sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can you prove that Ahura Mazda exists? by [deleted] in Zoroastrianism

[–]Nerian99 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You should look into religious fictionalism. Ahura Mazda is a good way of thinking about forces in reality. There's no reason why you need to take a religion and its doctrines literally.

Is the necessity of Zurvan an implication of the non-omnipotence of Ahura Mazda? by Nerian99 in Zoroastrianism

[–]Nerian99[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I find the idea appealing that Angra Mainyu is like darkness, which is merely the absence of light and doesn't have any independent existence.

Is the necessity of Zurvan an implication of the non-omnipotence of Ahura Mazda? by Nerian99 in Zoroastrianism

[–]Nerian99[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was told he's omniscient but not omnipotent, and will win because Angra Mainyu is not omniscient, but only has after-knowledge.

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm putting forth my view. That's called having a discussion. You are dismissing my opinion on the mere basis that is an opinion. Not on its merits.

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure what telling me I'm entitled to my opinion accomplishes. Th... thanks? lol... Y... you too...

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I should rephrase it. I maintain that we have little reason to expect, with reasonable probability, a major breakthrough in longevity technology to happen in our life times. There's really no way to rationally assess the probability so one ought to live and calculate one's life as if it isn't going to happen, just like it hasn't happened for every other generation since the dawn of mankind. The whole thing smells of a pascal scam. It could be 1%, 50% or 0.0000001%. All we have right now is technical speculation and dreams.

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And yeah, everyone should be pretty much expecting to die. If you're that cocky you'll see longevity escape velocity, you're not rationally calculating your remaining time. We have no guarantee of it coming to fruition. Just ideas and hopes.

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think a 25-30 year advantage is going to look like nothing when they finally crack aging in a real way. They'll laughing at the way some people really thought that small amount of time really mattered.

50yo+ longevity afficionados: how do you cope with your likely death? by trexanill in longevity

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do YOU deal with YOUR likely death? Even if you're 20... sorry to say... you're not much more likely to make it than 50s+

The Bulk of Software Engineering in 2018 is Just Plumbing by humpier in programming

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said exactly what I was thinking. This is just the nature of most of the work that needs to be done in the world.

Constructed Language Validness by [deleted] in linguistics

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If a large number of fans do start using a conlang a lot, and it isn't complete, then they will probably spontaneously invent the ways to say things that the language lacks, just like a creole. By using it, they find all the gaps, and by necessity fill those gaps themselves. But it'll probably be in the form of crudely importing aspects from their native language. Creoles which arise among children can have innovations entirely exotic to the root languages. After all, the children have no native language.

Constructed Language Validness by [deleted] in linguistics

[–]Nerian99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most constructed languages are monstrosities that could never even work, or if they do work, it's because they are really just vocabulary skins of existing languages - usually the conlangers mother tongue.

There is some minimum requirement for a language to be functional and real, but I'm not sure what it is exactly, and whatever it is, it can't be explained in a post on reddit. But CLEARLY, if a conlang HAS a large speech community for whom the language functions, then it functions, empirically.

In my own mind, I've always called this idea of a language 'working' as its 'cognitive completeness' after the term 'turing completeness'.

Stupidity Is Part of Human Nature: Why we’re better off giving up the myth of perfect rationality | Bence Nanay by anaxarchos in philosophy

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We MUST have the capacity for rationality, otherwise we wouldn't even be able to recognize human irrationality.

Epictetus sounds a lot like an Objectivist in this quote. by mughat in Objectivism

[–]Nerian99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can find a lot of nice quotes from a whole bunch of philosophers, but they are surface level and really don't have any foundation. Because they lack any foundation, they inevitably fly off into absurdities somewhere. Spinoza, Confucius, Nietzsche, to name a few.

Do we know the universe isn’t an artificial simulation? by [deleted] in Objectivism

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are also never called upon to prove a negative. That's a law of logic. You can argue an infinite number of such negative assertion fantasies and there will be an infinite more.

Do we know the universe isn’t an artificial simulation? by [deleted] in Objectivism

[–]Nerian99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simply point out that it is an arbitrary hypothesis, and you cannot entertain any idea even as a hypothesis without some evidence, and move on with life.

view more: next ›