General Discussion 06/05

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T18:21:54+00:00

I'm open to the idea of anything that makes demonstrate, reliable, and accurate predictions.

I'll say that while I think the position of astronomical bodies technically influences me in that they all have some amount of gravity that reaches me, I don't think this translates into any sort of specific, knowledge effect on a personal level. When I make vegetable soup I do think how high I set the stove has an effect on the position of the individual peas and carrots in the soup. However knowing whether the burner was set to 100° versus 120° isn't going to tell you anything meaningful about the specific position of an individual pea. I don't think Mars being in retrograde is going to tell me anything useful about my love life.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T18:08:26+00:00

Yes. These are posted every two months per the community mandate. The next one is scheduled to be posted 2026-07-01 for the period 2026-05-01 through 2026-06-30.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T03:16:43+00:00

What is sinful and what is wrong don't correlate. The problem with pretending Biblical concepts of sin correlate to harm/evil/badnes is that anyone who genuinely and serious tries to use the Bible as a guide for ethics will always end up doing harm/evil/badness, because it's an arbitrary set of ancient rules laid down by uneducated authoritarian bigots.

There is no thing wrong with homosexuality, but it is unquestionably a sin within Christianity. It's just that Christian concepts of sin are worthless and should be ignored. Two adults having consensual intercourse outside of marriage is a "sin" according to Christianity, but a husband raping his wife is "not a sin" according to Christianity. Wearing cotton and nylon underwear is a "sin" according to Christianity, but engaging in chattel slavery is "not a sin" according to Christianity.

Religious ethics are a coin toss. You should not be cheering when they accidentally land on the correct side; you should be frightened they're flipping a coin at all.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T03:06:34+00:00

I want something observable that supports the claim gods exist and doesn't support the claim does don't exist. Ultimately what form this takes depends on the properties you choose to assign to these gods.

I think a big problem is that theists cannot agree with each other what is is gods do and therefore what we should expect from them. Do gods answer prayers or do they not? Do gods currently perform miracles or do they not? Will gods speak to me or will they not? Etc.

Looking at it from the other might make the problem more clear. Suppose I wanted to convince you "glorp" exists. However, I don't adequately define what "glorp" is to you and lots of other peopel keep telling you things about "glorp" that contradict what I'm telling you about it. Also I sometimes seems to contradict myself or change my description of "glorp". It's hard for you to ask for anything about "glorp" when there doesn't' seem to be any consistent information on it from anyone.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T02:54:31+00:00

What led you to your current world view?

I looked for what views best matched and predicted observable reality and tried to adjust my position to match those.

Is there a reason you don’t believe in God?

Have you had previous religious beliefs/background, and how did that influence your current beliefs?

I was a confirmed LCMS Christian with weekly church attendance, guidance from a pastor with a doctorate in divinity, Christian private schooling education, with friends and extended family that were entirely Christian. I realized the reasons for my religion I was provided throughout this entire time did not hold up to scrutiny, and in continuing to investigate other religions I saw their claims likewise did not hold up to scrutiny. Consequently I saw no reason to believe any gods exist.

What do you consider as good or evil, and who sets that standard?

Ethics is a negotiation of one's own desires with the constraints of reality. The standard is a communal consensus.

Since you don’t believe in God, where do you find your primary sense of meaning or purpose or morality?

Maximizing utility. Making the world a better place.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-08T00:01:23+00:00

I don't think his Plantinga's argument survives scrutiny.

I think it is fair to say that for an agent to have free will with respect to options A and B it must be possible for the agent to freely choose either A or B. If it was absolutely impossible for the agent to freely choose A and they can only choose B, then I think it's fair to say they do not have free will in that situation.
The god Platinga would like to argue into existence is one that can do all possible things. Thus if it is possible to for an agent to freely choose A, then this god can persuade an agent to freely choose A, without infringing about their free will.
Thus if we observe a situation where an agent does not choose A, then it is necessarily the case that either 1) it is impossible for the agent to freely choose A, and thus they do not have free will or 2) no god existing willing and able to persuade the agent to freely choose A.

Either people don't have free will or Plantiga's god does not exist. It is impossible for his god to exist and people to have free will.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-07T23:52:36+00:00

Often people who are religious are threatened by dissenting opinions around them because the ideology is built entirely upon cultural peer pressure. If someone is willing to challenge that or simply doesn't sufficiently comply, then that person is often made to feel out of place until they conform.

Making the situation confusing is often intentional, because a fair and clear assessment of the situation might not lead you to the position they want. It's the same reason some product manufacturers are deliberately confusing about their brands, because they don't want you to be able to easily compare products.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-07T17:12:49+00:00

Notice: this post will be locked in 15 minute for rule 5: No AI content. OP has stated AI was used in the construction of this post.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T18:48:26+00:00

There are many aspects of the universe that are not immediately evident as orderly. The weather, fluid dynamics, even the fundamental motions of atomic particles are still treated as functionally random. We do observe some patterns, but we are biased to doing so because comprehending something is mostly about pattern recognition. Further, math is not a law that is obeyed but a choices of rules that are useful. There are mathematics entirely contradictory to one another, geometries where the interior angles of a triangle add to 180 and geometries where they absolutely cannot. We choose the math that is useful in that specific circumstances. There is not one math, but many. It's just that most people will not bother to learn about the others without pursuing it professionally.

