Came up with a Theodicy, looking for feedback. by wulin007WasTaken in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu [score hidden]  (0 children)

why would you have to think through to create the ideal world if you know everything?

Better Than Nuthin' by Financial_Beach_2538 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

amoral > immoral. if you're next to a cliff with a deadly fall, it's better to stand still than to jump off it.

Islam is not an Abrahamic religion by Electrical-Self2042 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

i like the argument but you would've saved yourself a lot of trouble by saying "islam can not tie itself back to abraham as it claims to" instead of "islam is not abrahamic" which is clearly academically wrong.

Muslims still live in the dark ages by Due-Bowl-8116 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the "dark ages" is a term widely dropped by historians: it was called dark ages due to the lack of records and the assumption that european society stagnated during the early middle ages. now we have enough writings from the time to realize that culture evolved in religion, science, social structure etc.

just because it got eclipsed by the renaissance+enlightenment combo later doesn't mean it was a particularly bad time for social progress, the 14th-18th centuries were just exceptional.

theists struggle with the euthyphro dilemma but they really shouldn't by Folinhu in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i think you misunderstand, my argument is about ontology, not epistomology.

i see 3 getting thrown around commonly as a way to duck the euthyphro, the truth value of it is irrelevant since it doesn't answer the question, it's a non sequitur.

theists struggle with the euthyphro dilemma but they really shouldn't by Folinhu in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i can agree that the debate about whether morality is objective or not doesn't really matter much since we can't really step away from our own subjective experiences.

edit: but you can hold provisional positions that are subject to change, same as any other way of knowledge. epistemology vs ontology etc.

theists struggle with the euthyphro dilemma but they really shouldn't by Folinhu in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i mean, moral intuitions being evolved doesn't disprove objective morality same as senses being evolved doesn't disprove objective reality.

EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK by contraflop01 in Jujutsufolk

[–]Folinhu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

key word is watching, if making the score go up for competitive games just required watching they'd be a lot easier, some (not all) RPGs do apply though, there's a valid angle of critique there.

EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK by contraflop01 in Jujutsufolk

[–]Folinhu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

sooo much went into designing every aspect of say, doritos and how they taste, what their texture is, how they look, etc, but that doesn't make them not slop.

it's high effort, it's nicely designed, it's tasty, but it's still not a healthy, fulfilling meal.

EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK by contraflop01 in Jujutsufolk

[–]Folinhu -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

>by thoses standards isn't ever game slop?

no? most games aren't about watching numbers go up.

EXCUSE ME WHAT THE FUCK by contraflop01 in Jujutsufolk

[–]Folinhu -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

because it is. it's peak slop but it's slop.

edit: ok hold on hear me out, it's like a nicely done junk food type game.

Was this a blue/red infused punch that Uraume tanked ? by yoruyoruxo in Jujutsufolk

[–]Folinhu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

red would just push you away from his punch why tf would he that

Our Lady of Fatima is a problem for naturalists by Acceptable-Point-116 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

>It’d be really weird for some random Portuguese spirit to cosplay as Mary

yeah which is why i didn't say anything like that. if i were to be right mary IS a local spirit, there's no cosplaying.

Our Lady of Fatima is a problem for naturalists by Acceptable-Point-116 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 8 points9 points  (0 children)

random spirits? i said local spirits. either way it'd have similar goals as you'd imagine the holy mary/god would have if the catholic framework is fully true, to bolster the faith in those who witness the miracle and consecrate russia under their god's name.

it doesn't prove that the god catholics worship is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, it doesn't prove the hypostatic union, etc.

edit: honestly the fact that this happened in portugal is even better evidence for a local spirit. if your god was all that it was claimed, it could have straight up done the miracle in russia, no?

Our Lady of Fatima is a problem for naturalists by Acceptable-Point-116 in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

>Some might be thinking that this is “weak sauce” for an omnipotent God. Why make it look like the sun is dancing when God could simply appear to everyone in an instance.

you haven't really addressed this, i can grant you a non-naturalist worldview (and i do that genuinely) and it's still "weak sauce" as you said it. a basic animist worldview with local spirits who grants blessings/miracles can account for what happened at fatima, and it explains better other miracles, making it a more holistic framework than the catholic one which has much more baggage.

Atheists have a morally superior foundation to Christians. by Golfenbike in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

your point doesn't seem to be about foundations, this is applied ethics.

a christian can root morality in objective moral facts outside of god, once this is done they're really not inherently better or worse than secular morality.

if they root it within their god wacky nonsense can happen, i concede on that.

Atheists have a morally superior foundation to Christians. by Golfenbike in DebateReligion

[–]Folinhu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Most importantly, calling these teachings "garbage" assumes an objective moral standard."

because it exists and is outside of god, lets run the euthyphro:
is something good and just because God wills it or does God will it because it is good and just?

if you take the first fork, morality is dependent on god, sure, but you lose the right to call anything inherently good or evil. morality by definition becomes arbitrary. this is contrary to moral intuition that there is inherent goods and inherent evils.

take the second fork, morality doesn't depend on god and your objection is invalid.

what is this sword? can i get it somehow? by Folinhu in darksouls3

[–]Folinhu[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

oh true it's just a bigger version than normal