Lejend's little corner

This is for discussions about news, politics, sports, other games, culture, philosophy etc.
User avatar
Latvia harcha
Gendarme
Posts: 5136
Joined: Jul 2, 2015
ESO: hatamoto_samurai

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by harcha »

lejend wrote:
26 Jul 2022, 22:01
harcha wrote:
26 Jul 2022, 07:07
Show hidden quotes
That is very of you
Goofy comment, especially coming from someone whose country's racial demographics are every neo-Nazi's wet dream.

33% of American Christians are non-white, including over 50% of Christians under the age of 30. Meanwhile in Latvia:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Bonus

http://espritdecorps.ca/perspectives-1/ ... e-minister

HITLER'S FOOT SOLDIERS: Latvia's Nazis are the pride of the country, says defence minister
Each March, despite condemnation from countries around the world including Canada, a parade is held in Riga to honour the members of the Latvian SS divisions which fought for the Nazis in the Second World War. Some in the parade this year – one of the largest in recent times – wore swastikas and other Nazi insignias.

But it was in September when the Latvian government further solidified its official support for Hitler’s loyal foot soldiers. “Latvian legionnaires are the pride of the Latvian people and of the state,” said the country’s Minister of Defence Artis Pabriks. “We will honor the memory of the fallen legionnaires, and we will not allow anyone to discredit their memory.”

“It is our duty to honour these Latvian patriots from the depths of our soul,” he added.

Pabriks’ comments drew immediate condemnation from Jewish groups.
I don't get your point. It is no secret that I live in one of the whitest places. Are you saying that we should have brought in slaves when we could have? Don't worry, we had plenty of serfdom as it was.

Or are you saying that I am not allowed to make observations? That wouldn't be very freedom-loving of you.
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

harcha wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 07:01
lejend wrote:
26 Jul 2022, 22:01
Show hidden quotes
Goofy comment, especially coming from someone whose country's racial demographics are every neo-Nazi's wet dream.

33% of American Christians are non-white, including over 50% of Christians under the age of 30. Meanwhile in Latvia:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Bonus

http://espritdecorps.ca/perspectives-1/ ... e-minister

HITLER'S FOOT SOLDIERS: Latvia's Nazis are the pride of the country, says defence minister
Each March, despite condemnation from countries around the world including Canada, a parade is held in Riga to honour the members of the Latvian SS divisions which fought for the Nazis in the Second World War. Some in the parade this year – one of the largest in recent times – wore swastikas and other Nazi insignias.

But it was in September when the Latvian government further solidified its official support for Hitler’s loyal foot soldiers. “Latvian legionnaires are the pride of the Latvian people and of the state,” said the country’s Minister of Defence Artis Pabriks. “We will honor the memory of the fallen legionnaires, and we will not allow anyone to discredit their memory.”

“It is our duty to honour these Latvian patriots from the depths of our soul,” he added.

Pabriks’ comments drew immediate condemnation from Jewish groups.
I don't get your point. It is no secret that I live in one of the whitest places. Are you saying that we should have brought in slaves when we could have? Don't worry, we had plenty of serfdom as it was.

Or are you saying that I am not allowed to make observations? That wouldn't be very freedom-loving of you.
"American Christians are Nazis" is just goofy slander though, not an observation.

Please explain how a group that's currently 33% non-white, and projected to be over 50% non-white in the near future, are "Nazis."
User avatar
Latvia harcha
Gendarme
Posts: 5136
Joined: Jul 2, 2015
ESO: hatamoto_samurai

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by harcha »

lejend wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 17:12
"American Christians are Nazis" is just goofy slander though, not an observation.
I was just referring to the horse guys post.

lejend wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 17:12
Please explain how a group that's currently 33% non-white, and projected to be over 50% non-white in the near future, are "Nazis."
You don't have to be white to be a "nazi". But that's neither here nor there because I didn't claim that American Christians are Nazis, it's just my observation that the religious zealots seem to align with fascists a bit too often.
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

harcha wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 18:15
lejend wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 17:12
"American Christians are Nazis" is just goofy slander though, not an observation.
I was just referring to the horse guys post.

