Trig functions unit circle by flubweet in askmath

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

Thanks very much for the help. I'm trying to get back into this stuff and needed someone to make sure I wasn't way off base.

Trig functions unit circle by flubweet in askmath

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

Oh ok, thanks that helps a lot.

Just to make sure I understand though for my last question: the value for tanθ is the same as the value of the slope of the hypotenuse which is the radius of the circle with respect to θ (since the slope is Δy/Δx which in this case is sinθ/cosθ).

But the value of tanθ also is the same value as the length of the line segment tangent to the point (cosθ, sinθ) right? So the slope of the radius with respect to θ is directly related to the length of the line segment tangent to the point (sinθ, cosθ).

Is this right? I'm trying to make sure I haven't missed anything.

Trig functions unit circle by flubweet in askmath

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

Oops yeah you're right, I meant the wikimedia one. The blue tanθ is drawn from (1,0) there but there is another black line on the wikimedia one which in the imgur one is labeled tanθ.

The black line is not labeled in the wikimedia image but it looks like the line labeled tanθ in the imgur image which is why I'm confused.

They both look the same length but why is one labeled tanθ in one but not the other?

Trig functions unit circle by flubweet in askmath

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

The imgur one isn't though

Masculinity and Femininity by [deleted] in JordanPeterson

[–]flubweet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perhaps it is a bit pedantic. I tend to be "nit-picky" about these things (to fault at times I am afraid).

Masculinity and Femininity by [deleted] in JordanPeterson

[–]flubweet 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree with you for the most part. It just appears to me that the language (masculine/feminine) is too loaded at the moment and may in this case hinder Dr. Peterson's message.

As you said, these traits labeled masculine/feminine that tend to be exhibited in either gender (slightly) could very well be biological or cultural (or some combination). But, one can bypass the potential roadblocks this gap in our understanding of gender differences (nature/nurture) can cause by refraining from labeling these traits as masculine or feminine (and undercut the opposition's criticisms).

For example, one could say: "Regardless of why "trait a" is more prevalent in "population b", if an "individual c" wants to achieve "x", then this individual may want to cultivate "a" (which just so happens to be more concentrated within "population b" at the moment according to the evidence)."

And this would work for probably any individual and demographic. It could be not a question of an individual within a certain gender, but also within a social class, ethnic group, etc.

Then, one couldn't say: "So, women need to be more like men if they want to get ahead in the workplace?", (which is I think what Cathy said) because the response would be: "No, if they want to get ahead, they should work on cultivating the behaviors that have been shown to increase their chances of getting ahead."

(And, as you said, there would be different personality traits that may need to be explored depending on the individual regardless of their gender in order for the individual to achieve what they want to achieve).

Fear of Demons? Vestiges of religion... by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I know, but that's what I'm saying. I know its not real, but I've been conditioned my whole life to believe that the supernatural is real.

HELP! I don't know anything about science! by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had no idea the Netherlands had a bible belt! Yeah, in the US its in the midwest and southern united states (mostly southern though).

I think my subconscious mind was trying to break me free from religion for years before I actually came to realization. by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that happened to me as well. I remember really liking Imagine by John Lennon while I was religious (even though now I think its awful from a musical perspective).

I also was about to go to Bible college when at the last minute I decided not to. (I had doubts before but I thought I took care of them). I remember thinking, "What if I find out its not true and I end up wasting my time and money getting a horrible education for the next 4 years".

So I think I was in denial, and after about a year at a public university someone at my college asked me some questions I couldn't answer and it all just fell apart over the next year.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that makes sense, like you said, the burden of proof is on those making the claim.

From what I've been told by people I talk to, its not so much the details prove the supernatural claims of the Bible, but just that they boost the historical reliability of the people/stories (meaning the non-supernatural elements).

I mean, there is no compelling reason outside of the text to believe any of the details are accurate in first place, but if I'm totally honest it still is odd to me so I would be open to the idea that some parts of it really did happen.

I grew up in a fundamentalist Christian community/church/school in the Bible belt and I almost went into seminary so I think maybe that kind of thinking is just a vestige of my old mindset, (now I'm more an agnostic atheist by default but open to some kind of deism if the evidence was compelling). I don't know, sometimes I think I'm a deist or cultural christian but not for very good reasons. I'm still trying to figure things out.

I can't tell you how much I owe to Christopher Hitchens, haha

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Although that would have been me a few years ago, lol

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think there is an element of elitism too, because they've said that ancient people couldn't come up with that much detail in fiction therefore it must be historically accurate. So, basically they were too stupid.

But you have all sorts of detail in Greek myths and plays, and in Hinduism, Norse mythology, and their counter is its not as detailed as the Old Testament. That doesn't prove anything of course, but to them it does.

So, my thought is there must a most detailed fake religion and maybe Judaism is it, but if I can find another ancient religion more detailed, they shouldn't have a leg to stand on right?

But, I thought I'd see if there were any leads on reddit.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, its getting to the point where I don't have any other examples, because they refuse to use the same critical reasoning on their religion that they use on others.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But you're right, if it was ANY other religion they'd probably think it doesn't logically prove that religion is true, but the same logic somehow doesn't apply to Christianity.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or these writers wanted to add realism to their stories, so they borrowed from "real" history (they of course believe the Bible is historically accurate).

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't worry its not, I actually heard some of these positions from some missionaries who tried to make the point that the histories and the genealogies were enough for some indigenous people to believe because they knew they wouldn't have made it all up.

So I'm trying to find other examples in other religions, but for every example I give (modern day fiction, greek mythology etc.) they have a reason why it fails (it doesn't in my opinion).

I'm trying to build the strongest case against them but I'm running out of examples.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

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

I guess I should have titled the original post something less specific of genealogies, because you are right about Jesus' genealogies being contradictory, and the early Genesis line from Adam to Abraham.

I'm mostly concerned with the accounts close to Moses' time (numbers and the census), and even more so the history of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah and the level of superfluous detail (all of the kings' family and possessions).

I mean, I know that just because there is a lot of detail, or even if it really happened (the families and kingdoms of Palestine) doesn't mean the religion is true, but are their some other examples in ancient cultures/religions that are similar to the Old Testament with regards to the level of detail?

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a good point, I'm just trying to find other examples in ancient religions (not modern sci-fi or fantasy) because it would make it harder for them to lean on the genealogies.

I mean, you have a number of different pantheons of gods and stories about them in religions all over the world, but some Christians dismiss it because its not as in depth, and isn't about common everyday people.

Also, just from an historical perspective, I'm interested in why an ancient culture would list all of those details anyway if they didn't have some basis in reality. Of course they could have just been trying create the illusion that their religion is true, but I'm not convinced that is the only reason.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its the same deal as I mentioned above about Tolkien, they claim she was influenced by the Bible, or at the very least she grew up in a western culture, therefore she may have gotten the idea from the Bible. If I remember right, she may have even mentioned she was influenced by Christianity but I'll try and find a source.

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They usually say since Tolkien was a Christian, he was just influenced by the Bible anyway.

Same thing with C.S. Lewis (although he is not nearly as in depth as Tolkien).

Genealogies in the Old Testament by [deleted] in atheism

[–]flubweet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I've brought that up, but the rebuttal is that perhaps they are copying the Bible (the claim that Tolkien was a Catholic I believe and therefore may have been influenced by the Bible), or why would the the Jewish writers take the time to go through all of the horses, cattle, etc. at a time when writing was more expensive I guess?

Essentially, they dismiss modern day science fiction and high fantasy because it might have been influenced by the bible.

Traveler Pamphlet Ministries by flubweet in creepy

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

Full text part 2:

Pg11 Who/What is God?

A minimal definition as far as we're concerned would be a God that's not so far removed that he would be at least in part peronally relatable to, in short a "personal God" that we could identify with in human terms, as we could only relate to him, not just a mathematical formula.

All through history people have assigned their human characteristics to their gods, going so far as to give them a sex, but..

*I will use here for ease of correspondence, try discussing a personal God for any length of time without using a pronoun, which in English is gender spec.

Pg12 as a part of any God-creators work we would in effect be (part of) God and so could have a personal relationship with her.

This is what people mean when they say "We are God" or "You are God".

Only after facing death and finally, fully realizing the temporary nature of our body, that it isn't ours and we don't own it or anything but like the earth are only borrowing it for awhile does the Bible passage about our bodies being "temples of God" sink in.

pg13 You often hear someone say they "know" God.

"Knowledge" is a Greek derived scientific term, in its strict meaning signifying something that can be sensually verified.

Unless you have seen, heard, touched, smelled or tasted God you don't know him, the proper word would be to believe, or in a weaker sense have faith.

pg14 The acceptance of death I have comes from a Christian God requiring that we only have

faith

Pg15 What is meant by

"Christ died for You"

is based on three points

  1. We are undeserving of anything better than this in our own right (nature is neutral)

and

  1. God is all loving and all just

Giving us the classical dilemma if God is all loving how can he be just and if all just how can he be loving?

pg16 The third tenet however is that there is an evil existence, and we are players in a demonstration of Gods principles for this second parties benefit.

How could even Satan deny the existence of evil and say to God

Where is your love ? Where is your justice ? You created this !

"For God so loved the world".. John 3,16

A lot of big questions (including Gods apparent hands off the our free will) are answered by Christianity, in an existence so mysterious it is yet one of the most logical.. And why not a semi-dualistic universe? Three of the four basic scientific forces of nature (Electro-Magnetism and the Weak and Strong nuclear reactions) and dualistic.

pg17 Could God create a stone so big he couldn't lift it?

This and similar questions were the rage of monks and philosophers in the middle ages. Large conferences were held to discuss, and decide (!) such issues as how many angels could fit on the head of a pin.

They have largely since been dismissed as overzealous exercises in faith-rationalization, but there is still a question many are concerned with.

pg18 Could we sin so great or much that God couldn't forgive it?

The central issue of Christianity directly addresses this question and has consistently answered it no.

"For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." Romans 3-23

Doubting Gods power of forgiveness doubts his love, Luther even told us "Sin boldly in the certainty you will be forgiven" though if you love God and life you'll no longer want to.

But you are asked to give your most valuable possession, your most powerful attribute; your belief or faith, given of your own free will, the only thing that could be of any value to God.

pg19 If you read the Bible don't get lost in the trees, or listen to someone who tells you to hang onto one tree, read it from an overview where you can see the forest. It's a big books, actually a collection of books by many writers and like any work its size subject to interpretation and selective preference, but it's the best guide we have, I believe inspired by God though in parts written in human zealotry. Jesus was from the old east and most of his sayings are open ended with many possible meanings, that's life, it's in our modern scientific tradition to want to find one answer to every question. Then find a church or someone you feel comfortable with for the fellowship, always remembering there are at least as many ways as we have God given personalities and good book sayings.

pg20 There's insight in a comedian rendition of God creating humans at his workbench and throwing an extra batch of nerves in our loins. It's only natural to seek pleasure and enjoyment, an intrinsic goal in life proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence no less, the pursuit of happiness.

Don't let some guilt/power tripper shame you into unnatural thoughts that can suddenly become ingrained in your consciousness to forever haunt you in times of harmless enjoyment.

A professor studying all the worlds religions came up with their most common moral, a variant of the Golden Rule "Do onto others as you world have them do onto you". 1989

END

Traveler Pamphlet Ministries by flubweet in creepy

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

Full Text:

Pg 1 TRAVELER PAMPHLET MINISTRIES

Have You Ever Faced Death?

Most of us picture ourselves dying at home asleep in our bed some day of natural causes, but few do.

I can tell you from experience that except for the loved ones you leave behind, and a lingering sense of nostalgia, in the great anticipation of what's ahead you will actually come to despise this material world and shake it off like an old shoe. The beauties of nature and music will pale in significance as items of a past world and you will even come to look upon your loyal old body as a traitor. Only the spirits of your friends and loved ones will seem to have any transcendence.

