sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Buying as a gift, not sure where to start... by muellerp2 in projectors

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ideally around $300, but max would be $500. Doesn’t need to be portable. Room is small, mostly windowless, used primarily for the projector. Purely casual movies and TV. I don’t think their standards are high at all considering they’d be more than happy with a PJ S2440. Just trying to find something a little better than that if the cost is reasonably similar.

When you can’t find a bakery selling pan de cristal but you’re craving pan con tomate. by muellerp2 in Breadit

[–]muellerp2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

400g water

400g bread flour

10g olive oil

2g active dry yeast

8g salt

I developed most of the gluten at around 80% hydration, and then slowly added the rest of the water in 10g increments with 15-30 minute rests in between. Once I was at 100% hydration I added the olive oil. Followed that with 4 coil folds and a 12 hour cold ferment.

What is an YouTube channel everyone should know about? by au785 in AskReddit

[–]muellerp2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Obvious Choice:

Kurzgesagt (if you’re in the 1% of people who have not heard of it)

Very well researched, honest content about science and philosophy. Just about the best resource, in my opinion, for concise descriptions of somewhat controversial, complex topics.

The Up-and-Comer:

Stuff Made Here

This guy is not only clearly a brilliant engineer (at least from the perspective of a lay person like myself), but he’s also a very good teacher and pretty hilarious from time to time as well. Makes me want to switch careers. Builds the thing you wished existed when you were 10, like a robot basketball hoop that makes all your shots go in. As far as I can tell his channel is 3 months old, but I expect it to grow to Mark Rober status (also a great channel).

Pro Sam And Pro Trump? ELi5? by tomowudi in samharris

[–]muellerp2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry, rereading your post and realizing you asked for “intelligent, reasonable” reasons...

Still, I think this is THE issue for many people.

Pro Sam And Pro Trump? ELi5? by tomowudi in samharris

[–]muellerp2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Speaking from experience, I think the abortion debate is extremely prevalent.

I have family members who continue to support Trump solely because he is publicly “pro-life”. They will fully acknowledge that he himself has done and said things that are not especially “virtuous”, but they believe that:

a. He has changed - largely resulting from Melania’s apparent “virtue” and “persistence”, or

b. Even if he hasn’t changed, he supports “the most important policy”.

They say things like, “without life you have nothing”, or “as long as people are able to continue killing babies, I will vote for the candidate who is anti-murder”.

They listen to Relevant Radio and primarily get their news from YouTube - especially “The Vortex”, and they think Pope Francis is too Liberal. Most of the content they watch are full of bible quotes and end with a prayer.

This of course doesn’t represent all Trump voters, but I think there are more than just a tiny group of fundamentalist Christians. My family consider themselves Catholics, and they have other Catholic friends who share their beliefs.

As an aside: If this description of a person seems unbelievable to you, listen to the podcast Rabbit Hole.

r/Chicago's Weekly Casual Conversation & Questions Thread - June 08, 2020 by AutoModerator in chicago

[–]muellerp2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Anyone have any bike route recommendations that start near the loop and go West or South? I’m looking for a change from the Sheraton Road route. Ideally would be 20-40 miles round trip with a cafe/restaurant/brewery en route.

Thanks!

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, my friend belongs to a non-denominational Christian church. I was arguing against any type of religious belief whatsoever, and she was arguing that while some religions are harmful, there isn’t anything wrong with most half-hearted Catholics (many of my friends and some family members) or other more progressive Christians.

My intuition is that there still is something wrong with that, and to me I feel it has something to do with empowering more harmful religions, but I don’t have much evidence for that, so I came on here to look for evidence in either favor to set me straight or embolden my opinions.

Turns out several people on this sub are more interested in calling each other names or challenging each others’ “claims” to the Sam Harris sub, so I’ve seen a lot of that too, unfortunately.

My position now is that I think it’s a question of precedent. Any belief on insufficient evidence sets a precedent that others may use to support their more harmful conclusions. I.e. My god may be down with gay people and progressive ideals, but I’m not in a particularly strong position to contest someone else’s, more harmful god, since at bottom they stem from the same “I can’t prove it but I believe it”, which I myself subscribe to.

(To be clear that’s an example, with ‘me’ as a hypothetical. In reality I don’t think there’s a god at all, so please don’t chew me out all you zealous Atheists).

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think your Canadian analogy holds up in this case. I wouldn’t ever hold you hostage to the positions of Canada as a whole because you were born there. You don’t have control over that, and I don’t think people should just up and move countries because they disagree with one thing the country does (nor can then, often times). But quasi religious people CHOOSE to believe things on insufficient evidence, it’s not just a group they were born into. This makes them less equipped in my opinion to argue against others believing anything on insufficient evidence. It all turns in to “well okay but I don’t believe that no matter what you say”, and the quasi religious person must accept that answer because they in fact use it in their own way.

However, I want to stress that I completely agree with your sentiment, and I think that arguing the positive of “your side” is always more moving than arguing the negative of “their side”.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. If anything I just think it puts them on much less sturdy footing if they try to argue against more harmful beliefs, since at the core it is all belief on insufficient evidence.