lejend wrote:
27 Jul 2022, 17:12
Please explain how a group that's currently 33% non-white, and projected to be over 50% non-white in the near future, are "Nazis."
You don't have to be white to be a "nazi". But that's neither here nor there because I didn't claim that American Christians are Nazis, it's just my observation that the religious zealots seem to align with fascists a bit too often.
Well, everyone has religious beliefs, and everyone is zealous -- for their own religion. But if by "religion" you're only thinking of Christianity, I'm pretty sure the sort of "religious" people who buy into fascism tend to have a primarily tribal or instrumental view of religion, so they're hardly "zealous" believers in that regard.
Rainbow Land callentournies
Howdah
Posts: 1676
Joined: May 6, 2021
ESO: esuck

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by callentournies »

im tired
If I were a petal
And plucked, or moth, plucked
From flowers or pollen froth
To wither on a young child’s
Display. Fetch
Me a ribbon, they, all dead
Things scream.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

callentournies wrote:
28 Jul 2022, 00:02
im tired
Isaiah 40 wrote:28 Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The Lord is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.

29 He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak.

30 Even youths grow tired and weary,
and young men stumble and fall;

31 but those who hope in the Lord
will renew their strength.
They will soar on wings like eagles;
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not be faint.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »



Rainbow Land callentournies
Howdah
Posts: 1676
Joined: May 6, 2021
ESO: esuck

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by callentournies »

Jesus Christ
If I were a petal
And plucked, or moth, plucked
From flowers or pollen froth
To wither on a young child’s
Display. Fetch
Me a ribbon, they, all dead
Things scream.
User avatar
Argentina Jotunir
Howdah
Posts: 1367
Joined: Mar 31, 2020
Location: Argentina

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Jotunir »

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

Jotunir wrote:
30 Jul 2022, 20:49
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
Epicurus likely never said that.

The mysterious case of the totally bogus Epicurus quote

It's a poor argument in any case.
The reason that the argument from evil logically breaks down is that the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil” can be defeated simply by denying it in favor of the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil without sufficient justification.” Then the argument from evil turns on whether or not God has sufficient justification for permitting the evil that He does permit. So the argument from evil requires that the following premise be established: “An all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God would not permit the amount of evil that actually does exist in the world.”

It should be obvious with a moment’s reflection that, in order to establish this needed premise to be true, one would have to be in a position to evaluate the actions of an all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God. One would, that is, have to be oneself both all-good and omniscient. And any argument that stands on a premise that requires omniscience and omnibenevolence to support it is going to fail. All the argument from evil can do is attempt to elicit an emotional agreement to this premise, that it can no way establish to be true except on the basis of “feeling” it to be so.

But of course many Christians and other theists “feel” that God exists, so the atheist cannot allow premises to be established on the basis of feelings.
User avatar
Argentina Jotunir
Howdah
Posts: 1367
Joined: Mar 31, 2020
Location: Argentina

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Jotunir »

lejend wrote:
31 Jul 2022, 05:19
Jotunir wrote:
30 Jul 2022, 20:49
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
Epicurus likely never said that.

The mysterious case of the totally bogus Epicurus quote

It's a poor argument in any case.
The reason that the argument from evil logically breaks down is that the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil” can be defeated simply by denying it in favor of the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil without sufficient justification.” Then the argument from evil turns on whether or not God has sufficient justification for permitting the evil that He does permit. So the argument from evil requires that the following premise be established: “An all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God would not permit the amount of evil that actually does exist in the world.”

It should be obvious with a moment’s reflection that, in order to establish this needed premise to be true, one would have to be in a position to evaluate the actions of an all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God. One would, that is, have to be oneself both all-good and omniscient. And any argument that stands on a premise that requires omniscience and omnibenevolence to support it is going to fail. All the argument from evil can do is attempt to elicit an emotional agreement to this premise, that it can no way establish to be true except on the basis of “feeling” it to be so.

But of course many Christians and other theists “feel” that God exists, so the atheist cannot allow premises to be established on the basis of feelings.
I was hoping for a better answer than you can't judge god if you are not god. An argument about free will and sin or rewarding people in heaven for their suffering on earth.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

Jotunir wrote:
31 Jul 2022, 12:40
lejend wrote:
31 Jul 2022, 05:19
Jotunir wrote:
30 Jul 2022, 20:49
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” – Epicurus
Epicurus likely never said that.

