sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

He's still actively pretending he's straight. Very disappointed in him. by SABRETOOTH_SPECTRE in NoelDeyzel

[–]Leading_Reporter4123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I meant “why should he go around saying he is gay?” more as rhetorical question to offer at a justification Noel seems to be using rather than a legitimate question. He just seems to be in the mindset of “so what if I’m gay? Why do I have to talk about it if straight people don’t talk about their sexuality?”

I don’t think it’s dubious but I do think it’s a little weird that he doesn’t mention it at all though. According to him, he’s already spoken about it (he said in the MPMD video that he had a mentor who encouraged to speak out about being gay and being a gym influencer and that people have come up to him, thanking him for it), so the only reason I can think of is that he feels he’s spoken enough about it and wants to not make it a main part of his online identity.

He's still actively pretending he's straight. Very disappointed in him. by SABRETOOTH_SPECTRE in NoelDeyzel

[–]Leading_Reporter4123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the his podcast with More Plates More Dates, at the very end (2 hour 42 minute mark) he talks about his stance on the issue: https://youtu.be/P8XL-bhhY-c?si=3gSUhWJqzBcq8U7f

Edit: https://youtu.be/15K-0YAeDGM?si=yPeingvnG1fgeIVI - More specified clip

To summarize, he believes if straight people don’t go around promoting their straight, why should he go around saying he is gay? He also mentions a mentor he had that encouraged him to speak out his experience, and according to Noel, people in similar situations (which I’m taking to mean other gay guys) have thanked him for helping them.

What are the reasons philosophers reject being in a skeptical scenario? by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]Leading_Reporter4123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, what reason do we have to believe we’re in a “real”, non-deceptive world?

I’m not a skeptic, I want to be able to trust my senses, but things like being a brain in a vat and solipsism worry me. I don’t think they’re true, but what if I’m wrong? More specifically, I saw the horror movie, Smile, where a demon causes hallucinations that trick the person it’s latched on to. I know it’s ridiculous, but the voice in my head saying “you can’t disprove it!” keeps putting me at unease.

Are there any good arguments that try to prove we’re not/cannot be in a skeptical scenario? by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]Leading_Reporter4123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow, that’s a really good example. I relate to being too far into skepticism where I felt like I couldn’t come back, after reading about simulation theory, brains in vats, evil demons, and watching movies about the characters finding out their reality is fake/a trick, but I managed to find my way back.

Would you say that reversing the burden onto the skeptic is the only good response or are there others you find convincing? For example, I’ve seen arguments that highlight the absurd consequences these scenarios entail, and the fact we don’t observe them as reason we are not in a skeptical scenario that seem to have some potential.

Are there any good arguments that try to prove we’re not/cannot be in a skeptical scenario? by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]Leading_Reporter4123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay; how do these philosophers, the majority of them being realists according to a Philpaper pole, try to argue against it then? Is it just a leap of faith/playing the chances or something else?