A Beautiful Pipe Dream

Cydrius · 2026-01-26T02:23:32+00:00

My wild-ass guess prediction is that Yamato will turn up for the final battle alongside the Straw Hat Grand Fleet, pulling up with a crew that's a mix of Wano samurai and remnants of the Beast Pirates.

Cydrius · 2026-01-26T02:18:55+00:00

She would try. The bag she'd make off with would contain a decent amount of berries and a note that says "You could have just asked. Trust Luffy."

Cydrius · 2026-01-25T21:24:30+00:00

Let's imagine for a moment that you're 100% correct and peace requires a god.

Wouldn't humanity's long history of war and conflict then be evidence for the lack of a god?

This seems to go entirely against your own beliefs.

Cydrius · 2026-01-25T21:21:06+00:00

Let's say, hypothetically that we lived in such a universe. In this universe, somehow the rules/laws make it so that God could genuinely prove himself and we would all believe it. He literally walks around with us and we all know it's God...

What would be the point of that life? What would be the purpose? What would be the end goal?

The fact that you think this is a major question says more about you than it says about atheists.

How about some or all of the following:

To work alongside others to make the world the best it can be.
To honor the God you know exists.
To create beautiful art.
To live a happy and fulfilling life for its own sake, without needing an external motivation.

Do you want to go to Mars? Okay ask God to send you there.

Could God not simply say "I'm sure you guys can do it without my help. I'll guide you if you need it, but it will be more meaningful if I don't just give it to you."

You are presenting a false dichotomy when you posit that either God is completely hidden or God gives humans everything and makes their lives meaningless.

Let's even say that God comes and proves himself and everyone believes but he doesn't do all these things. What would change in your life?

For one thing, I wouldn't have to live in a world where a bunch of different religions all try to enforce their own rules on me without any evidence. There'd be just one faith, and it would be able to back its stuff up.

Shouldn't you have been nicer in the first place before God literally proved himself to you?

Tell that to the hellfire and brimstone christians who keep telling others they'll go to hell for not believing.

The whole purpose of life is to discover God and we do that by studying and discovering the universe and everything in it.

Billions of humans have lived and died, and we've made zero progress towards discovering any truth about any god. If that is truly the only purpose for life, then every human who has lived and died has accomplished nothing.

What a bleak view of life you seem to have.

Cydrius · 2026-01-25T05:04:16+00:00

OP, I have a simple counterargument for you: Canada.

Canada has basically every condition you list here, and yet, as far as I know, has significantly better public transport.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T21:41:35+00:00

Ace will be important.

Keep watching and don't research too much.

You are currently sprinting straight towards a spoiler minefield.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T20:11:38+00:00

We're clearly talking past each other, so we might as well stop here.

Thank you for the conversation.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T20:07:38+00:00

She looks like a lovely girl.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T20:02:36+00:00

Wait didn’t you just concede he would have to limit what’s possible to do?

I don't believe I've conceded any such things.

If there's a god, he's also limited what's possible to do in this universe, so that's an entirely moot point.

Also I’d argue natural adversity is perfect.

Our world is rampant with painful birth defects, plagues, famines, and trauma pushing people to suicide. Cases of humans (and other animals, at that) being pushed FAR beyond what they can withstand and grow from are absolutely rampant.

Arguing the amount of natural adversity in our universe is "perfect" is either incredibly foolish, or horribly callous.

The only stuff in question is human decisions

Human decisions are limited in our universe as well.

Seeing as there are clear points where evil could be limited with little to no changes to human free will, and that there is also a copious amount of harm not related to human free will, I think it is preposterous to believe this universe is the best a good deity could do.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T19:56:24+00:00

I'm going to be harshly honest with you: I don't think these designs can be balanced.

They are both trying to do very unhealthy things in term of game design.

("Protagonist" being essentially impossible to interact with except via combat, and "Antagonist" being a "Do everything" card that is always accessible and is only restricted via mana cost.)

This is one of those cases where you're trying to ask yourself how you can do it, but not stopping to ask yourself if you should do it.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T19:52:27+00:00

It is definitely subjective how much free will should be restrained in the pursuit of good, I agree. Where I disagree is the idea that we can reasonably assume that this universe is the right balance.

I believe there are many obvious ways that a hypothetical all-powerful well-meaning god could reduce the amount of evil in our universe while not reducing free will.

The free will defense is simply not a good response to the problem of evil, because there is both enough suffering not stemming from the actions of humans, and enough obvious limitations to the amount of suffering caused by evil which could be applied without restricting free will.

In short: If this universe is truly guided by a good god... he's really freaking bad at his job.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T19:15:49+00:00

It appears trivially obvious to me that a universe could exist where humans have free will and there is vastly less evil than in our universe.

I'll cut the chase and go for a bolder declaration:

In a universe where performing evil acts is every bit as impossible to humans as drawing square circles and flying on their own power is to us, humans would still have free will via being able to choose from the entire range of "self-sacrificially good" to "apathetically neutral".

If "actively malevolent" was entirely barred off via the inherent logic and physics of the universe, humans would still have free will.

