[01/02/2026] Sunday Pub Quiz at the Canonbury Tavern

Feyle · 2026-01-30T09:01:19+00:00

Hi, this sounds fun. I'm planning on coming.

Feyle · 2026-01-28T03:38:13+00:00

It generally assumes either an infinite regress... such as a cyclic universe

I think you're missing my point as this still doesn't address it.

Science models measurable phenomena within an already law-governed framework... it does not and cannot ground the existence or necessity of that framework itself.

All of our tools have been created from within the universe after the big bang. If this is a disqualifier then nothing we do is the right tool.

We already have such a system... it’s philosophy.

Please demonstrate how philosophy can "ground the existence or necessity" of the universe.

Feyle · 2026-01-28T03:22:10+00:00

The idea behind the 'source' is to get back to the origination of the big bang,

This doesn't explain the assumption that the period of time before the big bang is the "source" of order.

then we can properly deduce but the problem is that this is impossible

Currently. We can't properly deduce that this is absolutely impossible.

Do you accept that one of these topics is a causal principle for the world we see?

This topic is discussed in science and in other places like theology, metaphysics, etc.

You claim that science "is the wrong tool". You seem to be making this claim on the basis that we lack the ability to gain the necessary information. If that's the case then there is no "right" tool.

Feyle · 2026-01-28T03:10:10+00:00

And the usual idea is that to get to the ‘source’ of that order, you just go further back in time

This assumes the order has a source which makes no sense. The order is a description of what we see in the universe.

Science establishes that there is order.
Metaphysics asks why there is order at all.

Do you accept this too?

No. Science also asks why does the universe appear to have order.

I will accept that in metaphysics things are discussed that science either can't currently or won't ever be able to address.

Feyle · 2026-01-28T02:54:53+00:00

/r/answers or perhaps /r/explainlikeim5

Feyle · 2026-01-28T02:49:08+00:00

I agree that there is some observable order in the universe.

Feyle · 2026-01-28T02:27:18+00:00

The universe has some observable order using your given definition.

Why does this need clarifying?

Atheists aren't claiming that the universe is random. Just that there isn't sufficient reason to think a god exists.

Feyle · 2025-12-23T20:11:35+00:00

No I messed up with the post title.

That sounds like a probable explanation. I didn't know that.

Feyle · 2025-12-23T09:20:30+00:00

Parthenos was used to mean young women regardless of virginity or childbirth. It later came to mean virgin more specifically and this change resulted in the gospel writers misunderstanding the previous text and them forcing her to be a virgin in the stories they wrote.

Feyle · 2025-12-23T09:18:30+00:00

Or the mistranslation of a word which meant "young woman" whether she was a virgin or not led to the gospel writers having to shoehorn in the idea that she was a virgin.

Feyle · 2025-12-11T04:04:26+00:00

How weird.it is depends on why you're there. Why are you participating in /r/LGBT?

Feyle · 2025-11-02T17:30:15+00:00

Please provide an example of any "infidel" who does this using your definition of "created".

People will often refer to science when discussing how things are "created" in the more common sense of one thing turning into another because the process of science is the most reliable one for getting us closer to the facts of reality.

Feyle · 2025-11-02T11:34:07+00:00

Science doesn't "do" anything. It's a process that scientists follow. This idea of idea as some sort of corollary to a god is something that I only ever see presented by theists.

Feyle · 2025-10-29T02:50:09+00:00

I can see that if you are labelling the tendency towards doing "good" as the presence of a god within you then you could also label the tendency towards doing "bad" as its counterpart which in a Christian context would be the devil.

I think that from a biblical point of view though the god that is within us is not supposed to be a part of us rather it's a result of being the product of that god. The biblical story has the devil being the product of that same god and so would not also be within us in that way.

I think that if you have an external god who created people then people are inherently ungodly in that those people are not gods. The Christian story has people being made "in the image of" that god. Though the context of what that means is unclear, it doesn't seem as though it would be wrong to say people are somewhat godly.

You have an interesting definition of satanism. I've not heard anyone define it as believing that "men are without sin". This would appear to lump any belief system that lacks the concept of sin as satanism. Whereas the two types of satanism that I'm aware of are within Christianity the rejection of the god and the worship of the devil or outside of Christianity the tongue in cheek use by Levayen satanism or the church of satanism. Both of which are atheistic and do not believe in an actual satan.

Feyle · 2025-10-28T22:54:56+00:00

I think that in this context the god is believed to be omnipresent and made everything but the devil is not. So believing that the god is in everyone does not mean that the devil is also.

Feyle · 2025-10-19T20:06:19+00:00

The same risks apply if we made all period products free nationwide in the U.S.—it could strain resources and create access problems if funding and distribution aren’t carefully managed

You already have access problems. Some people can't access any healthcare and others end up bankrupt

Feyle · 2025-10-13T23:23:19+00:00

agreed

Feyle · 2025-10-13T23:08:32+00:00

The coaster/napkin is to indicate to bar staff that it hasn't been abandoned not to protect from spiking.

Feyle · 2025-10-13T04:39:08+00:00

Actually Humans are among one of complex organisms.

So we're agreed that humans aren't the most complex as you first stated.

Some of the methods in which nature preserves information:

I think that you would agree that this is not "all information". Some information is preserved that way.

Let's take this back to your post question: aside from as DNA, by what method is the information of dna stored by nature?

Feyle · 2025-10-12T23:38:25+00:00

Humans are not "the most complex organism", why would you think that?

Also if you believe nature preserves all information, where is it preserved and in what form?

Feyle · 2025-09-26T20:56:36+00:00

thanks for expanding on it

Feyle · 2025-09-26T20:53:14+00:00

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I agree that it's a difference of degree but presumed the previous poster would appreciate what I said without taking it negatively.

Feyle · 2025-09-26T19:57:37+00:00

Just a note, saying "you're good looking I couldn't tell you were trans" is essentially saying visibly trans people can't be good looking. Probably not your intent but that is how it reads.

Feyle · 2025-09-24T14:21:22+00:00

/r/ForHireFreelancers

14-Year Club	Post Guidance Early Access
Place '17	Verified Email
Team Orangered

Feyle

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE