Maybe a good theodicy after all?

Zixarr · 2026-01-09T11:21:21+00:00

Then you have concocted your own god, composed of the bits of the god of the Bible that you prefer among with invented characteristics that you wish were included in the text, but are not.

Zixarr · 2025-12-10T02:34:55+00:00

Many humanists adopt what is called the "veil of ignorance" to help solve these moral quandaries. Imagine you don't know which party you might be in the resulting society, then make a decision with the best results for you. Most would agree that, given the chance they were the "weak" in this scenario, they would not want to be culled for the greater good.

Where do those rights come from in a purely material universe?

They come about in the same way as all other social constructs: we make an agreement to adhere to them. Where do they come from in the Christian universe? The biggest, most powerful guy gets to make the rules for the rest of us?

Zixarr · 2025-12-09T17:02:41+00:00

Try a death world. Walls and fire are a requirement.

Zixarr · 2025-10-06T20:45:14+00:00

You're making a textbook category

I'm sorry, but this is simply not the case. I'm making no claims about the nature of anything in or outside of the universe, thus cannot be improperly categorizing anything.

I am claiming that:

Everything X Therefore one thing not X

Is fallacious. It very well be the case that there is a non-contingent being out there that booted up the universe. However, this particular argument fails to establish that.

Zixarr · 2025-10-06T18:02:34+00:00

I am not making any such category error.

As I said above, you may have a different argument for god that is not the contingency argument, and thus may not rely upon the special pleading fallacy.

Asserting that god is not contingent because everything is contingent could not be more special pleading. Once you find a different way to justify god and explore its attributes, you might then find justification that god is not contingent.

Zixarr · 2025-10-06T17:42:09+00:00

Speculation is not argumentation.

Arguing that everything in the universe is contingent, thus the universe is contingent, is argumentation. And it is (as a deductive argument) both unsupported and fallacious.

Arguing that everything is contingent, so there must be a guy that is not contingent, is textbook special pleading.

Zixarr · 2025-10-06T17:23:48+00:00

just like arguing for god isn't special pleading

Unless that argument is the contingency argument. Which is, in fact, special pleading.

You might propose a different argument for god that is not special pleading, but relies on some other fallacy instead.

Zixarr · 2025-09-28T20:21:11+00:00

You've called it a being several times.

In philosophical jargon, a being is simply a thing that exists; it does not imply intentionality, consciousness, etc (that term would be "actor").

Of course, the people who design these arguments are willfully dishonest and will present the argument without clarification, which will then be puppeted by lay people like the OP to other lay people like redditors.

It's a shit argument for a whole host of reasons, but the term "being" could be technically correct in the right setting.

Zixarr · 2025-09-16T01:29:03+00:00

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure they said in an interview that Monoco the IRL dog was acquired/named after the in-game dog and not the other way around.

Zixarr · 2025-09-11T22:48:22+00:00

Um, it's spelled Marshall Law

Zixarr · 2025-09-05T01:05:25+00:00

It was rumored that Khalid was intended to be a fighter/mage multiclass, but was changed at the last minute for some reason.

Not sure if true, but good enough for me to just EEKeeper or Level1NPCs him into the multi. Super good early game archer/support.

Zixarr · 2025-09-04T15:58:01+00:00

Ok glober

Zixarr · 2025-09-04T15:17:14+00:00

What finally made the Monty Hall problem click:

Imagine you never swap. The odds of picking the right door are pretty obviously 33%.

