@sun_the_second's banner p

sun_the_second

could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC 

				
User ID: 2725


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
sun_the_second


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server

				
				
				

				

					0 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2023 October 31 11:26:45 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 2725


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					All
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Christian Soteriology
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


You are going to evoke concepts such as "good" or "truth" knowing it has no stable grounding and that tomorrow it can completely invert.




I will, while you invoke them not knowing that tomorrow they can completely invert.




Justification is not subjective, it is normative otherwise I can just say that Conan's response to question of what is good in life in form of "Crush your enemies, drive them before you and listen to lamentation of their women" is "justified" by his subjective perception of "philosophical concepts". So it then at least two of the criteria of Justified True Belief are met, and since truth is also subjective, Conan's moral prerogative counts as Justified True Belief as well in this insane system. It is "his Truth" in postmodern sense. Your subjective relativistic worldview completely vacates any possibility of truth, goodness and even possibility of any debate . *It's Conan's truth bro, he justifies it by his subjective experience of philosophical and moral concepts just like you, leave him be".




Debate is when you try to convince Conan that he doesn't see everything there is and so his "good" will eventually lead to his "bad". Such as, for example, positing that there is an entity that he couldn't possibly see whose good alings with your good more than his, which is capable of inflicting arbitrarily high punishment on Conan for diverting.


When that debate fails, people go secular and shoot Conan dead.




Or I can say that my philosophical concepts are "justified" because of "sbd sfnwefg esfdge".




This is exactly what you're saying when you say "God". "My philosophical concepts are justified because I say so".




I do not suffer from your problem




I do not suffer either, because just like you, I'm perfectly capable of telling myself "actually my beliefs do have grounding". As long as you're convinced that there is no point in looking for any common ground unless it is on your Christian terms, I do not see the point of saying more.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Christian Soteriology
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
At the end of the day no amount of constructing philosophical concepts like God and declaring that it is that concept alone that provides meaning will actually change anything. I will continue to act as if my actions hold meaning despite no materialistic evidence to it (I never said I am a materialist).


You seem to believe that I need some objective philosophical justification. Untrue: I only need a subjective philosophical justification. That's all I have, and furthermore that's all you have, because your perception of so-called objective philosophical concepts is itself subjective. Who knows, maybe you're the one who lives in the Matrix and what you believe and remember about the Christian God's goodness changes on the daily.


(Why was it the Christian God again, specifically?)


Needless to say, whether you or I live in the Matrix or the Boltzmann brains or whatever perfect illusion you conceive would have absolutely no, zero, nada bearing on what we believe and do. Suppose I even admitted that some sort of objective morality must conceptually exist. It would change nothing because there is no basis on accepting any religion as the true source of that objective morality. For all we know, God wants us to do the complete opposite of what you believe God wants us to do.


You claim God is the only possible basis for truth, yet who said that truth has any relation to the world around us? You claim God is what gives life purpose, yet who said that this purpose needs to be benevolent? What exactly would be the point of having a purpose if that purpose is, for example, to suffer in confusion.




Oh really? Were you there 2000 year ago as some elf from Tolkien story?




Don't tell me that you can't tell the difference between me having been there and the kind of thinking being similar.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Christian Soteriology
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


You do not have any grounding for epistemology either.




I have the same grounding as yours: my senses and reason. These are not perfect. You talk about a human not having the capacity to judge God, but your positive claims about God are no less hubristic than Job's attempt to judge God. Your claims of objective morality are unfounded.




Guess what, what is obvious to you is completely alien to somebody else such as saying that of course my sense of morality is based partly on meat desires.




Do not pretend that "knowing true things is good, believing in false things is bad" is something that wouldn't be obvious to you even without any religious indoctrination. You don't need God to not walk into traffic, assured that the traffic isn't there.




You are a nihilist, your declaration of something being good has the same meaning as writing "safbdsnbdsv a,fmbdsf sdfd" - an equally arbitrary and meaningless statement.




