There are some “big bills” that Democrats should find opportune times to pass. This was not one of them -- it wasn’t a bill on the Democratic agenda for a while, it was explicitly aimed at combating the COVID-induced recession. The issue wasn’t the timing of the bill; the issue was the bill itself. When should the government have spent $1.9 trillion on stimulus? I’d say never, because there wasn’t a $1.9 trillion output gap.

--> @Shila

It is clear from the Canadian study more black teachers are needed because black students stay in school longer and get better grades. 

does this hold true for OTHER skin-tones ?

Polytheist-Witch: I don't know if they have how many seasons they're going to do planned out  better like beginning to ending then they did with the original series. I'm not sure how much ground they're actually trying to cover. But things are starting to move a little quicker and we're only on episode 4

--> @oromagi

The West needs to be ready for Putin's end and start preparing irresistible incentives for a post-Putin Russia to become more democratic, open for immigration and ideally, itself a member of NATO.

Well we're finally on the same page about something.... as long as by "democratic" you don't mean almost no election integrity + enormous tax burdens and regulation.

However some historical context for this comment might be nice, Russia did make overtures at being part of the NATO club after the wall fell. The military industrial complex (i.e. the deep state) had no interest in removing one of their excuses to collect stolen wealth and they shut that down.

For decades the deep state treated Russia like a geopolitical enemy without the excuse of ideological differences and I very much doubt this invasion would have happened in any other case.

--> @Shila

#67

Excellent post from you there shila. Credit where it's due and all that.

Not sure why you would say that. I simply enjoy reading and studying theological matter.

--> @Double_R

Yeah, like I said, I disagree with it. The existence of a transcendent realm is a matter of faith, you have faith that it doesn’t exist, and I’ll add that you are very dogmatic about your faith.

I never claimed an external realm doesn't exist nor is that my position. You made that up so that you could claim my beliefs are just as irrational as yours.

If you read carefully, you will note that it says "transcendent realm", but since you are on the subject, if it is not your position that an external realm doesn't exist, then it is your position that an external realm does exist (don't bother to say you didn't say that, simple logic applies), so with that assertion you have the burden of proof, and since you cannot prove it, your beliefs are irrational.  

Yes, you did.  That puerile burden of proof game you play isn’t valid, it demonstrates that you do not understand logic.  “You have the burden of proof so I’m right” isn’t a logical argument. 

I never made that argument. You’re once again, having a conversation in your head.

The burden of proof is a very basic philosophic principal rooted in skepticism. It’s not just a matter of external validation, far more importantly, it’s about internal validation. If you believe something you should have a good reason (aka evidence) for it. Without such reason, to continue to hold the belief is by definition irrational.

External validation here is simply the test of whether you actually have good reason, which is why those who aren’t interested in filtering out irrational beliefs hate talking about it.

So no, this has nothing to do with “winning” (a remarkably childish interpretation). Accepting the burden of proof as a valid principal governing acceptable thought is a prerequisite for having a rational dialog. So when you disregard it you show that you are not interested in that, at which point there is no reason to discuss anything with you.

I'm fully aware of the articles of faith for your fundamentalist atheism. Perhaps your scholarship could include using a dictionary;

Faith:

2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof:

"To know a person's religion we need not listen to his profession of faith but must find his brand of intolerance." - Eric Hoffer

--> @Stephen

Species evolution is a small chunk of the bigger picture of material evolution.

Material evolution and our place therein, is what interests me more.

Though Darwin did a great job of explaining the processes of physical adaptation and development.

I would suggest that the "giant leap" came with the rapid development of intellectual ability.

The ingenuity to outsmart our animal competitors and migrate, survive and proliferate in varying climes.

So, in terms of evolution, intellect allowed us to adapt to the natural world comparatively quickly.

When compared to the physical development of the brain and sensory functions for example.

Religion was just a part of intellectual development, from which we have moved on. Though old ideas are recorded and therefore will inevitably persist.

And of course, what moves us on is our expanding intellect, allowing us to facilitate an exponential rate of material development into a technological era.

Indeed, hence why I included heaven as a part of my diatribe.

Given the metaphorical nature of language and the history of the Bible, I have to wonder where the idea that there could be any such thing as a “literal translation” start anyway?

The Bible is a book that includes history and prophecy, poetry and love songs, allegories and parables, none of which is conducive to any kind of literal translation. The information in the Old Testament was passed down verbally through many generations before it was finally written down in Hebrew and Aramaic, not exactly the most precise way to transmit information. Then, four hundred years after the Old Testament the New Testament began and it was written is Koine Greek. Until the invention of the printing press, each written copy had to be transcribed by hand, which we all know is a very inaccurate process.  For the oldest books of the Bible this went on for over 3,000 years, every single copy was transcribed by hand for generations and generations, and it started with information that had been handed down through the generations verbally. The language journey was roughly, verbal transmission in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic, initially written down in Koine Greek and Aramaic, then translated into Latin, then German, and finally English.

