Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)G

galanthus

@ galanthus @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
192
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • I could say the same to you. FYI, rational does not mean "something I reckon is true".

    It is easy to just say your worldview is rational and dismiss everyone who disagree with you on that basis. Making good arguments is much more difficult, isn't it?

    Goodbye.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • You can't prove anything to be definitively true. Materialism especially.

    Your worldview is just as unporven.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • Philosophy is always based on assumptions, just because people had different assumptions and intuitions in the past, doesn't mean they are intellectually deficient in any way. If you think your intuitions are definitively true, or that you do not assume anything at all, debating or, possibly, reading philosophy might not be so pointless as you think.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • You can try to challenge spiritual thinking all you want, but you have not provided any arguments against it yet.

    If you don't want to debate philosophy, it is fine. I can't say I agree with your understanding of historical philosophers in any case, and it does eem rather pointless.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • I did say that Aristotle was a major inspiration.

    You can't think anything into existence the way Aristotle proposed.

    I am not sure what you mean by this. I have not found that in Aristotle and it is hard to imagine someone from that time saying this, seems very uncharacteristic. Feel free to clarify what you meant.

    What "evidence" are you speaking of? The experimental method was not employed by anyone then, philosophy is a speculative endeavour. There were arguments, however, and saying that Plato, Aristotle, or any other non radical materialist is somehow intellectually deficient simply shows a lack of familiarity with antique philosophy.

    Also, materialism is about as metaphysical as it gets.

    I am not sure you noticed, but no pre-modern physical ideas are currently employed, whether Epicurean or Aristotelian.

    While I disagree woth you on everything you said with regards to philosophy, I will grant you thatyou are correct and a religious experience is in a sense, a natural phenomenon. I will add, however, that while it is possible to deny the spiritual nature of such an experience(which I mentioned), it is, philosophically speaking, possible to deny any proposition, so this alone is not a refutation.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • But I am talking about religious experiences specifically, not physical phenomena.

    Also, you seem to think that when society was more religious people had beliefs about physics that were informed exclusively by religion, but this is not the case. Greek tradition of philosophy has been inherited by Christianity (which has elements of both Greek rationality and Jewish mysticism), and in the middle ages physics and other sciences were rooted in Aristotle.

    But that is hardly relevant. As I said, I am talking about religious experiences, not explanations of natural phenomena.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • When something happens, people try to explain it. So when someone has a religious experience, feels the presence of the holy spirit, talks to god or something like that, I see no reason for that person to say this is just a delusion, as opposed to interpreting this experience religiously. I would not. And I think you would not either, but who knows.

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • If you are a country with a GDP that is 1000 or 10000 times higher it will not be a problem.

  • Heaven on earth = Communism

    Jump

  • Not to the early Christians it wasn't. The early Christians movements (before they were co-opted by Empire) were radically egalitarian.

    That would be irrelevant even if it was true. We are not in the second century. It is a very controversial position either way.

    Egalitarian values certainly did emerge out of Christianity, and there was a change in that direction even then, but they were not egalitarian in the modern sense.

    Also, please be careful when generalising early Christianty, as it was a very diverse group of sects that hardly agreed on anything.

    Early religious communities sometimes were very accepting, and women played a role as well, but they still existed in a very patriarchal culture, so you should not expect their women to be equal to men in society, and there were absolutely positions of authority.

    They opposed the empire because initially, they were not perceived by anyone as a group distinct from Jews, which were very hostile to it. However, there were appeals made by powerful Christians later to be recognized as a non-threat to imperial power, and ultimately, they succeeded.

    Even so, the Jews simply wanted independence, not equality. The idea of social equality did not even exist then. They were equal in Christ, not in society.

    Christianity was not coopted by the empire, it conquered it.

    The idea that early christianity was somehow "more pure" I do not accept as well. I would say the Christian tradition has only been enriched over the years, and without a unified basic set of dogmas it would really make much sense.

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • You missed my point. Islands are irrelevant. Russia isn't.

  • What's the appropriate explanation for the supernatural (holy spirit, miracles, etc.) if there's no god?

    Jump

  • Why do you believe that your account should be preferred over theirs?

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • Your great argument has changed my mind. I now see that I was wrong. Thank you.

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • Lmao, what? Why even?

    Well, even then, these islands are not significant geopolitical actors. And tarrifs will certinly not hurt the Russian economy, and I doubt they are going to help the US in terms of geopolitics.

  • The final boss

    Jump

  • Vive le dirt!!!

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • 3 billion is nothing.

    I wonder how much the EU imports.

  • Russia Not on US Tariff List Despite Broad Global Reach | Sweden Herald

    Jump

  • Russia exports next to nothing to the US, but it does import things like electronics for obvious reasons.

    Tarrifs on Russia will be pointless, really. Russia has been trading with Europe for the most part for obvious reasons until it fell out of favour. So this seems like manufactured outrage.

  • Heaven on earth = Communism

    Jump

  • Well, it does not have an economy, so why would it have money?

    Also, it doesn't have politics and society in the conventional sense, but men are clearly subordinate to God. Christ is king, this is the way Christians think, so I am not sure this is a correct comparison.

    The question of "should Christians strive for a classless society" is a complex one. Egalitarian ideals are very new compared to Christianity, but some Christians now think that in the "fallen world" authority is undesirable as it can be abused. This is not common though.

    However, Marxism is an anti-religious ideology. Marxists both believe that religion will disappear after "the base" changes and it will become, ultimately, obsolete, and also have historically persecuted and enacted violence on Christians. So I am not surprised there are not many Marxist Christians.

  • Marine Le Pen banned from running for public office after guilty verdict

    Jump

  • Got twice as much as Jean Valjean. Absolutely hilarious.

    Someone should sens him a copy of the book. I think it will resonate with him quite a bit.

  • RESTORE THE M2 BROWNING

    Jump

  • Is this Martin Luther?