Discussion thread [Serious]

[atomtengeralattjaro]

Peak capitalism: ".ORG" is being sold.
here is a site that explains why that's probably bad, and you can sign a petition about it:
https://savedotorg.org/

edit:
apparently the protests worked, and .ORG was saved for now!

[Froggychum]

I didn't know where else to put this; so here we go.

I had a neat idea for a feature suggestion. My idea is that we could add a little thing at the bottom called 'Asdfversaries' right under the 'Birthdays' tab.

There it would list all the people who joined the forums on the current date.

I figured since the technology already exists with the aforementioned birthdays tab, this should be easy to implement? IIRC, a few of the forum moderators had some experience in programming, so maybe they would know how to do this.

Anyway, just an idea that struck me when I realized my forum anniversary was coming up in 3 days, and I also realized that 'anniversary' and 'asdf' make an awesome portmanteau!

tell me what u think :3

[atomtengeralattjaro]

Sounds doable I guess...
It would however require a particular amount of nonlaziness to implement.
wait a minute, maybe there is already an extension for that...
*checks*
And the answer is yes.
But it's abandoned and not available anymore.
And the other one I found was so old it used a different system ("modifications" instead of "extensions"), so old that the entire system was deprecated years ago.
Hmm, back to the eventual possibility of nonlaziness then...

[Froggychum]

Nonlaziness is an extremely rarely-occurring natural vibe, so forget that I asked; such a miraculous source of energy is certainly better spent on things like going to the moon or understanding gravity

[nervoris20]

Hello, for sure there is and I believe that there is a higher power, it is obvious to me other people believe it and it is also true for them and for atheists I do not feel offensive at all

[assdef]

Hello, for sure there is and I believe that there is a higher power, it is obvious to me other people believe it and it is also true for them and for atheists I do not feel offensive at all

If you believe it, then for you, it is true.

[Froggychum]

The whole point of 'faith' is to believe in something without knowing whether it is true or not.

If you know something is true, you cannot have faith in it, because you have no need to 'believe' it, since you 'know' it.

Basically, believing in something does not make it 'true' (as in 'real'), because the entire essence is to place your trust without assurance.

With that out of the way, I do not believe there is a higher power. I cannot know whether there is or not, but it is most logical to not make assumptions.

[assdef]

But truth isn't universal, it's a matter of perspective. And without belief, knowledge and truth don't exist--a belief is a subjective requirement for knowledge. If you don't believe in something, it will never be true for you. You do not believe in a higher power, ergo, that is your truth. But others believe a higher power exists, so that becomes their truth.

[Froggychum]

But truth isn't universal, it's a matter of perspective.

I disagree, but I suppose it's a matter of our frameworks being different.

My framework is that of an objective reality, while you seem to be claiming that reality is subjective to every individual.

Unfortunately, I have long held that those living in completely incorrigible frameworks will never be able to discuss anything properly, because we do not view the world in the same way.

There is no argument that I have that can convince you that truth is universal. Of course, I believe in perspective, but it doesn't change the 'truth', just looks at it from a different point.

And without belief, knowledge and truth don't exist--a belief is a subjective requirement for knowledge. If you don't believe in something, it will never be true for you

Actually, I agree with you on this. The line between "knowledge" and "belief" is iffy at best. People will swear up and down that they "know" something, but they can turn out to have misremembered or otherwise been wrong.

The distinction is there, but it's hard to say it's absolutely important or even reliable, since humans are not organisms which can see the world in an objective lens, in the first place. Reason can only take us so far, especially since we don't have any inherent way to measure reality.

Still, I do not concede that means objective truth does not exist, but rather that humans are not capable of grasping it, at least at this point in time.

Tl;dr It is an impossible task to prove that an objective reality exists (on a side note, it is also impossible to prove a subjective reality exists. or any reality, for that matter), so I will make no effort in beginning to speak on whether a higher power truly exists.

[assdef]

Isn't that the appeal to ignorance fallacy though: it can't be proven so it can't be true?