As an originative religious text, the narrative is codified memory as opposed to historical record, its intent was to “image” reality, and “relate” the individual to the whole, to help the individual understand where they fit it. It was never intended to be read literally as a historical record.

--> @Shila

And you’re an idiot for believing that since you NEVER SERVED!!!! Uneducated moron!!! 

--> @Shila

Congressional Democrats can’t decide whether to soak the rich or hand them an immense tax break. In a tribute to policy incoherence, they’ve settled on both. 

The House on Friday approved the $1.2 infrastructure bill after decoupling it from an even larger entitlement measure — the reconciliation legislation — pursued by progressives and the president. The content of the latter remains fluid and its fate remains in doubt, particularly in the Senate.

In order to get moderates on board for the massive social spending bonanza, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has revived an old favorite. Last week she discreetly made sure that the reconciliation bill includes a gift to wealthy residents of high-tax blue states in the form of a healthy increase in the federal write-off for state and local taxes — known as the SALT deduction. Democrats have been wailing about the provision ever since Republicans in 2017 imposed a $10,000 cap on such deductions, which made it more difficult for big-spending politicians in California, New York, Illinois and other liberal enclaves to disguise their imprudent fiscal decisions. Ms. Pelosi now seeks to bump the cap to $72,500.

This would overwhelmingly benefit high earners. The Wall Street Journal reports that a Tax Foundation model calculates nearly 88 percent of taxpayers making more than $1 million would get a tax cut under the Democratic plan, with filers earning beyond $250,000 getting 70 percent of the savings.

This from a party whose faithful regularly drone on about the rich not paying their “fair share” and only a week ago were floating the idea of taxing billionaire capital gains before they’re even realized. But the hypocrisy runs even deeper.

In addition to the SALT giveaway, Democrats would hand tax subsidies worth up to $12,500 to well-off Americans who buy electric vehicles. Under the current bill, the credit won’t phase out until individual earners hit $250,000 in annual income, or $500,000 for married joint filers. There’s also a tax credit for electric bikes — electric bikes! — including high-end models that run as much as $4,000.

Meanwhile, Democrats claim to have this $1.9 billion reconciliation bill “paid for” with higher taxes on corporations and the rich. That would be much easier, of course, if they weren’t taking away with one hand while giving back with the other through SALT relief, EV handouts and other subsidies. But the idea that this bill pays for itself is accounting fiction: In a master stroke of fiscal gimmickry, every new entitlement in the measure is designed to sunset — which will never happen. Whatever final number Democrats pin on this donkey, expect the true cost to be triple.

The infrastructure bill may be stuffed with pork, but the reconciliation spending barrage is a dangerous house of cards.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-democratic-hypocrisy-on-the-rich-and-taxes-2474308/

--> @Shila

Even with the picture, the truth of my humanity exists.

Also not so much a dehumanized picture of 'myself, as a character from a video game.

--> @Shila

@Shila

There is very little reported rape among transgenders and LGTB. etc.

The military will see a dramatic drop in rape cases as transgenders and LGBT fill the ranks.

Delusions of grandeur, again?

Hard to think of raping a transgender in uniform knowing the person is actually a man out of uniform.

You're not the brightest bulb in the box. 

T are less than 0.5-0.8% of the population, LGBQ are less than 6% of the population. Their participation in the AF are significantly less, so no, there will not be any dramatic drop in rape cases in the service. 

You people who never served have absolutely zero business commenting on actual service and its implications for others. Just piss off. Unless you enjoy embarrassing yourselves with such ignorant stupidity. 

--> @Shila

If you could not respond to my posts that would be great. We don't have anything in common on any human or intellectual  level.  This will be my last response to anything you post.

--> @Stephen

Jesus spoke about god at a very young age. His views did not evolve over time. Jesus even believed This childish god was his father.

The Boy Jesus at the Temple

Luke 2:41 Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. 42 When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom. 43 After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. 44 Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. 45 When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.”

49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”[a] 50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.

51 Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. 52 And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.

This story has always amused me.

Here we have a woman chosen by God himself above all other women on the planet to be birth mother of his son and not even noticing that their "treasured" holy charge was absent until after a whole day's travelling!?  And they only recovered him after three whole days!!?

 Some "blessed among all women" she was, wasn't she? I am sure social services would have something to say about that if it were to happen today. 😂

And why on earth were they "astonished"!? Had this "blessed among all women" forgotten that the child that she had given birth to was gods son? 

Why didn't "they understand what he was saying to them"!? He was the son of God!

What is really hard to believe is how our spiritual detractors can make claims to being more "intelligent" and "logical" while demanding literal translations of religious narratives, anyone with even a basic understanding of religious narratives, would not call this "intelligent" or "logical".

Religious narratives achieve greatness because of their power to generate meanings, not in their value as an historical record. 