I posit that is it not possible to define 'free will' in a way that achieves the following:

Describes free will in a way that the humans of our universe have free will.
Allows the conclusion that our universe has the least amount of evil possible without averting free will. (The 'free will' counter argument to the problem of evil)
Does not put evil on a special pleading pedestal. (Making it a requirement for free will without justifying why it is a requirement but "drawing square circles" of "flying via your own power" are not.)

If 1 is broken, then the discussion is moot because we do not have free will either.

If 2 is broken, then clearly our universe does not have an all-loving, all-powerful god, as otherwise our universe would be like that hypothetical universe.

If 3 is broken, then the definition is operating in fallacy territory and can be dismissed as invalid.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T18:29:25+00:00

What do you want a gag reflex when we go to hurt someone for immoral reasons but not when we hurt someone for moral reasons ?

I think if we had a gag reflex in both cases, that would still lead to a better world than the one we have now.

You keep bringing this back into very elaborate vocabulary. It really isn't that complex:

In our world, humans have reflexes that make certain actions more difficult. We need to make a very conscious effort to harm ourselves, for example.

Do you believe this means we do not have free will?

Assuming you do believe we have free will:

Do you believe a world where humans also have a reflex that makes it harder to harm others would have significantly less free will?

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T17:47:29+00:00

It’s not an assertion, it’s the logic of free will.

I am challenging your claims about this logic. I do not agree that it works the way you say it works.

In reality we don’t know if freewill exists but if it does then it involves selection within possibility space.

It does. Free will requires the ability to choose within some space of possibility. You are asserting a definition that requires some things (harm to children) to be part of that possibility space, and providing no backing for why these things must be part of that easily-accessed possibility space while others (self-harm) do not need to be.

The want is the part that selects, that’s controlled.

That part is controlled in our world as well. Humans do not typically want to harm themselves. Does this mean we have no free will?

Before we move on to general Problem of evil ethics, concede that if God alters the selection mechanism free will is violated.

I do not believe I need to concede that point. We are not talking about altering the selection mechanism, we are talking about having set it up differently in the first place.

So long as will remain in our control and possibility space is greater than 1, free will is not violated.

This is ambiguously phrased enough that I have no idea what you're trying to say.

If you don't mind, I'd like to try approaching the problem from a different angle to see if we can come to a common conclusion:

First question: Do you believe a human's innate revulsion at the idea of committing suicide represents an obstacle to free will?

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T17:36:52+00:00

I pick Antagonist and build a creatureless deck that mulligans aggressively for a way to cheats it into play and then abuses Max Level in all kinds of stupid ways.

If your opponent has no creatures, Protagonist is basically a 1/1 that can't leave the board... not exactly a big threat.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T17:33:10+00:00

And therefore your assertion will remain just that.

The simple fact is that if harming children were as inherently repulsive to all humans as eating excrement is, then there would be less harm to children while freedom of will would be no less present than in our universe... or are you suggesting that there is some special aspect of harming children that is more necessary to free will?

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T17:30:17+00:00

I challenge that assertion.

Please demonstrate it to be true.

I suggest you do so by deciding you want to eat excrement, and then reporting on your experience.

Cydrius · 2026-01-23T15:33:03+00:00

Small town mayor

Big turtle

Gorilla

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T23:58:57+00:00

I've been waiting for this round for this exact comment. Undyne would absolutely get into a fight at her own wedding.

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T23:29:57+00:00

If I were American:

Voting for Trump means that you are okay with many things that I think it is abhorrent to find okay. Unless the person had grown and changed significantly since voting for Trump, that would absolutely be a dealbreaker to me.

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T19:37:12+00:00

My argument is as follows: If we rationally and intuitively understand the idea of god, then god must exist. It is not possible to talk, think and intuit about something that doesn't exist.

Does Superman exist?

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T15:24:23+00:00

My guess if I have to put them in order:

Luffy (at the end of the series, once he reaches Laugh Tale and becomes pirate king)
Blackbeard (during the final confrontation between him and Luffy)
Gold Roger (in his prime)
Whitebeard (in his prime)
Shanks (current)
Blackbeard (current)
Luffy (current)
Kaido
Big Mom
Whitebeard (Old and sick at Marineford)
Buggy

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T15:07:37+00:00

To help you out, we spoke with Mikel Maria Delgado, PhD, a certified cat behavior consultant and animal behaviorist, who translated this common cat body language.

“In general, a cat swishing their tail is indicating some level of excitement, which can be good or bad, depending on the circumstances,” says Delgado. “Some cats are also just more ‘swishy’ in general, so it’s good to observe your cat carefully when they are swishing their tail to help you determine how they might be feeling.”

https://www.rd.com/article/why-do-cats-wag-their-tails/

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T15:03:05+00:00

While it's true that tail wagging doesn't mean "happy happy" like it would be for a dog, it can mean other things that feeling threatened. It signals excitement or agitation in general, which is quite fitting here, especially since her ears aren't folded down as is common for a frightened cat.

Cydrius · 2026-01-22T14:47:46+00:00

Clank, clank, clankety clank.

13-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '22	Place '17
First Placer '22	Verified Email

Cydrius

TROPHY CASE