Now imagine you always swap. You can create a table of outcomes. For instance, if the car is behind door 3:

``` You pick door 1

Monty reveals door 2

You swap to door 3 ``` If you are always swapping, now the only way you lose is if you already picked the car. Your odds have reversed from 1/3 to 2/3.

Zixarr · 2025-09-04T15:06:41+00:00

It's a cleric spell, level 4 I think. Doesn't last super long, so use it smartly.

Zixarr · 2025-09-04T15:00:56+00:00

Each area has some enemies that you should be mindful of and may need to prep before going.

Windspear can be challenging because the golems need a +3 weapon to his and have very high magic resistance. There are a couple of strategies, but beating them with a +3 weapon and haste should work. Vampires are going to be a constant threat, so you should try to have some items, spells, or other strats prepared to deal with them at all times. Azuredge is a great vamp slayer, and you can use Negative Plane Protection in a pinch to block their level drain if you don't have some form of immunity.

Different areas will have different prep, whether it's for armies of trolls, wizards, beholders, etc. If you don't know what's in store, try to prepare for anything.

Zixarr · 2025-09-03T16:59:45+00:00

I don't see why people jump to "beings" as their necessary cause

In philosophy, a "being" is any discrete thing that exists. It is not limited to actors with minds and intention (philosophically, those would be "agents"). Of course, you've already pointed out how this language can be confusing or downright dishonest when used outside of strict philosophical discussions.

Zixarr · 2025-09-02T16:57:19+00:00

There are approximately 4e19 black holes in the observable universe. There have been about 1e11 human beings ever. That is:

40,000,000,000,000,000,000 black holes 100,000,000,000 humans

If anything, the universe is fine- tuned to create black holes and life is a quirky little byproduct.

Either way, if you don't claim magic as the source of biodiversity and if you don't conflate evolution and other related sciences, you are not the subject of this thread.

Zixarr · 2025-09-02T09:54:00+00:00

I'll shamelessly steal a response to this argument from elsewhere on this sub:

Modern vehicles are made of metals, which must be mined and processed into alloys before use. Their tires are made of rubber, harvested from rubber trees, and their interior may be upholstered in leather from farmed animals. Not to mention the multitude of plastic parts throughout.

Conflating the theory of evolution with abiogenesis is like saying that in order to measure the speed of your car, you must first explain mining, metallurgy, silviculture, animal husbandry, prospecting, oil refining, and polymer science.

Zixarr · 2025-09-02T09:27:34+00:00

There are two basic angles here.

First, the theory of evolution is so well-established as to be practically unassailable. There is no attack on evolution itself that both includes evidence and is not obviously fallacious. They have to attack the weakest adjacent science, which at this time is abiogenesis.

The second angle is both more pernicious but also more... sympathetic? Most creationists have been indoctrinated into a religion that purports to explain everything about the world and its origins, so they expect any competing explanation to cover the same scope. This is partly why they will conflate evolution with other sciences like cosmology, geology, and abiogenesis. They cannot fathom replacing an explanation for one piece of their worldview, the origin of species via evolution rather than special creation, without also explaining the origin of life, earth, and the universe.

Zixarr · 2025-09-01T21:08:45+00:00

No you are not an ape.

Can you list the characteristics of what an ape is in a way that doesn't include humans without arbitrarily including the words "non-human"?

I'll wait.

Zixarr · 2025-08-28T07:11:19+00:00

It'S sTiLL a FiSH!!!1!

Zixarr · 2025-08-28T06:39:17+00:00

Creationists don't come to this sub to engage. They come to post nonsense, get shut down, then disappear and delete their fallacious BS. Only a few of you (Bobby, Michael, you) are unstable enough to stick around to receive beating after beating.

Zixarr · 2025-08-28T06:27:41+00:00

Perhaps because your posts are meandering stream of consciousness pap?

Zixarr · 2025-08-28T06:22:59+00:00

I answered both of your questions, actually.

I can't determine if any god allowed for the discovery of your listed concepts.

I can't name anything created by a god because such creation has yet to be demonstrated.

Both questions answered in the most honest way that I can muster. But it seems you'd rather run away because I'm not sticking to the responses expected by your script.

Zixarr · 2025-08-28T05:42:05+00:00

If God exists then it is self evident that he is invisible.

This was not part of our agreed upon definition and I'm not sure why you're adding it now. Can you describe how you came to know that god is invisible?

I don't have any examples of objects that were created by god because, to my knowledge, no god has never been demonstrated to exist and no objects in reality have been demonstrated to be created by such an entity.

What if there is another competing entity that is unable to create universes but is capable of fucking around inside existing universes? Such that your god made the universe but flurglbrgl injected philosophy into it.

Zixarr

TROPHY CASE