You would not be replying if what I was saying was random noise. You act as if informational value below 1 is the same as zero.




So stop appropriating moral language of Christianity that actually at least allows for objective morality to exist in its paradigm and pressuposition.




The kind of morality I am employing predates Christianity and operates closer to reality. Rich of you to forbid me to use maths because your version of maths allows division by zero.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Christian Soteriology
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Knowing what you know and what you don't know correctly generally turns out better for you (in a very self-obvious way that you'd have to be deliberately obtuse to not understand), if you haven't arrived to that conclusion in life I don't have anything else to tell you. By the time you're an adult, you're supposed to figure that one out rather than relying on "because I said so" from your parents.


Of course my sense of morality is based partly on meat desires and partly on post-Christian values instilled in childhood, I am not going to pretend that these are any less arbitrary than they are. Meanwhile your sense of morality is not going to become less arbitrary no matter how long you plug your ears and chant "I believe in Jesus Christ the King and Saviour".


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Christian Soteriology
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Do you have a better answer to it?




The better answer is to admit you don't have objective morality rather than writing a book that says "this is the objective truth, trust" and deriving secondhand moral authority from it, i.e. sparkling personal preference.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I do not see a lot of typical victims in power. In mainstream perhaps, there are more. Those who get in power are, as the other guy noted, still the bully type, even if not the locker-showing jock type.


If you're thinking of the modal trans activist moderator, he wouldn't be bullied into insignificance, he'd just adapt to grow up into a duckspeak comissar of some other ideology.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Also:




Reagan made a counteroffer: not doing any of that. And if Hell used any nuclear weapons, he would nuke the whole world, destroying all human life. Thamiel’s goal, he said, was to corrupt humanity and make them suffer. Piss off the Untied States, and they would knock humanity beyond all corruptability and pain forever. Some would go to Hell, others to Heaven, and that would be the end of that for all time. Mutually assured destruction was the only way that anyone had ever prevented nuclear war, and sometimes that meant threatening something terrible in the hopes that your enemy didn’t want it either. Reagan gambled everything on the idea that the Devil didn’t want a final end to all sin.




				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
No one would be able to use the word "replaced" like it's something evil and vile if they didn't imply that the removal of whites to be later replaced is deliberate and done by the same actors.


So I don't ask you to disbelieve anything, I just want you to speak plainly. If you wish to have a white people (well, "heritage american") guild like they had craftsmen guilds in the past and still have unions in some areas of labor, so that the white people can go on strike whenever they want and can't be replaced with scabs, you can say so.


And more generally, if you really believe there's going to be an annihilation race war and it's going to be initiated by the non-whites I would like to see an actual outline of what you think is going to happen, because so far it looks like vague scaremongering as justification for enacting a white-initiated annihilation race war.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
"Reproduction suppressed economically" is an argument I'm used to hearing from the permanent adolescents who do not dare to have even one child until they are 40, paid mortgage on a house and have college funds.


What is this economic curse that makes whites so poor they objectively can't maintain a TFR of 2.1?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Friday Fun Thread for October 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I've played it. The puzzle part is great, but at some point, the roguelike walking around the estate part starts to hobble the appeal. I gave up on it somewhere at 70-75% total completion, after realizing how much busywork coaxing out the next set of clues was going to take.


If you don't mind parts where you know what to do, but actually doing it requires getting the correct rooms with RNG even with all the RNG mitigation available, taking an hour or more just to set up, then you're going to love it. As it stands, I merely liked it.


There's like... I don't think it's a spoiler, but there's a library room, and suppose you want to read a particular book. Tough luck, you have to check it out on a library form first, and then you get to read it the next time you roll a library, which is normally only in the next run at the soonest.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I can take an educated guess that it's not so. I can't know if there is a Heaven, or Hell, or no Heaven and 9999 layers of Hell, either.


