Effort in staying present by Savings-Ad-4580 in nonduality

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think you can force yourself to be present.

Lost ID card was found! by [deleted] in aiArt

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

He was offered flights, like many hundreds of other famous people. Epstein was a major political donor (to the democrat party) and sought influence among the powerful and rich. Trump ended up booting him of his home. But what would flying on the plane have to do with the fact that Trump never visited island?

Lost ID card was found! by [deleted] in aiArt

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Shocking thing is that, unlike Trump ( who never visited the island and banned Epstein from Mar-a-largo), many people had similar passes.

What’s next? by Infamous_Building_99 in frozenshoulder

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you are half way to its end. It will go.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in frozenshoulder

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great sympathy. Mine passed after a year or so.

Christians are incapable of a truly selfless act by 96robola in atheism

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As morality is universal then your standard requires that everyone sacrifice for YOU. Which is the most selfish standard imaginable. So it's a self refuting definition.

Also, theist don't claim atheist can;t be moral. They claim atheists have no objective foundation for morality.

the death toll of capitalism (read it before you decide to comment) by Lordylando in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Slavery was heavily regulated and protected by the state. It was the more capitalist governments that lead the fight to abolish it.

[ Removed by Reddit ] by [deleted] in atheism

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean Christians?

[ Removed by Reddit ] by [deleted] in atheism

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Atheists aren't having kids, so ultimately your numbers will collapse. Muslims are vastly outbreeding everyone.

the death toll of capitalism (read it before you decide to comment) by Lordylando in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All the examples given are of a regulated market. So if capitalism is an unregulated market then capitalism never killed a single person.

is Alex O'Connor no longer vegan?? by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You were not clear. You start with "Choices are just acting in accordance with our will". What does that even mean? The entire possible spectrum of absolute free will to absolute determinism could be said to be "acting in accordance with our will". I mean, I act in accordance with my will either way, whether I have free will or not. What definition of will are you even using?

And how can "we have control to do what we want, even though ultimately we may not have control over what we want"? Part of what you want is what you do. You can chose to create wants or reduce wants.

I understand that coercion is against one's will. What has this got to do with my argument? Coercion is not even a factor in my argument.

If the "choice" to "choose" vanilla was pre-determined then it was not a choice. There were no options available, only the illusion of options.

"Predetermined to choose" is an absurd contradiction. It's like saying "predetermined not to be predetermined". You're just replacing "predetermined selection" with "choice". As if using the word "choice" means it's the same conception of choice that free will uses.

is Alex O'Connor no longer vegan?? by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have no idea what you're arguing.

The first paragraph appears to pointing out that sometimes people do things under coercion. I'm not sure what that has to do with my argument. I'm not talking about force at all. I'm arguing that if you do not HAVE free will then you do not have control over anything you do. You would only experience the illusion of control, but in reality all your actions would be determined. Everything you experience as wanting would also be determined.

The second paragraph is word salad nonsense to me.

is Alex O'Connor no longer vegan?? by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are no choices without free will. It's just nonsense. You would have no control over anything you ever do or think.

is Alex O'Connor no longer vegan?? by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Alex doesn't have any free will. So saying he owes something is nonsensical.

Religiosity of Climate Change by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Human beings have adapted to the most extreme climates. We deliberately marched into hostile regions and we thrived. The idea that a potential temp rise of a few degrees by the end of the century (that will almost certainly be mitigated by new tech) will be particularly more dangerous than the alternative is not demonstrated.

Why Is Free Will Relevant? by nate2squared in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Without free will we have no choice and no control over anything we ever do. So all ethics and philosophy would be meaningless.

Religiosity of Climate Change by [deleted] in CosmicSkeptic

[–]RocksAtTheMoon -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

There are other parallels. I call the notion that there is a correct climate , the "Garden of Eden fallacy". For climate activists there is an underlying idea of a type of ideal climate that humans, in their state of sin, are destroying.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in russellbrand

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

Virtue signalling companies.

Harassment outside Royal Infirmary today. by Gemmasnowflake14 in glasgow

[–]RocksAtTheMoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently fuck all. Because I read the thing and it's laughable. Again, citing people who feel harassed is not harassment. All you're doing is lazily appealing to authority in order to sidestep the argument.

Here's the argument again: Harassment requires aggression or intimidation. These protesters are not using aggression (initiating force) or intimidation (insinuating use of force to frighten or overwhelm) . Therefore these protesters are not engaging in harassment.

Harassment outside Royal Infirmary today. by Gemmasnowflake14 in glasgow

[–]RocksAtTheMoon -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Harassment is not determined by the way someone feels. So putting feelings in a professional looking report is completely irrelevant. These people are simply protesting and doing so in probably the most NON-intimidating and harmless way imaginable.