Originative religious texts are not historical records. The unexamined assumption that both sides of these debates adopt is that of historicism, the presumption that religious texts are historical records. Historicism attempts a reinterpretation of the transcendent dimension in the story that defines it as religious in the first place, it assumes that narrative, implies record, it doesn’t.

I believe that this innane literalism is contrived by people with ideological agendas that want science and faith to be at odds. These dogmatic fundamentalists, both Theists and Atheists alike, presume a referential interpretation of the religious narrative, and when they do they are overlaying an alien intentionality onto the story. Historicism negates the religious text by forcing a referential interpretation onto it, a purpose it was never designed to serve. Even among believers this mistaken analytic treatment of religious texts only sharpens doctrinal debate and results in divisiveness, it does not foster religious awareness, and again, the text is negated. 

--> @Shila

That the profile picture doesn't look human, doesn't matter.

Your's is currently various pink and white geometric shapes,

Of course we both know we are not those profile pictures, but instead humans operating electronic devices.

--> @Shila

There is very little reported rape among transgenders and LGTB. etc.

The military will see a dramatic drop in rape cases as transgenders and LGBT fill the ranks.

Delusions of grandeur, again?

You clearly know nothing about the Salem Witch Trials. 

https://salemwitchmuseum.com/locations/border-disputes/

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/true-stories/what-really-happened-during-the-1692-salem-witch-trials/news-story/8433744aaef7dffb81badfa11cd4bf76

https://www.on-a-limb.com/2015/09/5-things-about-the-salem-witch-trials-that-surprised-me.html

I never said they were

No. That is not what I did at all. I provided links backing up my original response to what I said to you, not what you said in response to me.

Says the one deficient in reading comprehension and interpersonal communication skills.

--> @Shila

"Their opinions maybe less relevant but they want to be liked too." OMG your condescension really really does have no bounds does it. I don't think you are aware of your own existence. But with that said I am sensing troll also based on previous replies to different subjects and people.

RationalMadman: Also, this is a callout thread but Shila has been obnoxious to me so idc.

--> @badger

How come time flies like an arrow but fruit flies like a banana?

Because of grammatics. The first “flies” is a verb and the second “flies” is a noun.

If a bot can detect grammatical variance, then this makes this test virtually nonsensical; if a bot cannot, then just treat Shila like any bad debater. You can debate with Shila on everything and it would make sense, more meaningful than asking this question.

--> @Shila

How come time flies like an arrow but fruit flies like a banana?

--> @Shila

Well, I'm still human

--> @Shila

Trump fixed the limit on SALT tax deductions to 10,000$. That we done primarily to hurt blue states. But his 2.6 trillion tax cuts to the rich just added to the deficit 

Think how many more trillions the deficit would be without the rich paying their fair share. Take a W when you can. Eat the rich. he wasn't really hurting blue states, he was hurting the rich people in Blue states.  I don't care about rich people no matter what state they live in.

--> @Shila

Yes he did appear to the 12 for 40 days and they watched him rise into heaven (Acts 1:1-8).

But he also appeared to some on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35).

And Paul said Jesus appeard to over 500 people, even telling his readers that many are still alive. (1 Corinthians 15:6). This is significant because, if Paul were making this up, he would not have said that, because Luke and others compiled eyewitness statements about Jesus's life from every source they could find. Surely these 500 people would have stated they never saw Jesus and therefore fact check Paul. But we see no such historical record existing.

Paul, himself, is a particularly interesting witness of the Resurrection because he was becoming a prominent Jewish religious leader who gained fame and prominence from stoning Christians. He thought the entire Christian religion was a cult. His views we so passionate about it that he stoned Christians to death himself. 

To Paul, the only thing that actually changed his mind was literally seeing Jesus risen from the dead, and being blinded by it, so that he had to be guided to the God following man who healed him.

Paul's life after being a Christian was no laughing matter. He was broke, imprisoned multiple times, shipwrecked, literally floating out to sea, beaten, and whipped for his testimony.

Who would give up prominence, fame, and fortune to be poor, beaten, imprisoned, and shipwrecked? Only someone who truly believed what happened to him. 

In various accounts of Paul, not one man calls him crazy or irrational, and there isn't any chance it is a mental disorder because of his coherence and intelligence and scholarliness.

I have both a trade and a bachelor's. And a good trade too, like kinda fancy, e&i tech, paid me well while I was at it. 

Then I got bored and went back to college. Did a computer science degree. 

I mean my trade is tiddlywinks compared to my degree. And 3 months out of the degree I was earning more than I had been working with 5 years experience in my trade. 

College is serious shit. No way I'd pay American fees though. 

I came up with a new word...

Plagiarism.

This is probably the turning point in the war. Good on Ukraine.

I don't quite understand dehumanization, myself.

Even if one hated a people, that they are human seems undeniable