"Souls exist in a substantial enough way to experience things while lacking a body" is, of course, yet another argument against being particularly fearful of nonexistence.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Aren't Christians supposed to get the world to chug along until at least the Second Coming before letting it explode?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The cryonics bulls suggest that my consciousness effectively dies every time I sleep because yadda yadda brain activity halts, yet I don't notice, so why not halt it with cryonics?


The cryonics bulls also suggest that it does not matter if specific atoms are destroyed, because there's no such thing as specific atoms in physics.


If I don't believe the cryonics bulls on either of those two topics, then it is useless to bother with cryonics, since either way it will kill the person that I am only to spark another very similar one in the future (maybe, if the cryovat foundation does not go bust and the technology to revive arises).


If I do believe the cryonics bulls on those two topics, then they are not needed because my consciousness is as immortal as any particular maths concept, and can stop existing no more than the decimal number 25925893 can stop existing. It might be unlikely to be instantiated on Earth again without preserving the particular body, but that's not a problem for me because I will not be experiencing any time that passes while I am not instantiated.


The only problem here is that the multiverse might be finite in time, but this frankly sounds paradoxical to me.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
If the consciousness is stored in the balls maths as Yud seems to believe and the specific substrate or specific continuous process does not matter, why bother preserving the brain (imperfectly at that)? I can just wait while dead for the N aeons required and reincarnate wherever and whenever conditions arise for me to exist once more.


Same for the destructive upload. If anything, this would just increase my chances of existing in a dependent state of an infomorph who anyone with root access to the server can delete/fork/torture etc.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
In this case, we can write off the category of "coverup for simian greed" as useless, as all categories that include everything are, and proceed to categories that are useful for more than nihilistic grandstanding.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
What do you draw meaning from that cannot be sneeringly explained away in unflattering terms?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
My point is that it's impossible by definition to replace someone who's not gone. So "replacement" as in "the great replacement" obscures the actual causes of the original group's diminishment as rhetorically convenient.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Why did the names vanish? Are you going to claim that nonwhite crime killed all of them?


Sounds like it's more their fault for not having enough children.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 5, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Eh, must've been the wind.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It's hard to see how the checks required to avoid going supercritical are "basic", still. I don't recall any frontier company actually figuring out how to stop their agent networks from acting weird.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
"They are already big" is exactly what I had in mind and find a sufficient answer. If you have to run a race where the leader is 5 km ahead with training weights on, and you also have to put on training weights once you get within 1 km, it sounds like something that will severely slow down your ability to catch up. Maybe not for ever, but for long enough to count for the mortal leadership. And that's assuming that regulations will be otherwise impartial.


And while "we could all die" would be very unfortunate, the probability is not yet above my personal willing-to-be-Pascal-mugged threshold. Especially given that we will all die in due time unless sufficiently fast progress in medicine makes it otherwise, and frontier labs being mired in regulation sounds like the opposite of fast progress.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Why would highly morally developed people be unwilling to refuse that?


The way I see it, "would you answer a disgust-bait question to prove high decoupler credentials" is a valid read on the meta-question and a perfectly coherent high-decoupler (but not high decoupler signaling) answer is "no" or even "no, fuck off".


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You propose that the high IQ bracket is characterized by being unable to refuse answering the question?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Suppose that for once the corporations are thinking about anything besides profit and that they were in fact motivated by trying to save us from runaway AI. Does that rule out the new regulations giving them competitive advantage? Last time I checked it's not just their motives but also the tangible results that were in debate in this thread.


And obviously no one is going to find any evidence of Altman and Amodei conspiring to cartelize whether they did or not.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			
			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 28, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Usually, when a scenario can be explained by "huge corporations conspire to corner the market" I would rather look for evidence that they couldn't do that rather than that they did it. Because my first question is "why wouldn't they?".


It's not like a straightforward moat where you blatantly slam everyone below you with the regulations while avoiding them yourself. But from where I'm standing it could very well work like a moat where you slam yourself, plus a fair distance below you, which works almost just as well but gives you deniability.