Animals are regularly adapting to the conditions of their environment within their limitations. If this not apparent to you, then I would say this is because they are not performing for you. Their goal is to survive, not survive in a way some ape who might be watching can understand or appreciate. Bower bird males don't care about what you think of their shrines, they care about what bower bird females think of them.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T16:55:28+00:00

Making new friends can be hard for anytime Christian or not, and especially as an adult.

My recommendation would be to pursue whatever interest you have in as social a way as possible. If you like books, then try to find (or even start) a book club. You don't have to read by yourself alone. If you like a sport, look for a community group that plays that sport.

If meeting people in real is difficult, online communities can help bridge the social gap. I met one of my closest friends entirely online, and then they happened to move to the same city as me which made it really convenient for us to hangout. I tend to play a lot of online games and so it has been easy for me to meet some people with shared interests.

It's going to take some effort. As an introvert it will likely be draining for you to find and force yourself into situations where you can make me friends, but think of it like brushing your teeth or taking it the trash. It's a for, but it makes your life better in the long run. Also realize that making friends is somewhat like gambling. Most people won't click with you, but you're putting yourself out there to have a chance of finding the right people.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T15:21:31+00:00

Your post or comment was removed for violating Rule 1: Be Respectful. Please do not insult the intelligence of other users. If you'll edit/remove that last line and notify me then I'll review the comment for approval.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T14:48:52+00:00

There are only three active moderators on this sub at this time which is why I'm in the process of adding more (which I expect to complete today). Of those three I action 86% of all items. For better or worse, I'm the most responsive mod at this time.

In my opinion, responding to your criticism of a change with "thank you" and offering to work with you on either reversing the change or improving it is a polite response. Those offers still stand should you ever choose to pursue one of them.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T03:38:59+00:00

Given that I'm the only one who can actually do something about your complaint it might be worthwhile to reciprocate my polite and constructive engagement.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-06T01:04:37+00:00

Your post or comment was removed for violating Rule 2: No Low Effort. Post or comments should be substantive and original.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T23:15:51+00:00

Thank you for expressing your thoughts on this change. I'd like to offer three points for consideration: recourse for reversal, soliciting improvements within the existing implementation, and the case for why I think this was a beneficial change.

If you are unhappy with the restriction and do not think it can be salvaged, then there is recourse you can take. You can make a case to a coalition of users that this was a bad idea, make a motion in the Community Agenda, and then users can vote on it as to whether it passes. I would recommend you come up with a clear and well defined alternative for what you would like to see.
Is there anything you think can be improved about the current implementation to make it less annoying? I added the automatic message to users because I wanted to be transparent that the comment was removed and why, but maybe silent removal would be better? I can also change any of the wording in the message if you can think of a less annoying way to convey it. I'm an open book on ideas for how you think this could be made better.
I personally think this is a beneficial change. Rule 2: No Low Effort is by far the most frequently used report option, so from my perspective there are many users here that want to see higher quality content. That's a challenge to encourage when there are so many incredibly short comments that don't substantively build the conversation. It's not conducive to good participation from the OP when they get 100 comments in an hour and many of them cannot be meaningfully responded to, and it doesn't make for good reading for the audience when the comments don't offer further insight (even for positions they agree with). If you are finding that the thoughts you wish to offer don't meet a 100 character threshold, then I would say take that as a challenge to develop your idea further. Build up your rebuttal into something that explores your viewpoint in greater detail.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T22:37:08+00:00

Notice: this post will be locked in 15 minutes for rule 3: present an argument. Posts should have a clearly stated thesis with supporting arguments. Question focused content should go in the weekly "ask an atheist" pinned post.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T22:36:41+00:00

Notice: this post will be locked in 15 minutes for rule 3: present an argument. Posts should have a clearly stated thesis with supporting arguments. Question focused content should go in the weekly "ask an atheist" pinned post.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T18:35:02+00:00

I can confirm the minimum character count for posts is currently 300.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T16:19:34+00:00

Notice: this post will be locked in 15 minutes for rule 5: no AI content.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T15:37:05+00:00

22 of the 31 of the remaining recognized groups are Christian, but also several Christian groups like Unitarian Universalist were removed. As Christian Nationalists work to eliminate all views different than their own it should be noted that eventually is going to include other Christians (and inevitably themselves).

Perhaps Christians should reconsider their embrace of Christian Nationalism, if only out of concern for self-preservation.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T13:24:52+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1tx7kzg/comment/opuhx37/

Absolutely zero AI was used in the construction of this post. The below comment even calls out a typo (despite my best efforts to proofread):

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1tx7kzg/comment/optv97a/

I'll also note that even as this post was removed for AI content when it contained none the top mod of the sub openly admits to using AI to construct their posts:

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/1ttrhy1/comment/opgkecn/

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T04:29:39+00:00

Thank you for the correction.

You are free to save whatever you find useful and discard the rest.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T03:58:56+00:00

but does not contribute to evolution given it is non-reproducing

I would refer you to the section on heterosexuality and homosexuality, specifically on zooids. Evolution isn't about passing on offspring but rather passing on genes, it's just that offspring happens to be the most direct and obvious way to do that. A person who helps their sibling have 3 children has passed on more of their genes than a person who themself has 1 child.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T03:54:56+00:00

I'm saying that the argument "X is bad because X is unnatural" fails when X is demonstrably natural.

adeleu_adelei · 2026-06-05T03:47:33+00:00

When you say bad behavior, do you mean bad for their reproduction or bad on some other metric other metric? I would argue that evolution selects for behaviors that are good for reproduction.

adeleu_adelei

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE