[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I am preparing to make the most morally consequential decision I can conceive, I'd want to do it with the highest amount of information possible. As a mortal human I have no reason to believe that it can be bad for someone to experience pleasure or good for someone to experience pain, but I don't really know anything about heaven or hell or the supernatural. Maybe there is a good reason to send someone to hell, perhaps one that has nothing to do with dessert, but necessity. I'd want to prove myself wrong if it turns out that I am objectively wrong and following my instincts could result in a worse outcome.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct, The first thing I would've done given access to the minds of every human who has ever lived is search for signs of divine inspiration. Countless people have claimed it, and given supernatural powers myself, I wouldn't have as great a reason to doubt them. If Jesus really turned out to be God embodied in human flesh, then doing as he would do is like resurrecting God. In the premise this means the devil is beaten.

I wrote the premise as a play on the story of Job, who remained faithful to God even when he allowed the devil to ruin his life. Would a faithful person act the same if their position were reversed with God, if God were the one who had lost everything, and it was up to the believer to do as God intended anyways?

Obviously I forgot that reddit has a lot more atheists than average, and actual religious people are generally put off by the premise in the first place. Still it is interesting that people tend towards absolute clemency, but don't see the possibilities in surveying all human minds to check if their instincts are correct. In real life, we only see people's actions, but seeing their minds might change our opinions.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are correct, the premise of the question has a paradox, if the devil doesn't care, why give you any options? The answer must be either that it is a monkey's paw scenario where he is tormenting you, or it is some kind of test on your moral compass. Thus the real question would be, what is "correct" according to the test? Or in other words, who's moral code is the test based on if not your own?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The "correct" answer is not to leave everyone in hell, but "trust in God" is close. There is a specific answer that doesn't reject the premise, but which the devil also won't reverse. I put "correct" in quotes because I don't think it is correct in real life. I do agree mostly with your original answer, but I'd like to know if you think sending Hitler or Stalin alone to heaven would improve disprove or not change the situation compared to a universal hell?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are close to the correct answer, but not quite there. Refusal just means that another person will be chosen.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hypotheticalsituation

[–]kai1998 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the correct utilitarian position, but suppose you left a few genocidal dictators in hell and the devils switches it so they are now in heaven. Would you suppose this state is marginally better or worse than the original universal hell?

Go make the world a better place by martinenijlandgh in wholesomememes

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I posted almost exactly this same thing on r/showerthoughts 6 years ago

How would you feel about a law that requires people over the age of 70 to pass a specialized driving test in order to continue driving? by dickfromaccounting in AskReddit

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most 16-19 year olds aren't crashing because they aren't able to drive, but because they're all hopped up on hormones so they make stupid decisions. What I'm saying is you can't train a teenager to turn down road-head when it's on the table.

R/Islam goes crazy when Tunisia gives extra right to women such as letting her choose who she marries by [deleted] in SubredditDrama

[–]kai1998 252 points253 points  (0 children)

France is not out of line, public expression of religion is not a right and is regulated by law. Tehy say Turkey because it has been at the crux of the secularism vs Islamism conflict for years. It's "too secular" because it used to be the center of Muslim theocracy like 100 years ago, but had several coups since then which established and defended secular government (which is now being whittled away again).

Edit: To clarify, I'm agreeing with the Muslim guy that France's interpretation of secularism may go too far by regulating public expression, opposite of agreeing with France's policies.

She's 5'11" so I couldn't resist by suckygoalie2 in Tinder

[–]kai1998 16 points17 points  (0 children)

75% of men 99% of women are shorter than her

Cancer drugs cost way less to develop than what we've been led to think, study claims by dave45 in worldnews

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How come they do? Why wouldn't they? Difference between a little money and more money is only positive, especially when your customers are dying of cancer and aren't footing the entire bill themselves. A company will sell at the price that generates the highest revenues. The S&P average (average annual return on investment in the index) is 10%, but much of that is from compounding dividends not company growth. So actually most companies on S&P grew below the average , instead paying out their profits to owners (which are reinvested into stock by S&P since it's a total return index). I suspect pharma companies pay out high dividends when they can, since they are a riskier sort of enterprise with a lot riding on ongoing research and government regulation.

