sun_the_second
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server
No bio...
User ID: 2725
We also find it historically attested that a man in the 1800s has declared that he talked to an angel, wrote a new holy book and convinced millions of disciples to take what is, in plain terms, a blatant heresy of the dominant religion seriously.
Thankfully, USA is not ancient Rome, so the Mormons weren't yet widely tested for their capacity for martyrdom. Yet this is a modern example of how easy it is to become a prophet and found a religion. Extrapolate it from 200 years ago to 2000, with corredpondingly spottier reporting, and the story of Jesus of Nazareth doesn't look that out of place.
Being unsure about some aspects of our reality and being unsure about God are very different kinds of unsure, as you've highlighted with your model of layered realities.
You could argue that any relationship built on communication with a higher entity would necessarily be one built on coercion, sure. But without communication there is no relationship. When one can't be sure if he's speaking with God or with the echoes of his own mind refracted through religious culture, where does freely made choice even come into it?
If a willful intelligence from a higher reality actually talked to me, as you're correct to point out it could if it wanted, my questions towards Christians and interrogations of the truthfulness of their faith would be much fewer.
(Allegedly divinely-inspired words of mortal men, "signs", feelings and vibes are no proper replacement for a conversation in my book. If it wanted to talk to me, it could talk to me.)
If our assumptions based on the observable reality don't work for higher realities, then that should signal we can't derive how/if God works from what we see in our world. No matter how much evidence there is in favor of Christianity, it provides no truth value.
You must see how that just sounds like "separating from family made me feel worse". Those whose Christian family was, in fact, the miserable part of their lives, or those whose family was not religious at all, would have different experiences.
If the air stopped being there for an hour, I would certainly be very inconvenienced, yet no one thinks of selling of buying air at all, let alone for the infinitely-high price the necessity theory of value would command.
It appears that "how likely the work is to stop being done" is a factor in evaluating its worth that cannot be ignored. Menial work is something that many can, and will, for relatively small pay, do.
An EA suggesting that someone who can do rare kinds of labor should do those, and leave the common kinds of labor to those who are only capable of that much, seems reasonable. Both for the purposes of "you get more money" and for increasing the amount of rare labor being done in the world, which is presumably good. Snobbery doesn't have to be part of the equation.
I wouldn't insist that all historical evidence is bad. But from what I have read, an average layman does believe popular history more than they should. There's this "historical evidence on Sparta was largely written down by Sparta's political opponents" factoid that I recall of note.
"Dandymaxxing" implies a higher fixation on fashion than what I observe in the looksmaxxers who seem to be more focused on maxilla and bonesmashing.
I think you missed the part where I don't believe that it happened.
I'm starting to think that if "Christ rose from the dead" is something that historical evidence supports, despite all the other evidence to the contrary of such things being possible, then it is not that I should believe in the return of Christ more, but that I should believe in historical evidence less - including other areas of history.
Wouldn't oriental martial arts serve better then, not the one marketed as the pragmatic spec ops killer system?
They are saving lives, are they not? It's just that there are more lives to be saved every minute.
Suppose we go by size - Sol is on the medium-small side as stars go.
You know that "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" is about something a person can't do, right?
Having any non-Sol star within your grasp is obviously cooler than just Sol.
It's a face that has just about no "beauty", but I wouldn't call it ugly. It's not deformed or anything, just a stereotypical testosterone gopnik face. It has the nobility of a well-formed specimen.
Should also consider that the picture was probably taken in the context where threateningly mugging at the camera is appropriate.
If I have the energy efficiency to disassemble the Earth, why would I bother with a Dyson sphere?
I do not recall any country where suffering from psychosis deprives someone from voting rights.
If you want to argue that giving the same vote to someone who isn't criminally responsible in the same way is unjust, then you could argue that.
More cynical people say both are also purchased in the girlfriend case. But the underlying motivation and emotions differ, and the client knows they differ, and some get off on it not unlike the men who prefer a conventional girlfriend to the one who takes pay by the hour.
Don't you also see the difference between a real girlfriend and a purchased Girlfriend Experience?
(What's D1? Google and deepseek fail me.)
The EULA wand glitch however was the true defeat, as the last soul fragment lived inside Voldemort, so it was the final destruction of his soul.
I still don't see it, no. At that point, Voldemort was mortal and having EULA glitches was not a requirement, just a convenient excuse to let the MC easily kill him without extra casualties and having to set up whatever all the other Elder Wand-wielder-victors did to kill Elder Wand wielders. Voldemort relied on his immortality and infamy more than raw magical power. Once he was in the middle of Hogwarts, surrounded by his enemies, no longer immortal and suffered a massive aura loss, defeating him in combat was just the wrapup.
The snake was chronologically killed last but Harry had set it up by telling Neville to do it. It was also not the most narratively significant one, it didn't require sacrifice, just plain old Gryffindor sword, like other horcruxes before.
It is one of the most anticlimactic defeats out there
Well, yeah, because that wasn't Voldemort's defeat, that was just taking him out. The climactic defeat was when Harry sacrificed himself (as far as he knew) to destroy the final horcrux keeping Voldemort invincible. (Technically not the final one chronologically but narratively it was.)

Isn't MIRI effectively a rock with the words "don't build the AI [that takes over the world]" on it? I don't recall them building anything. By those standards I'm an AI organization too.
More options
Context Copy link