I would also argue that a "higher power" is not necessarily a being or beings (e.g., God). Belief in a higher power could simply mean you believe things happen for a reason (or that the universe is random/chaotic) and use that idea as an internal compass to help you orient to the world around you.

[Froggychum]

Isn't that the appeal to ignorance fallacy though: it can't be proven so it can't be true?

I don't think so.

I didn't say it cannot be true that a higher power exists, I didn't even say whether it can be proven or not.

I was solely talking about whether the universe has objective truth (like I think it does), or if it's all subjective (which I believe you were stated to think).

Personally, I think if a higher power does exist (which I also do not believe), it WILL be hard, if not downright impossible, to prove it is so.

I also agree that whether we can prove it or not has no bearing on whether or not it actually exists.

I would also argue that a "higher power" is not necessarily a being or beings (e.g., God). Belief in a higher power could simply mean you believe things happen for a reason (or that the universe is random/chaotic) and use that idea as an internal compass to help you orient to the world around you.

If you know that the universe is random and chaotic, then you do not believe in a higher power but simply know a bit about scientific theories. Unless, I suppose, you believe in some great force/entity perpetuating Chaos throughout the cosmos.

I agree that a higher power does not have to be one or more entities, it could also be a driving force of some kind. But, there is a limit to that. Nobody calls 'entropy' or 'particle physics' a higher power, because it is a fundamental force of the universe, discovered by science. Not at all mystical nor spiritual.

-

Anyway, I feel like we may be getting a little off topic here, so I am gonna call back to the source of this discussion.

I think Nervorsis was originally saying that they are CONVINCED there is a higher power. Because, their exact words were 'for sure there is and I believe that there is', which is a contradiction as I previously explained. If you know something to be true, you have no reason to believe in it. It's not an act of faith to put your trust in something that you know will always work perfectly.

They also said "it is obvious to me other people believe it and it is also true for them" which I guess means he believes in a subjective truth/reality as well. I disagree, because there is no evidence that people believing in something makes it true in (objective) reality.

lastly, they said, "and for atheists I do not feel offensive at all" which I interpret as meaning "And for atheists [who disagree with me], I do not feel offended at all" which is not an argument, so I have no comment.

Basically, my two points are (in direct response to Nervorsis):

1. I know that: If you know something to be true, you cannot believe in it. Belief/faith is an act of putting trust in the uncertain.

2. I believe that: There is an objective reality, which exists beyond any subjective truth. Certainly, there is perspective, but it is imperfect and incomplete, not independent or isolated.

[assdef]

1. I know that: If you know something to be true, you cannot believe in it. Belief/faith is an act of putting trust in the uncertain.

Knowledge (or as you put it, "know something to be true") doesn't exist without belief first. That's why hypothesis is an earlier step in the scientific method before conclusion. If you don't believe in something first, it will never become knowledge. If you believe in an objective reality then your perspective may include "true beliefs" and "false beliefs" - but just because a true belief is knowledge doesn't mean it is no longer a belief.

[gene14]

The ideas you write about seem to be cool to me, I would like to see how it will look like when it will be added

[Froggychum]

The ideas you write about seem to be cool to me, I would like to see how it will look like when it will be added

I think you mean that "I would like to see how what you write about will look like when you talk more about it"

I will actually say that my perspective now is closer to what assdef said. I totally forgot that we talked about this, but I vaguely remember disagreeing

The whole point of 'faith' is to believe in something without knowing whether it is true or not.

I still think this is correct. Of course, faith can be used as a word in many ways. But, when it comes to metaphysical assumptions like 'higher powers', these are utterly unprovable, and thus require faith (defined here as "knowledge-less belief").

But truth isn't universal, it's a matter of perspective. And without belief, knowledge and truth don't exist--a belief is a subjective requirement for knowledge. If you don't believe in something, it will never be true for you. You do not believe in a higher power, ergo, that is your truth. But others believe a higher power exists, so that becomes their truth.

I think the way me and assdef were using truth in this conversation was different. I was using truth as though there was one of it, and it was something nobody really knows, while assdef was using truth in the way that every person has one.

From now on, I will be more clear with my words, and will split 'truth' into 'objective' and 'subjective'. I believe both exist, but looking back it does seem like I was denying the latter.

I agree with him that everyone has different 'truths', but I also believe there is an objective truth (or at least something beyond my personal perception). Otherwise, I would be a solipsist. Solipsism is a mind-poison and I have ventured down that road. It is a wholly unproductive and frankly harmful way to look at things.

I don't think assdef is a solipsist. I really hope not. If so, there is no point in talking with him. That's not meant to be dismissive, it's simply inherently reasonable given that those people believe only believe in the existence of a 'self'.

Isn't that the appeal to ignorance fallacy though: it can't be proven so it can't be true?

As for this, in regards to higher powers, I am agnostic. Simply put, any metaphysical assumptions beyond the ones needed to function (which solipsists discard) I refuse to make. However, even though the existence of 'higher powers' cannot be proven, they equally so cannot be disproven. Thus, I am not atheist, but agnostic.

Knowledge (or as you put it, "know something to be true") doesn't exist without belief first. That's why hypothesis is an earlier step in the scientific method before conclusion. If you don't believe in something first, it will never become knowledge. If you believe in an objective reality then your perspective may include "true beliefs" and "false beliefs" - but just because a true belief is knowledge doesn't mean it is no longer a belief.

I originally argued disagreed with this, but clearly never responded.

But, I now understand that one does actually need to believe in something before they can recognize it.

It was a little naive of me to think that everyone would acknowledge anything when it was simply 'proven' to them.

Also, my favorite part of this is "If you don't believe in something first, it will never become knowledge". This is the thing which most describes how my thinking has changed. Also, drawing a parallel to science was a good way to move me over as a nerd, ha ha.

---------

Thus, my thinking is something like such now:

Objective Truth is a metaphysical assumption I hold. This is a belief which I have no way to (dis)prove. Still, I strongly believe this is good to hold.
Subjective Truth exists, and is comprised of what a person believes/knows.
If a belief is proven - it becomes knowledge or a 'true belief'.
If a belief is disproven - it is not knowledge, but it is still a belief or a 'false belief'.

As for higher powers, I do not metaphysically assume they exist. I think it is not a healthy thing to hold. Of course, it is also needless to state the harmful material consequences of most all religious institutions. Not that they do only bad things, but local churches giving food to the poor cannot make up for global trends of oppression. Especially since those churches' services could and should be replaced with government welfare.

I am happy to discuss more about this. I think my framing is different (or just clearer?) from before. Also, I cannot stop thinking about this video which really helped organize my thoughts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4cAhHWSqBE

I love this guy's channel (funny as shit, and I can't stop quoting him ), so check out some of his other vids if u want. He basically moved me away from being a teenage neonazi/fascist. I am now a dirty socialist lmao.

Honestly, my political instincts are terrible, so I'm relieved (and more than a little ashamed) to admit that I really just agree with whatever this guy says since I don't trust myself in this field at all.

[bengt45]

For me, the ideas seem to be very cool, they are very interesting

[ole44]

When it comes to God, I also believe in him, but I don't go to church, God is everywhere who believes in him

[Froggychum]

Strange that we've got a few new users in a row now with near-identical usernames...

Any funny business going on right now, mods?

[milo23]

I also believe in god and I don't go to church either, but you don't have to go to church to believe in god.

[Froggychum]

I also believe in god and I don't go to church either, but you don't have to go to church to believe in god.

This is true. Some may argue you need to go to church to worship, though. It seems silly to me to gatekeep your religion, but each one seems to do it to some extent. I have no skin in the game, regardless.

On another note, milo23. you would not happen to be related to ole44 and/or bengt45 would you? If you're the same person, you can just use one account instead of making a new one every time you post.

[atomtengeralattjaro]

If they are spambots, they are not doing a great job at advertising anything. Odd.