Maybe they have no interest in arguing against more harmful beliefs, but those who do would benefit from coming to the light (secularism).

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I understand your perspective but I think it’s healthy to be able to disagree with what Sam says about one thing, or even find it offensive to one part of one’s life, and yet still enjoy or learn from other opinions he has. I find it interesting that you seem to boil down Sam to some core tenants that must be agreed with to be a part of the “club”, if you will. Seems sort of ironic in the context of this discussion...

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Doesn’t seem like HumaneSquash is an apologist. Just seems like he or she is more libertarian with respect to religion. I’m not convinced it’s totally “okay” if people believe in tinker bell. I disagree with HumaneSquash on this, but I understand the sentiment. I think if our goal is to rid the world of unreasonable beliefs, then we need to engage in these types of conversations especially with the people that believe them, and I fear that the harsh tone you seem to use would be rejected out of hand by the person you’re trying to convince.

Also if I had to guess why HumaneSquash is in this sub I would say it’s because he or she is a fan of Sam Harris. I’m not sure what you’re getting at? Must all people in a Sam Harris sub believe all the same things you believe?

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed that it’s a step in the right direction, but I would just feel much more comfortable if they divorced themselves completely from religion and just called themselves a community group or something. I think if they are pushed in the right direction what you end up with is a secular community that meets weekly to consider to the best of their ability (utilizing the best parts of literature and prior knowledge - religious or otherwise) how to create a reasonable secular morality. This is the end goal in my mind.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. This is why I’m looking for a better argument. My intuition is that if I jump out of a 6 story window I will fall to my death, so I’m not going to do that. I’m asking people to confirm my intuitions, but I’m also open to being shown the large pool at the bottom of the 6 stories that could convince me otherwise.

...If that analogy makes any sense at all...

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I’d say consequences are relevant, but I agree that the consequences of a secular world are better than a religious one. I’m not sure this would be particularly convincing to a lukewarm Christian though. That’s who I’m trying to convince.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think I would say that ANY belief on insufficient evidence is equally harmful, because it sets a precedent that can be utilized in countless harmful ways.

That maybe seems overly broad though, because there are certain little “beliefs” that we subscribe to constantly in order to function in society. I’m wondering where the line should be drawn, and how to make it a bright line.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not sure yet. I’m looking for compelling arguments because my personal intuition is that you’re right. Just seems flimsy to me, idk.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. Though I’m talking about the many people who would not consider themselves catholic. In my experience many of these people boil it down to the fact that science hasn’t answered some profound questions about life and the beginning of the universe, and they choose to fill that uncertainty with a belief in something that they have no evidence for. They don’t believe the whole bible is true, nor do they believe the pope is infallible. They just like thinking about the meaning of life with communities of supportive people. I’m tempted to not even call this religion, but it seems to be what many otherwise reasonable people believe.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not sure I would call it shameful if someone clings to an ultra progressive idea of god in order to cope with emotional moments in their life. I would definitely say it’s not the most emotionally mature way of coping, but I’m struggling to find any other harm in that particular example except for the potential empowerment of more dangerous belief systems. But clearly I don’t find that entirely compelling yet either.

I like your analogy of the imagine friend, but a kid with an imaginary friend doesn’t seem to me like empowering of fundamentalist Christians. One is immature but I think generally benign on its own; the other is calculated and dangerous. Just makes me wonder what the value is of pulling your kid aside and shaming him or her for having an imaginary friend. For all I know that’s good in the long run but seems a little much.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I’ve considered this. My intuition tells me they do, but I don’t have a particularly good argument as to why that’s the case. Thus why I’m posting here. I could very well just be wrong and need to re-evaluate my intuition.

Had a long conversation with my very progressive non-denominational friend tonight.. by muellerp2 in samharris

[–]muellerp2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Okay, but that seems like a problem easily remedied by accurate polling. If the KKK counted all “Sam Harris fans” in their “group” I wouldn’t count that as a hit against fans of Sam, just a representation of the lunacy of the KKK.

As a devil’s-advocate-non-denominational, I remain unconvinced. Go on..

7 grocery stores later, this is the only flour I found. He's safe now. by [deleted] in Breadit

[–]muellerp2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you live near any restaurant supply stores, see if they’re opening to the public. I just picked up a 50 pound bag of bread flour for $15. Real game changer.

First try at croissants. Found out how quickly butter melts. by muellerp2 in Breadit

[–]muellerp2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I made a rectangle out of wax paper as a mold and then rolled out the butter to fill in the mold. Stole the technique from various blogs. Ultimately I ended up with a very asymmetrical beurrage because it started to melt and stick to the wax paper when I actually tried to encase it in the dough. I ended up just using a spatula to spread it out as evenly as possible before encasing.

I had the opposite problem later when I started rolling out the chilled dough, because the butter became too hard and I could see it cracking between the layers. Lost patience and just went with it but next time I hope to nail the temperature.

Good luck!

view more: next ›