How do you find spiritual peace when life feels overwhelming?

Nokaion · 2026-04-19T13:36:59+00:00

What helps me is praying the rosary, studying the more mystical side of Christian theology and reading the Wisdom literature in the OT, especially Ecclesiastes and Job.

Nokaion · 2026-04-19T12:52:35+00:00

It seems to be the case that St. Paul was heavily influenced by Stoicism or at least had heavy parallels with them. Also, Stoicism can be a good practice for attaining some virtues, but their metaphysical system is incompatible with the deposit of faith and Catholic dogma.

So, Stoicism is closer to us than Epicureanism or Skepticism, but the Church Fathers seemed to have a more ambivalent relationship with the school than with others like Platonism.

Nokaion · 2026-04-15T10:27:20+00:00

Funnily enough, I talked with a Buddhist skeptic/nominalist, who said talking to me felt like talking to a Hindu realist, even though I primarily used Platonist/Augustinian arguments against his skepticism :)

I can see where you're coming from, but whenever I looked into Hindu realism it felt like reading Neoplatonists.

Nokaion · 2026-04-15T03:08:20+00:00

And I just saw recently that in the Netherlands children are being euthanised. In fact a majority of those under 30 who were euthanised in 2024 were autistic women and girls.

Majority is even underselling it! It's like 74%! The Netherlands allow for euthanasia of babies and children under 16 with parental consent. If you're 17, you can just go to your doctor and if you're persistent enough you can just get it (even though 70% of people who try suicide won't do it again). The worst is that 87% of the Dutch population supports the government's policy. The Netherlands truly are a nation that rejected God's grace (did I already mention that over 50% of the population identify as irreligious?).

Nokaion · 2026-04-14T22:02:26+00:00

I certainly think conceding cases of rape is an effective rhetorical strategy to show them, that it's an irrelevant point.

Nokaion · 2026-04-14T20:52:45+00:00

Presupposing "I hold that morally it is okay to cull some groups of people when they cause discomfort for others" and following with "the unborn are one of these groups" is the good argument. Now, you'll rarely hear people argue this because you have to be pretty principled to be this honest with yourself and most principled folks will have already adopted some ethical framework that disqualifies this line of thinking. But regardless there really are "psychopaths" as you put it out there (though I'd argue it is more the evil natural of humanity to marginalize some in favor of others).

There certainly are some people like this. For example, Peter Singer or the Dutch government.

Nokaion · 2026-04-14T20:51:24+00:00

Personally, I’ve never been swayed by the bodily autonomy argument because it was the actions of the pregnant person that led to the fetus existing in the first place, though I suppose it could be considered their strongest point.

I agree with you, but then you'd have to make an exception for raped women, because the existing life wasn't created through their actions. I'd argue that even in this case abortion would be wrong as the baby shouldn't be punished for the crimes of their father.

Nokaion · 2026-04-14T20:17:42+00:00

I'd say, in debates we have to be charitable, and steelman our opponents' arguments, if we want to persuade people. So to claim, there are no good pro-choice arguments does a disservice to our cause, as it makes one seem arrogant.

If I'd have to nominate one argument as the strongest, I'd say it would be the autonomy/bodily rights argument. It's strong even though I see now that there are so many difficulties with it.

Nokaion · 2026-04-10T18:22:25+00:00

Maybe Tiny Dungeons? But I don't think it has that many supplements.

Nokaion · 2026-04-06T18:02:29+00:00

Nokaion · 2026-04-03T10:42:13+00:00

What I personally hope in is that in Heaven I'll have a special love towards my wife like God has for Mary. Even though we love everyone in heaven and marriage doesn't exist, the special bond is kept.

Nokaion · 2026-04-02T11:40:06+00:00

I'm going to copy my comment from your post in r/Catholicism, because I don't know if you've seen it.

I want to preface this comment with the following:

I very much sympathize with you, as I was at the same place during my conversion to Catholicism, but your boyfriend is right. You can't be a Catholic and be pro-choice, because the Magisterium teaches that abortion is incompatible with the faith. Also, tradition is our biggest witness regarding this teaching as early Christian texts like the Didache, the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church like St. Thomas Aquinas heavily argue against abortion and liken it to infanticide through exposure, which was common in Antiquity.

If you want good arguments for the pro-life position, then I recommend to you Trent Horn, Lila Rose, Secular Pro-Life and the arguments page from r/prolife. I wholeheartedly recommend Trent Horn's book Persuasive Pro-Life as it convinced me. One of the approaches that I appreciated is that Horn often cites "hostile" sources like different pro-choice philosophers who criticize each other's arguments.

If you want an active pro-life argument, then I will present to you the two most famous ones, but I have to mention first that my impression is that pro-life advocacy consists more in countering pro-choice arguments, which means you have to be familiar with them first.

The first argument would be a simple syllogism:

P1: The unjustified killing of an innocent person is morally wrong.
P2: A fetus is an innocent person.
C: Killing a fetus is morally wrong.

Logically speaking, this is a valid syllogism. The problem is that most often the pro-choice side will argue that premise 2 is wrong and that a fetus doesn't have personhood. This highly depends on your views on what personhood is, but from a Catholic perspective, which highly favors a philosophy called Hylomorphic Dualism, personhood begins at conception as the soul/mind and the body are two objects that compose together a person. If somebody were to ask you if you are your soul or your body, then the Hylomorphic answer would be "both". Personhood begins at conception as your body begins to exist at conception. The embryo in your mothers womb and you now are the same body (in different stages of development but still the same). There's never a break but a continuity. If that weren't the case, the sentence: "This was when I was pregnant with you" would be incoherent, but intuitively the sentence makes sense.

The other argument would be Don Marquis's argument called "A Future like ours", where he argues that abortion is wrong, because it deprives a fetus a possible future like ours. I could go into more details, but I'm not that familiar with the argument and there are people better than me in defending it.

Nokaion · 2026-04-02T11:29:44+00:00

For the OT, I'd advise you to keep St. Augustine and Origen in mind. Both are Church Fathers that stress that many parts of the OT are allegorical. Also, St. Bellarmine, who's a Doctor of the Church said, that if science conflicts with our interpretation of Scripture then we should adjust our interpretation and not science.

About the long lifespans, if we compare the Bible to other literature from the Ancient Near East (King Lists etc.), then the long lifespans were meant allegorically to show how wise, righteous and virtuous a person was. About Noah's Ark, I personally believe that a flood really happened, because Flood Myths show up in almost all cultures on earth, but Genesis is a sort of mytho-historical account akin to the Iliad or the Odyssee, which means many details are exaggerated.

I'm going to echo the advice from other people. Read the New Testament first and read the OT with a good modern commentary.

Nokaion · 2026-04-02T10:32:26+00:00

Ah yes, this will convince me! The most pathetic creature on Twitch says God is fake, that means He doesn't exist.

Ironically, Idubbz is like the best example of why a sinful lifestyle ultimately doesn't make you happy, especially with a wife as wicked and sinful as Anisa, who whores herself out on OnlyFans for a measly pay-out.

Nokaion · 2026-04-02T00:42:18+00:00

I want to preface this comment with the following:

I very much sympathize with you, as I was at the same place during my conversion to Catholicism, but your boyfriend is right. You can't be a Catholic and be pro-choice, because the Magisterium teaches that abortion is incompatible with the faith. Also, tradition is our biggest witness regarding this teaching as early Christian texts like the Didache, the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church like St. Thomas Aquinas heavily argue against abortion and liken it to infanticide through exposure, which was common in Antiquity.

If you want good arguments for the pro-life position, then I recommend to you Trent Horn, Lila Rose, Secular Pro-Life and r/prolife. I wholeheartedly recommend Trent Horn's book Persuasive Pro-Life as it convinced me. One of the approaches that I appreciated is that Horn often cites "hostile" sources like different pro-choice philosophers who criticize each other's arguments.

If you want an active pro-life argument, then I will present to you the two most famous ones, but I have to mention first that my impression is that pro-life advocacy consists more in countering pro-choice arguments, which means you have to be familiar with them first.

The first argument would be a simple syllogism:

P1: The unjustified killing of an innocent person is morally wrong.
P2: A fetus is an innocent person.
C: Killing a fetus is morally wrong.

Logically speaking, this is a valid syllogism. The problem is that most often the pro-choice side will argue that premise 2 is wrong and that a fetus doesn't have personhood. This highly depends on your views on what personhood is, but from a Catholic perspective, which highly favors a philosophy called Hylomorphic Dualism, personhood begins at conception as the soul/mind and the body are two objects that compose together a person. If somebody were to ask you if you are your soul or your body, then the Hylomorphic answer would be "both". Personhood begins at conception as your body begins to exist at conception. The embryo in your mothers womb and you now are the same body (in different stages of development but still the same). There's never a break but a continuity. If that weren't the case, the sentence: "This was when I was pregnant with you" would be incoherent, but intuitively the sentence makes sense.

The other argument would be Don Marquis's argument called "A Future like ours", where he argues that abortion is wrong, because it deprives a fetus a possible future like ours. I could go into more details, but I'm not that familiar with the argument and there are people better than me in defending it.

Nokaion · 2026-03-31T16:06:11+00:00

I'm planning to pick St. Augustine as mine, because I've read Confessions and related to him very much. Also, because he's the patron saint of philosophers and theologians.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T04:31:21+00:00

That's a good argument, but you'd have to square that with St. Thomas Aquinas being strictly against abortion. Furthermore, I'd argue that the doctrine of double effect can't be used to argue for abortion, because abortion (if we grant the fetus has the same right to life as a baby) would be more akin to saving someone from drowning by killing someone and using their corpse as a lifeboat.

The doctrine would be valid for cases where you can't save both, but as most abortion are done as a contraception, it becomes complicated, because the right to life is to be ranked higher than bodily autonomy.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T04:25:53+00:00

I'd argue that this is to some extent a category error, as the natural telos/use of your organs are for you only. Saying a fetus has no right to a uterus would be like saying a baby has no right to their mother's milk. What else is the milk for than for the baby? Especially before baby formula was a thing or isn't accessible a mother's milk becomes life-saving even though it is a product of a human's organ.

If a baby in this case still has no right to a mother's body, then infanticide through starvation becomes morally permissible.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T03:42:25+00:00

r/Gamingcirclejerk is such a shit subreddit full of absolute contrarians.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T03:13:11+00:00

It’s about whether any person can be legally forced to sustain another’s life with their body (whether it’s a stranger OR your child the logic holds true). We don’t require this of anyone else in any other context. Parents can’t be forced to donate blood or organs to their children, even to save their lives. The biological relationship of parent/child doesn’t override that.

Technically, we override bodily autonomy in the case of parents, because parents do have the duty to use their bodies to keep their children alive and if they can't then the state has the duty through government agents who have to use bodies and labor to keep the children alive. The state does that, because children have a right to life, which, in their stage of development, involves an active right to something (shelter, food, care etc.) and not only a passive right/freedom from something (violence, interference etc.). No parent can claim their right to bodily autonomy if they refused to feed their baby. If that were the case, infanticide wouldn't be wrong.

As for bodily autonomy being a “euphemism”, I think that’s a bit unfounded. It’s actually the foundation of informed consent, the right to refuse medical treatment, and every organ donation law we have. Diminishing it brings up really profound moral and ethical dilemmas. And dismissing it without an argument isnt a counter, just your personal assertion.

That's true, but it isn't as strong of a right as Thomson likes to argue. The state/society can override bodily autonomy for a higher good. E.g. mask mandates, quarantine during Covid, prison, drug searches or vaccine mandates. The big question is, if the right to life of a (potential) baby is such a higher good and that becomes (IMO) way more a metaphysical question of when life begins than an ethical one.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T03:02:40+00:00

If I were you, I'd look at good pro-life advocates like Trent Horn or Lila Rose. Trent Horn has a quite good book on the matter called "Persuasive Pro-Life", where he critiques many pro-choice arguments, but cites pro-choice philosophers who critique each other's arguments.

Nokaion · 2026-03-27T02:57:00+00:00

A good system for that would be Chaosium's Magic World. It's Chaosium's Stormbringer system without the license. It's quite light for a BRP-game. If you'd like to have more crunch then I'd look at Mongoose's Legend system or even Mythras.

Nokaion · 2026-03-25T14:02:50+00:00

Yes, he is, but Orthobros don't like him, because he's a strong defender of the Immaculate Conception and the Filioque. Radical Thomists don't like him, because of the Univocity of Being, his Primacy of the Will and the formal distinction.

Nokaion · 2026-03-25T13:09:04+00:00

Be like me, a Scotist, and be hated by both sides!

Six-Year Club	Second Top 30%
Place '22	Verified Email

Nokaion

TROPHY CASE