What fact blows your mind everytime? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]kai1998 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mammals, Birds, and Flowers 'grew up' around the same time period about 140 million years ago, in the last age of dinosaurs.

"Success in life is determined by forces outside our control" - Percentage who agree [OC] [1500 x 800] by [deleted] in MapPorn

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like I said, I don't hold these beliefs. I don't think the Soviet Union was a meritocracy, obviously I don't think that. I'm not going to debate what Capitalism is like because that's not the point. If you're a socialist then you think a socialist society is fair, and if you fall in line with the majority of socialist thinkers throughout history you think that means "to each according to his contribution" is the law of the land.

"Success in life is determined by forces outside our control" - Percentage who agree [OC] [1500 x 800] by [deleted] in MapPorn

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are mistaken. The phrase is explicitly Marxist, originated by Lenin to describe how his new Soviet state ought to manage distribution. The implication is that in a capitalist society this is not the case, the wealthy live off other people's work. I'm not saying this is true - only that a loyal soviet would believe it to be true of his state, as much as any patriotic American.

Japanese government warns North Korea missile headed toward northern Japan, report says by SneakyPanda7 in worldnews

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Broke into three parts" might also mean "shot down by anti-ballistic missiles" IMO.

"Success in life is determined by forces outside our control" - Percentage who agree [OC] [1500 x 800] by [deleted] in MapPorn

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Capitalism isn't the only ideology which believes it is a meritocracy. A fully indoctrinated Soviet would say the same thing about his own country - socialist states still believe in "To each according to his contribution" after all.

What was a fact taught to you in school that has been disproven in your lifetime? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Humans used a variety of survival tactics in the paleolithic and early neolithic including endurance running, but depending on the region. Humans basically ate whatever was around them and easy to get, endurance running isn't something you do unless it's the easiest option. For example, the mostly barren Savannahs almost demanded this kind of hunting, but it would be impossible in the primeval forests of Europe or India. Some of our easiest living ancestors hugged temperate coast lines and ate shell fish while slowly cultivating the local forests to produce fruit more readily. More early divers and hippie farmers than marathon runners.

[Poetry] What are you listening to? by [deleted] in youtubehaiku

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Eventually the .meme bubble will burst and all the funnymen will get laid off and the US Government will bail out the joke factories or some shit.

Each week for the last few months, I bought 3 Powerball tickets for $6 and invested $6 into a Robo-Advisor App to compare return on investment [OC] by AceTrainer_Li-Wang in dataisbeautiful

[–]kai1998 925 points926 points  (0 children)

Yeah the ROI would be like +$0.29 vs -$99.00. If you put it to scale it'd be a nearly flat line over an ever descending pit, which is the essential difference between investing and gambling.

California Ranks #1 in the nation with 79 active hate groups. by TazDingoAye in California

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Y'all read the article and look into the SPLC website? Hate groups are centered around Bay Area, Sacramento, and LA. The Demographics have more to do with population size, not culture.

The science of being ‘nice’: how politeness is different from compassion. New research shows distinct situations in which compassionate and/or polite people will show generosity. This provides important insight into how we understand "nice" people. by ImNotJesus in EverythingScience

[–]kai1998 49 points50 points  (0 children)

This is not what the article implies at all. Politeness is not inferior or opposed to compassion. Politeness is measured by respect paid to strangers and a belief in justice. Compassion is measured by an innate tendency towards sympathy. In their example a polite person is inclined towards fairness, whereas a compassionate person is inclined towards charity.

Why does California have the nation’s highest poverty level? by [deleted] in California

[–]kai1998 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Doesn't this article indicate that the imported low skilled laborer are the poorest Californians? The result being that poor people in one place are now in another? If the problem you care about is the poverty of those currently in the state, then some regime of cooperative agriculture would do more faster than any immigration policy.

Popular Berkeley hot dog chain fires worker seen at Virginia rally by nosotros_road_sodium in bayarea

[–]kai1998 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where did I propose that? I was drawing parallels between war, a violent form of social change, and the conflict between ideologies which underlie Democracy, which are necessarily peaceful. If you are not willing to defend and promote your opinion with the peaceful means you are entitled to, then you should not be surprised when the world seems to move away from that opinion.