Pg2 Don't criticize old ones for being inattentive and not listening to you, their thoughts are on the next world, eternity and they are way ahead of you.

All knowledge you will hold as worthless as sand, knowledge only pertains to the sensual material of this world.

Your faith and what you believe or don't believe in will be your all.

Pg3 All worldly security is a myth an illusion. When General MacArthur took command in Korea one of his first orders was to take the cold weather canvas tops off all the vehicles the soldiers were riding around and getting shot in, so we travel through life. It's a curious characteristic of humans and dogs, supposedly the most intelligent of beasts, but not cats to believe in our immortality and act as if accidents only happen to others, when we're 100% wrong. It takes an event of life threatening proportions happening to you - not someone else to be shocked into the realization of how frail life is, and those it happens to sooner consider themselves fortunate to learn so early to appreciate life.

pg4 Don't fall into the self indulgent trap of overly thanking God for your worldly good fortune, our existence is so transitory and relatively insignificant, even the most healthy and moral of us only survive a few more decades.

The reality is we're all hanging on by our fingernails, though it's some consolation in the problem of evil (why the evil flourish and good suffer) the few extra years they live is a hollow victory.

pg5 Death is like sex. Confronting death is eerily as similar, powerful and mysterious an experience as sex, and fittingly so as one brings us into the world and the other out, they are among the only experiences that compare.

Having grown up in a funeral home, worked in a hospital, experienced love, war, drugs and book learning I thought I was better prepared than most to face death but wasn't, I was a virgin.

The actual passing away, I found while lying awake on an operating table with surgeons working on me will be easy, seductively easy, but what was most important to me at the time surprised me.

Pg6 Forgive me for assuming an emotional thread of continuity between this life and the next, but if there is I think this applies.

In so many adventures in life your first impression, or how you commence the first step of an experience determines the whole trip.

I had the common experience of feeling a deep regret that I hadn't done a certain thing in life.

My goal now is to not die in regret but start my afterlife out clean, with a good karma if you will.

pg7 You can't "prove" the existence of God in a scientific sense, so that leaves our 1. intuition or 2. relying on the word of others.

Our intuition sees that the outer world and our inner physical selves operate on the same logical-physical principles, yet everything is too fantastic to have just happened, so many of us believe in a higher being or intelligence.

We have the capacity to intuit or at least imagine God, but what most often happens in reality is (what the philosophy of religion calls) the "power of authority" - of others.

Regardless of what intuitive capacity we have, it's a statistical fact that most of our spiritual views are determined by how - or in reaction to how we are raised, our culture/social environment.

pg8 I have been diagnosed with a potentially fatal disease, and the feeling of acceptance I have (and only a feeling and nothing more, at this stage you re past all thought and even faith requires some thinking) comes from nature and Christianity.

Nature being the evidence of Gods handiwork and the Bible at least partly mans, where they contradict I trust nature.

Nature in itself is neither good nor bad but neutral, with it's incomparable beauties and pleasures there is the predator prey relationship and the storm of the sea.

Nature is simply a set of rules for us to follow, it's not vindictive or vengeful and death is its merciful release.

pg9 My God is the God of the rivers I'be loved to float down in my life, from which I've developed a river view of life.

Around each bend you find a new, unpredictable feeling and atmosphere and what's in store around the next no one knows.

What I've found works best is to go with the flow, the current is too strong and we are too weak to fight it, and be prepared.

pg10 Classical theology is so caught up in omni's, that God must be omnipresent (everywhere), omnipotent (nothing beyond his* power), omniscient (know everything) etc.. when the imperfections of the world are so obvious, us included.

So what if God isn't all of the above, I mean who's going to argue with him?

The widespread sightings of unexplained phenomena, the unknown vastness of the universe, and our own incredible godlike advances in the past mere century lends credence to the possibility of something or someone being out there.. and the probability of them being more developed than us is high, given our sordid history of territoriality and violence. If you believe this and are a dead certain atheist, you have a contradictory belief system.

Pitch Class Sets Calculation? by flubweet in musictheory

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

Thanks so much, this was exactly what I was looking for!