The mysterious case of the totally bogus Epicurus quote

It's a poor argument in any case.
The reason that the argument from evil logically breaks down is that the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil” can be defeated simply by denying it in favor of the premise “An all-good God would not permit evil without sufficient justification.” Then the argument from evil turns on whether or not God has sufficient justification for permitting the evil that He does permit. So the argument from evil requires that the following premise be established: “An all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God would not permit the amount of evil that actually does exist in the world.”

It should be obvious with a moment’s reflection that, in order to establish this needed premise to be true, one would have to be in a position to evaluate the actions of an all-good, omniscient, omnipotent God. One would, that is, have to be oneself both all-good and omniscient. And any argument that stands on a premise that requires omniscience and omnibenevolence to support it is going to fail. All the argument from evil can do is attempt to elicit an emotional agreement to this premise, that it can no way establish to be true except on the basis of “feeling” it to be so.

But of course many Christians and other theists “feel” that God exists, so the atheist cannot allow premises to be established on the basis of feelings.
I was hoping for a better answer than you can't judge god if you are not god. An argument about free will and sin or rewarding people in heaven for their suffering on earth.
That a person can't judge God without being in an epistemic position to do so may not be an answer you like, but it's a perfectly valid defeater for the "argument from evil."

One could also point out that an atheist has no moral basis on which to condemn anything as "evil" at all, since if there are no objective moral truths then "good" and "evil" are ultimately meaningless categories.
User avatar
Great Britain Horsemen
Jaeger
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sep 24, 2018

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Horsemen »

Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
User avatar
Latvia harcha
Gendarme
Posts: 5136
Joined: Jul 2, 2015
ESO: hatamoto_samurai

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by harcha »

lejend wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 00:04
That a person can't judge God without being in an epistemic position to do so may not be an answer you like, but it's a perfectly valid defeater for the "argument from evil."

One could also point out that an atheist has no moral basis on which to condemn anything as "evil" at all, since if there are no objective moral truths then "good" and "evil" are ultimately meaningless categories.
If you think that without god people would lose their guiding morals, then you are the one that is morally bankrupt looking for external fulfillment.
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Dolan »

Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 05:52
Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
Giving moral laws an otherworldly allure makes them look just as factual and given as the speed of light.
If moral facts were left up to human scrutiny then they would have the fate of every ideology ever: debated, doubted, argued against or for, splitting people into schools of thought.
But if they're presented as coming from the supernatural realm, they're not reducible to sense-making human thought, they become facts.
And that gives them an appeal of permanence, a promise of deliverance from the desperate state of an ever-changing world.
If the inevitability of a horrible fate makes people dread (death), the inevitability of a good fate guaranteed by timeless moral laws can make people euphoric they can escape the ever-changing Heraclitean river of being.
There's a lifeline in that river they can hold on to and escape the destruction and loss of their self.
People place their hopes for salvation in what does not come from their reason, but from something that is not familiar and is out of their control.
User avatar
Great Britain Horsemen
Jaeger
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sep 24, 2018

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Horsemen »

Dolan wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 07:56
Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 05:52
Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
Giving moral laws an otherworldly allure makes them look just as factual and given as the speed of light.
If moral facts were left up to human scrutiny then they would have the fate of every ideology ever: debated, doubted, argued against or for, splitting people into schools of thought.
But if they're presented as coming from the supernatural realm, they're not reducible to sense-making human thought, they become facts.
And that gives them an appeal of permanence, a promise of deliverance from the desperate state of an ever-changing world.
If the inevitability of a horrible fate makes people dread (death), the inevitability of a good fate guaranteed by timeless moral laws can make people euphoric they can escape the ever-changing Heraclitean river of being.
There's a lifeline in that river they can hold on to and escape the destruction and loss of their self.
People place their hopes for salvation in what does not come from their reason, but from something that is not familiar and is out of their control.
didn't answer my question lol
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Dolan »

Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 19:56
Dolan wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 07:56
Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 05:52
Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
Giving moral laws an otherworldly allure makes them look just as factual and given as the speed of light.
If moral facts were left up to human scrutiny then they would have the fate of every ideology ever: debated, doubted, argued against or for, splitting people into schools of thought.
But if they're presented as coming from the supernatural realm, they're not reducible to sense-making human thought, they become facts.
And that gives them an appeal of permanence, a promise of deliverance from the desperate state of an ever-changing world.
If the inevitability of a horrible fate makes people dread (death), the inevitability of a good fate guaranteed by timeless moral laws can make people euphoric they can escape the ever-changing Heraclitean river of being.
There's a lifeline in that river they can hold on to and escape the destruction and loss of their self.
People place their hopes for salvation in what does not come from their reason, but from something that is not familiar and is out of their control.
didn't answer my question lol
I think it did but maybe not in the terms you were looking for. What would "objective moral truth" even mean outside of a theist worldview.
Tbh it seems a question more focused on language and applying science concepts to a domain like moral thought that is inherently dependent on worldviews.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Does anyone here unironically think Jesus literally walked on water and, if so, explain to me how you think that went down
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Dolan »

fightinfrenchman wrote:
02 Aug 2022, 03:05
Does anyone here unironically think Jesus literally walked on water and, if so, explain to me how you think that went down
Yeah. They used plexiglass
User avatar
Argentina Jotunir
Howdah
Posts: 1367
Joined: Mar 31, 2020
Location: Argentina

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Jotunir »

fightinfrenchman wrote:
02 Aug 2022, 03:05
Does anyone here unironically think Jesus literally walked on water and, if so, explain to me how you think that went down
If He's so Smart, How Come He's Dead?
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 05:52
Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
You don't. The question isn't whether an atheist can perceive objective moral truths, but whether an atheistic worldview can rationally account for the existence of such truths. Without recognition of an objective moral law-giver, an atheist could believe in the existence of objective moral laws, but he'd have no rational warrant for this belief.

No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by lejend »

Dolan wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 07:56
If the inevitability of a horrible fate makes people dread (death), the inevitability of a good fate guaranteed by timeless moral laws can make people euphoric they can escape the ever-changing Heraclitean river of being.

There's a lifeline in that river they can hold on to and escape the destruction and loss of their self.

People place their hopes for salvation in what does not come from their reason, but from something that is not familiar and is out of their control.
Why do atheists talk like a JRPG final boss delivering his last monologue

Image

Image
Rainbow Land callentournies
Howdah
Posts: 1676
Joined: May 6, 2021
ESO: esuck

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by callentournies »

Because everyone’s making meaning in different ways and being is weird.

There’s a lot of good in that way of making meaning and I like it, but all the good gets left out and all the bad gets imposed onto others, manifested in America over a large area. It’s no wonder it tastes sour, and sourer.

If being cringe is a disqualifier for a belief I’ve got bad news for you.
If I were a petal
And plucked, or moth, plucked
From flowers or pollen froth
To wither on a young child’s
Display. Fetch
Me a ribbon, they, all dead
Things scream.
User avatar
Argentina Jotunir
Howdah
Posts: 1367
Joined: Mar 31, 2020
Location: Argentina

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Jotunir »

@lejend I am an Agnostic, not an Atheist.
"A man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe." — Thomas Henry Huxley
A hypothesis with no supporting, objective, testable evidence is not an objective, scientific claim. As such, there would be no way to test said hypotheses, leaving the results inconclusive.
As for morality, it does not rely on religion. "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death." — Albert Einstein
User avatar
Great Britain Horsemen
Jaeger
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sep 24, 2018

Re: Lejend's little corner

Post by Horsemen »

lejend wrote:
03 Aug 2022, 14:57
Horsemen wrote:
01 Aug 2022, 05:52
Why do I need to be a theist to perceive objective moral truths? An atheist could perceive other types of objective truth, so what is so special about moral truths? If I relied on religious belief for my moral compass, wouldn’t that make moral truths subjective?
You don't. The question isn't whether an atheist can perceive objective moral truths, but whether an atheistic worldview can rationally account for the existence of such truths. Without recognition of an objective moral law-giver, an atheist could believe in the existence of objective moral laws, but he'd have no rational warrant for this belief.

Why wouldn't an atheist have a rationale to account for objective moral truths? Do atheists need a rationale to account for other types of objective truths? What makes moral truths so special?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV