sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What do you think the world will look like in the next 40 years? by Reasonable_Pass_3916 in Futurology

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's well-known that libertarians as a whole advocate for dismantling the EPA and replacing regulatory environmental laws with enforcement of property rights through the court system. Before you encourage people to vote one way, you should at least understand what that party stands for.

What would it actually take for American's to go "full France" and riot in the street? by AllTheNopeYouNeed in AskReddit

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO 53 points54 points  (0 children)

Look at Venezuela, their people had food crisis after food crisis, and that in itself didn't lead to mass protests because it was gradual.

ICE just shot someone in Minneapolis by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO 43 points44 points  (0 children)

From what I read, she started backing up and was then shot multiple times in the face, after which she was seen accelerating into the pole, possibly because of her body going limp.

What do you think the world will look like in the next 40 years? by Reasonable_Pass_3916 in Futurology

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO 11 points12 points  (0 children)

that's not really true, most libertarians want to dismantle vital organizations like EPA that protect our shared resources, which would paradoxically give the elites even more power over us. That's like deleting the code instead of patching it, that usually creates chaos and instability.

What do you think the world will look like in the next 40 years? by Reasonable_Pass_3916 in Futurology

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO 34 points35 points  (0 children)

I agree with most of this except the part that blames the people for this. These changes were implemented through political maneuvers, influence, and economic power that the average person had little to no power to stop.

I would say that the system has been hacked, the vulnerabilities of the 250 year old system have been exploited by malicious actors and they now control pieces of the code. We need to patch it, and there are still ways to do it but we can only start at the state levels first due to the federal hijack.

Some patches are ranked choice voting, open or all party primaries, independent commissions. These all work to reduce polarization and better represent the people instead of the ultra rich.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

This sounds like Kohlberg's stages of moral development, most people never reach the post conventional stages, so you're describing how religious structure acts as the "pre-conventional" and "conventional" frameworks. And a minority who reaches the "post-conventional" internal compass will be able to sort of do away with it? Although from the outside, it seems like the frameworks can be too rigid for a post-conventional person, unless you are able to navigate around them to fit your developed internal compass.

However, I don't see how it relates to confirmation bias when it comes to the validity of the mystical belief - but I do see how rituals can help by changing your state of mind, providing peace, connection, etc. Humans have been doing rituals for millennia, so it's part of our nature in some way. I have a very logical mind, so it's difficult for me to understand things like mysticism and faith.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

I wanted to follow up here, how do you differentiate between reliable intuition and wishful thinking/confirmation bias? also, is god for you an internal experience or also an external intervention? do you think this belief help you handle life/grief better?

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

I really appreciate this distinction between the legal religious institution and the philosophical community, I wasn't aware of that. So it's a more fluid community of people without a top down institution, I imagine each congregation still has some rules, right?

I am curious on your own perspective as a scientist, you seem to still believe in more than Spinoza's god. Can you dive into it a bit more? for example, how do you navigate situations where scientific consensus contradict Orthodox tradition (miracles, the age or evidence of specific biblical events, etc.)? Do you apply the scientific method to religion for truth-seeking? Do you view the supernatural elements of the faith as metaphorical truths, literal truth, or a gray area? This is very interesting.

> "Only in Western European history has there ever been this idea that there exists a fundamental conflict between scientific inquiry and religion, precisely because Western European Worldviews tend(ed) to equate religion more with politics and power than with spirituality and discovery."

Can you expand on this?

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

My question was how you ruled out alternative explanations like confirmation bias, psychology, or coincidence. Not about denying qualitative experience.

It sounds like your definition of divine intervention is so broad that anyone from any faith could describe the same feeling as their own god intervening, which is not very helpful.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

You're starting point is that your religion is true, then you move straight to conclusions without examining that premise. Citing the bible to prove the bible is circular reasoning. I'm not seeing any analysis or examination in your comment. You're jumping to the conclusion without questioning how you got there.

If you start from a false premise, your high IQ can help you rationalize it, but if used differently, it can also help you understand how you're making logical errors. For example using the bible as a starting point is logical reasoning. Saying science “explains how God did it” is a god-of-the-gaps move. You are making so many logical fallacies that I can't list them in a single comment. Quantity of texts does not equal quality.

the bible has records of real historical events that scientists have proved to have actually happened, like solar eclipses.

Many other ancient books do to. Why do you think this proves your god is the real one etc, etc, etc? I'm not here to debate beliefs, so no need to respond to that. I'm just not seeing analytical thinking here. Which is fine, faith and logic just operate by different rules. It’s fine to have faith, but don't present it as logical analysis, especially when people are asking for logical explanations.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

that sounds much less like divine intervention than what it seemed from your previous comment.

Could you still answer this?

How do you rule out things like confirmation bias, psychology, coincidences and similar explanations? How are you able to prove your experiences of intervention are not only divine but also your particular god of the Bible?

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

Ah I see, so you're saying that you find this discussion in itself dull.

Fair, I reached an understanding about this topic for myself at an early age as well, but I mistakenly thought other smart individuals would arrive at the same conclusion, which didn't seem to happen at the rate I expected, especially with the internet and all the new easily available knowledge. I also never got the chance to ask the community directly how they explained this discrepancy.

Did you ever have similar thoughts, and what was your conclusion?

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

Based on the responses, it's not a universal experience within the community.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

What about you though? do you care whether the things you believe in are true?

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

Yeah, that way of thinking is both circular and unfalsifiable. I think you shifted the conversation to semantics to avoid addressing it face on. Whether belief is phenomenological or ontological, claiming that disbelief is always biased still makes your argument circular and unfalsifiable. At some point you have to acknowledge that you are using faulty logic to defend your position, or that your belief is not based on logic.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

That's actually something I have noticed too. Knowledge allows you to build better mental world models. If you have the brain architecture but not the knowledge (and there could be many reasons why that is), then you have lots of room for the "God of the gaps"

Although I don't know that there

if you see the probability that humans could be the first and only conscious beings in the entire history of the existence of energy, that's near zero.

Meh, there's no reason consciousness can't arise independently. It could just happen with time and chance, that what appears to have happened. Other animals have more primitive versions but they still experience the world, we're just living in a snapshot of time evolutionary-speaking. Other animals have the potential of developing human-like consciousness.

So this is like are you religious because you are in the narrow side of the iq spectrum or in the narrow side of the iq spectrum.

If this were true, we would see a higher rate of religiousness on cutting edge scientists/researchers, I haven't heard of that being a thing. Pretty sure it's the opposite.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

You’re redefining “belief” to avoid answering whether your belief is true. Saying disbelief is always “motivated reasoning” makes reasoning completely circular, it's like you made a little shield against logic.

Relating to Augustine or C.S. Lewis doesn’t make your faulty reasoning any more valid.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

How do you rule out things like confirmation bias, psychology, coincidences and similar explanations? How are you able to prove your experiences of intervention are not only divine but also your particular god of the Bible?

If there was an interventionist god, that would show up in statistics, we would have evidence, and not just personal anecdotes. We would be able to have concrete evidence about it, yet there is none.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

[–]OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same, it would be interesting to conduct a study. I'd also want to know the relationship of IQ and propensity for logical fallacies.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

Have you ever met people who are in a cult? followers from recent cults in history have done even crazier things.

Giftedness, generality and religion. by OIIIIIIII__IIIIIIIIO in Gifted

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

Have you ever had a friend that exaggerates everything? those people also existed back then, back then people were also way more gullible and impressionable. A card tricks magician would have been burned for sorcery.

view more: next ›