- 143 Posts
- 435 Comments
1·14 hours agoI mean, if the bias was based on skin-colour or sex, would you feel differently about it?
1·13 hours agoNo, because it’s circular logic.
It is, and that’s inherent in the problem under consideration, the problem of the ‘uncaused caused’ or the ‘first mover’. Logic can either be A) circular or B) not-circular. Any not-circular logic must explain each element by referring to a prior, but then you’ve got an infinite regress. So you’re trapped in a dilemma: do you want the circular logic or the infinite regress? Liebniz’s choice was to say that God was inherently existent, like when Lao Tzu said 道法 自然
There’s no reason for a necessary being to exist before it does
Correct. It is necessary: it is self-causing. It does not stand upon a ‘reason’, unlike everything else in conditioned existence.
to exist before it does
You’re assuming it is subject to the laws of linear time and causation, and point out how that assumption leads to a contradiction. But Liebniz’s God is not subject to the laws of linear time and causation. Which is the whole point of positing it: because if it were subject to those laws: infinite regress.
and no evidence that one does in the real world.
Well the world exists, so all this existence must have some cause. That was the starting point of the conversation: Why is there something instead of nothing?
I was complaining about this on [email protected]
About 10% of pop culture stories, maybe more, are about billionaires. Are 10% of people billionaires?
And even in a medieval fantasy settings, it’s about gold-decked kings: the billionaires of the setting.
It’s to perpetuate a class bias.
Well Liebniz said it’s because of a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself, if that helps.
deleted by creator
871·1 day agoHow much general legitimacy does the regime have there? Do people not want to overthrow/replace it by this point?
Why is there something instead of nothing
Cool story
1·1 day agoThe new testament stories were written well over a hundred years after
Not right.
These were written 20 to 30 years after: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_the_Apostle (“Fourteen of the 27 books in the New Testament have traditionally been attributed to Paul. Seven of the Pauline epistles are undisputed by scholars as being authentic, with varying degrees of argument about the remainder.”) It would be more like someone writing about this now, which I do remember.
Gospel of Mark is dated to around the year 70
Book of Revelation around 81-96
The canonical gospels are the four which appear in the New Testament of the Bible. They were probably written between AD 66 and 110. — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel
The New Oxford Annotated Bible claims, “Scholars generally agree that the Gospels were written forty to sixty years after the death of Jesus. They thus do not present eyewitness or contemporary accounts of Jesus’s life and teaching.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament
wait Fitbit was killed off?
What do you think of what Ehrman says here at 1h45m25s that the mythicist theory isn’t taken seriously by the academy because it’s mostly pushed by people who seem eager to dunk on religion.
Please subscribe to [email protected] and contribute
There is is #666
11·3 days agoBut at what cost???
22·3 days agoWe did it here. I spent years protesting and camping on-and-off when they tried to build the M3 motorway through the Hill of Tara, an ancient site with similarities to Stonehenge.
They will get what they deserve in the end.
12·3 days agoOk Biden-lover
It’s valid to have posts slagging an unpopular politician.
stackexchange will probably give you a better answer than lemmy (that’s me trying to be helpful with good advice)
Are there any good recent statistics papers looking at the rate-of-exploitation in recent years?
deleted by creator