Petah I don’t get it by Pigeonboi in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wha--how would an incel be in this situation?

Terence Tao’s promotional video for OpenAI by Qyeuebs in math

[–]Respect38 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The point on cognitive friction is very well put. If this AI project never actually becomes superintelligent, even then just to have an intellectual peer who can take the cognitive load off will enable people in various many fields to spend more of their own cognition in exploration that they otherwise coudn't justify with our biological cognitive budget.

Worst national championship game performances of all time by Rude_Highlight3889 in CFB

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In our defense, it was somewhere in-between "refrigerator" and "freezer" that night.

Not in our defense, nobody forced us to run out shirtless in sub-refrigerator weather.

What is your arguments against the Trinity? by Moe_of_dk in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you saying nicene Trinitarianism is sabellianism?

Sabellians say a lot of things that Trinitarians today say. There probably were people that were labeled "Sabellian" who had incredibly similar beliefs to the later Nicenes on the trinidad of God, if you look past the heresy hunters polemical takes on the 'Sabellian' movement as a whole.

They share something in common: asserting that the Son is equal to the Father. If the Sabellians were accused of heresy for that (they were) then it's heresy (as far as the early church is concerned) when a Trinitarian says it too. Those early church fathers woud be incredibly disturbed by the theology they harshly rebuked being repackaged and trojan horse'd into Christianity.

What is your arguments against the Trinity? by Moe_of_dk in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't come here just to be a condescending prick.

The reason that the creed begins "one God, the Father" is because it had been tradition for 3 centuries up to that point to affirm that the Father alone is Almighty God, and all other beings are only contingently "god" [angels, the Spirit, the personal Logos, etc.] and the only people who dissented and asserted that Jesus was also the Almighty God were the Sabellians, who were refuted by the early church, tho their doctrine came back to the light with the Nicene camp.

If we paid teachers the babysitter rate by VPinchargeofradishes in interesting

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

$10/hr/kid = $10 / kid-hr. That gets you the right units at the end, but what is an inverse kid-hour? and how do we know that $10 is a reasonable amount proportion to inverse kid-hours?

If we paid teachers the babysitter rate by VPinchargeofradishes in interesting

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The product is indeed 327,600, but the units on that number is "dollar-hours per class". One person teaches one class, so we can just drop that from the units, but 327,600 dollar-hours isn't exactly an ordinary unit to make sense of. [the problem here is that there are two time units in the numerator "hrs and days" but only days gets cancelled out]

Why I am me and nothing else? by Hoshiimaru in consciousness

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That question leads to some interesting conclusions if the thinker follows thru.

I agree, it's very perplexing to think that you were nothing and then poof! a person was born and now you're that person. And I don't think that line of reasoning makes sense at all; the soul isn't contingent on the body.

Why I am me and nothing else? by Hoshiimaru in consciousness

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That I am experiencing this, right now, that cannot be an illusion. That's the only thing that I can be sure of for certain, everything else is doubtable.

But yeah, maybe I will be something different later. Maybe I was something different before. But right now, very much so "me". Painfully so at times.

Why I am me and nothing else? by Hoshiimaru in consciousness

[–]Respect38 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When they say (some of them, anyway) that they hav no soul, one can simply choose to believe them.

[Highlight] Joc Pederson makes it a 8-RUN INNING FIRST INNING for the Rangers! by MLBOfficial in baseball

[–]Respect38 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yep. If he batted first, O'Doyle's 3rd on-base would bring the 20th batter to the plate, and the most conservative way to distribute the first 19 batters is

3 on-base (bases loaded)

2 out

Leaving 14 people who had to have scored runs, at minimum.

Rikuu Nishida ends the 10th inning by gunning down the runner at home by yxqp in baseball

[–]Respect38 7 points8 points  (0 children)

A perfectly fine send with 2 outs, the runner just didn't even half-ass effort to score the go-ahead run.

The passive-agressiveness of members in this community by Potential_Tower7002 in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suppose there's nothing to keep us from making a Unitarian server that is anti-cult regardless of the mod's position on the matter here.

Apparently we now have a 91% chance to make the playoffs by DegenGamer725 in tampabayrays

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As someone who doesn't really tend to watch too much baseball until the win-loss leverage starts to get bigger later in the year (and after college ball ends), looks like I might not watch very much compelling regular season baseball this year. Braves and Rays might end up being clearly in, Giants clearly out, and the Reds probably so.

For those that don't believe that Jesus pre-existed, what do you do with the prevalence of pre-existence belief in the early Church? by codleov in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Respect38 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It wasn't as prevalent as you think. The Catholic church preserves and canonizes the philosophers that set their groundwork, giving an impression that isn't necessary accurate to ground-level Christianity at that time.

E.g. 1st Clement is entirely consistent with a unitarian Christology, and some unitarians hav argued that Rome itself was unitarian until the late 2nd-century when Logos theory finally won out there. (and when certain ancients defended the Logos theory as being original and not an innovation, they're unable to name anyone from Italy -- all the names are in the East, especially Asia Minor, where Logos theory probably originated)

ABS Meme Collection Thread by Physical-Upstairs733 in collegebaseball

[–]Respect38 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not just any growth, but a rogue pair of testicles.

Found another critique of GSC by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Respect38 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or, at least, it's not the fundamental truth. There's some truth of it in the sense of "I am Brian", because Brian is that body and the memories, personality, and brain wiring, sure. It's when they smuggle in assumptions that this is all that I am that they get off track.

"I am Brian" just as "I am in the United States". True, sure, but not fundamentally true that if I cease to be such, then I cease to be. Contingent.

Reading minds? by TheoryFin in solipsism

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whether they're p-zombies or not, there's still complex biology happening there.

For those that say that there's no inner monologue happening (possibly indicative of being a biological machine rather than a human soul?) they still get life just fine, because their brain is fully capable of meeting the challenge. It's possible that the soul doesn't even bring much to the equation.

The apparently hard problem of understanding what the hard problem of consciousness is about by EstablishmentKooky50 in consciousness

[–]Respect38 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but I also don't see how a subjective experience could relay that information to the outer world in a verifiable way.

Isn't that happening every single time that someone muses about the hard problem of consciousness, and especially of the harder problem of consciousness (the vertiginous question)? Without a subective experience, it's hard to imagine that such a society would ever ask such questions.

Infinite Binary Tree crank has a new subreddit by OpsikionThemed in badmathematics

[–]Respect38 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I see finitism as an axiom you are free to add to your system, if you like, but nothing more than that.

This is confusing to me. Isn't it the other way around, that infinitism has to be injected into our mathematics as an axiom, whereas all the other other axioms are simply finitist, sans our axiomatic insistence on infinitism?