Maryland AG releases 463 page report detailing 80 years of sexual abuse (at least 600 victims) and cover-ups by Archdiocese of Baltimore

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Anywhere where there’s a hierarchy and imbalance of power is there a chance for abuse

[Zaku3]

 

4 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

I had a good discussion with my wife the other day about Christianity, and she was very confused about the whole thing. Couldn't understand why there are Catholics but also other Christians. When I explained what Protestantism is, she was also confused by how many types there are, and how big the range is in extremism. She asked "so who are the worst Christians?" and I had to explain which ones are more extreme in different ways, etc. How you have Anglicans and also Evangelicals in the Protestant camp (technically). She kind of threw her hands up in the air and said none of it makes sense, haha.

 

It makes sense there is just alot to study. I legitamately would read the books that were used as source material from the Hell On Earth podcast.

[Massdriver]

6 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Furthermore, if the argument is that She doesn't know whether a person is condemned to Hell, then that pretty much eliminates Her "omniscience".

 

In summary:

 

If She doesn't know if a being will be condemned for eternity, then She isn't "omniscient".

If She knows that a being will be condemned for eternity and can't do anything about it, then She isn't "omnipotent".

If She knows that a being will be condemned for eternity and can do something about it, but chooses not to do something about it, then She isn't "omnibenevolent".

 

What's the use of believing in this supposedly infallible Deity anyway?  I'd rather believe in one of those ludicrous pagan pantheons because at they're honest about how horribly fallible they really are.

I would argue that condemning anyone for eternity based on a finite set of wrong actions is inconsistent with omnibenevolence. Therefore perhaps punishment of these sorts are temporary, sort of like purgatory! In that sense, purgatory makes more sense to me than hell.

 

The common response to argument 3 is a bunch of spilled ink on theodicy and free will, for example Evil and Soul-Making by John Hick.  

[GeneticBlueprint]

1 hour ago, SuperSpreader said:

 

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

25 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I would argue that condemning anyone for eternity based on a finite set of wrong actions is inconsistent with omnibenevolence. Therefore perhaps punishment of these sorts are temporary, sort of like purgatory! In that sense, purgatory makes more sense to me than hell.

 

Don't let the damnable Protestant heretics hear you say that!!!

 

26 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

The common response to argument 3 is a bunch of spilled ink on theodicy and free will, for example Evil and Soul-Making by John Hick.  

 

And all that spilled ink isn't worth the paper it's written on because the very existence of such a Deity who ostensibly knows the eternal fate of a being before that being is even born precludes the very notion of free will from the outset (not that I actually believe in free will myself, but that's neither here nor there).

[Ghost_MH]

30 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I would argue that condemning anyone for eternity based on a finite set of wrong actions is inconsistent with omnibenevolence. Therefore perhaps punishment of these sorts are temporary, sort of like purgatory! In that sense, purgatory makes more sense to me than hell.

 

I don't even buy into the notion of a hell, so where did that leave a Christian like me?

 

2 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

And all that spilled ink isn't worth the paper it's written on because the very existence of such a Deity who ostensibly knows the eternal fate of a being before that being is even born precludes the very notion of free will from the outset (not that I actually believe in free will myself, but that's neither here nor there).

 

Depends on how you believe time flows. If you watched a video replaying everything you did yesterday, that wouldn't remove the free will your recorded self experienced in the then. However, that you in the recording certainly doesn't have any free will to change what was caught on tape.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

38 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

Depends on how you believe time flows. If you watched a video replaying everything you did yesterday, that wouldn't remove the free will your recorded self experienced in the then. However, that you in the recording certainly doesn't have any free will to change what was caught on tape.

 

The actions that I committed yesterday weren't the result of free will.

They were the result of a nearly-infinite number of complex psychological and physiological processes that were influenced by an also nearly-infinite number of external and internal factors stretching back to when I was first conceived and over which I have little-to-no control.

 

In order for a human both at an individual and societal level to function, it's absolutely necessary to maintain the illusion of free will even though I well and truly believe that it doesn't exist in the least.

[Massdriver]

44 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't even buy into the notion of a hell, so where did that leave a Christian like me?

 

Out of step with Roman Catholicism and (I think) Eastern Orthodoxy. You would be in good company with some that believe in universal salvation, I'm assuming some protestants and non denominational Christians. Origen, a church father, believed in hell but thought it was temporary and thus was an early heavyweight that was also a universalist. 

[Uaarkson]

37 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

The actions that I committed yesterday weren't the result of free will.

They were the result of a nearly-infinite number of complex psychological and physiological processes that were influenced by an also nearly-infinite number of external and internal factors stretching back to when I was first conceived and over which I have little-to-no control.

 

In order for a human both at an individual and societal level to function, it's absolutely necessary to maintain the illusion of free will even though I well and truly believe that it doesn't exist in the least.

Yepppp. Free will and also time are illusions!

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

The actions that I committed yesterday weren't the result of free will.

They were the result of a nearly-infinite number of complex psychological and physiological processes that were influenced by an also nearly-infinite number of external and internal factors stretching back to when I was first conceived and over which I have little-to-no control.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the notion of free will

[Uaarkson]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the notion of free will

What you mean bro, he nailed it. As far as we can tell, the universe is deterministic

[Guest]

Just now, Uaarkson said:

What you mean bro, he nailed it 

Free will does not preclude such internal or external factors from influencing decision making. 

[Massdriver]

Free will can mean something different depending on the person or philosopher.

 

Free will in the libertarian sense would make the claim that you are free such that you could have acted otherwise. I think Wade would not fall in this category.

Free will in the compatibilist sense would make the claim that that you are free to act in accordance with your own psychology or motivations. 

 

Compatibilism is called that because it posits that free will and determinism are not inconsistent with one another.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

5 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

Free will in the libertarian sense would make the claim that you are free such that you could have acted otherwise. I think Wade would not fall in this category.

 

That is correct.

 

In this particular universe, I was never going to act in any other way than the way in which I did.

[Uaarkson]

All of our decisions were set in stone at the Big Bang, and past and future exist simultaneously and we only experience the passing of time as a consequence of the way our brains are structured 

[CitizenVectron]

28 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:

All of our decisions were set in stone at the Big Bang, and past and future exist simultaneously and we only experience the passing of time as a consequence of the way our brains are structured 

 

I generally subscribe to this (that all things would proceed in an identical way if you could "restart" the big bang over again), but I do acknowledge that there are elements of quantum mechanics that could invalidate that view (a legitimate randomness to how quantum events occur that is somehow external to space-time). However, while these events may be "random" within space-time, it's also possible that there is another layer to existence that exerts itself on space-time that is also predetermined, etc. But generally speaking, if all things are inevitable based on the original conditions of all forms of energy/fields and the laws that govern their interactions, then we have no free will.

 

I've been lately diving down the rabbit hole that is modern physics, and how more and more the general consensus is that the universe isn't actually a thing that exists, and is more of a set of fields. Every single part of my body (in the quantum/atomic sense) is actually a field that exists throughout the entire universe, and is just experiencing a spike in probability at my current location. Particles exist, but are more of a manifestation of the probability spike in the field than things on their own. And the way these primary fields interact (gravity, EM, strong nuclear, weak nuclear, higgs, etc) determines how things "are." We are just fields of probability layered across multiple fields, and how these fields spike at different levels and interact is what causes things to be the way they are. Some fields/forces like gravity have a default of 0 (with some bubbling randomness at quantum levels), but some, like the higgs, have a higher default level somehow (which is what allows matter to have mass by default).

 

Really interesting stuff. We're just numbers floating around the interacting, and our senses/experience are a reaaaally rough interpretation of things far outside our understanding. Basically a dumbing down of existence so our feeble brains can understand enough to find food and fuck.

[Uaarkson]

We’re all just waves maaaaan!

[Greatoneshere]

The Matrix already explained this - while our choices may be deterministic, so "we've already made the choice", we arrive at the choice so we can understand the choice that we make, and why we made it. We typically think we have free will "in the moment" because we're processing information right then and there, but ostensibly who we are decides what kind of choice we'll already make, but we don't know that ourselves until we make it. Our "choices", deterministic or not, inform ourselves and others first and foremost, and that's why they matter, and that's what free will is - the ripple effects of our decisions that influence other people. All the decisions may be pre-set because of who that person is, what makes them them, but the external and internal factors that affect other people and what they decide to do will alter and inform which pre-set choice you yourself will then decide to do following their choice(s). Determinism and free will aren't necessarily at odds with each other, they are simply two sides of the same coin.

 

I have a BA in philosophy and religion and yet I used The Matrix to explain this, but that's my take.  It's easy to be dismissive of our choices because of determinism, but the "choices" we make are all that still really matter. Free will vs. determinism at that point is like debating God's existence - it's an intellectual masturbatory exercise and nothing more, since it shouldn't affect how you live or what decisions or choices you make in life. 

 

 

"You didn't come here to make the choice. You already made it. You're here [at the moment of the choice] to understand why you made it . . . We can never see past the choices we don't understand."

 

"Are you saying I have to choice whether Trinity lives or dies?"

 

"No, you've already made the choice. Now you have to understand it." 

 

Edit: It's often ourselves we're most tricking by acting like we don't understand what choices we'd make in whatever instance. Neo realizes in this clip, once he's honest with himself, that he'll clearly choose Trinity and condemn humanity, which is why he says he refuses to make a choice. But, as we know, once he faces the Architect at the end of the film, he does make a choice, a choice he knew he'd make because he knows who he is, and then he does it anyway. Determinism, but also free will. Determinism vs. free will is just a battle to understand ourselves and others, not that choices aren't predetermined or not. And if we can't see all the strings because of our basic Euclidean minds anyway, isn't it a distinction without a difference? If it appears like free will to the person, then it's free will even if the choice was already set by a huge, sometimes incalculable number of factors which is basically the same thing as free will, but we call it determinism. It's not the "illusion" of free will because you can't guess or determine every internal and external factor that led to your decision. Just because something can theoretically be determined doesn't mean anything if the person can't tell the difference or determine the infinite number of factors.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Acknowledging the practical reality that it is impossible to determine the near-infinite variety of factors that led to a particular decision really doesn't diminish the notion of the illusory nature of free will, at least for me.

 

If anything, it reinforces that premise as more than anything it demonstrates that we are well and truly the metamorphical "playthings of the gods", beholden to a universe of factors beyond our control and comprehension.

 

In such a universe, there genuinely is no room for free will.

[Greatoneshere]

2 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Acknowledging the practical reality that it is impossible to determine the near-infinite variety of factors that led to a particular decision really doesn't diminish the notion of the illusory nature of free will, at least for me.

 

If anything, it reinforces that premise as more than anything it demonstrates that we are well and truly the metamorphical "playthings of the gods", beholden to a universe of factors beyond our control and comprehension.

 

In such a universe, there genuinely is no room for free will.

 

They aren't factors beyond your control though. Some are and some aren't within your control. The ones that are, you won't know how they are imperceptibly affecting future decisions, but there are factors certainly in your control. Additionally, we are ever growing creatures, so what was true of how you would make decisions yesterday is different than the you of today, who is a result of the decisions from yesterday, so on and so forth. Again, calling free will illusory is like saying determinism is definitive. You don't know what is deterministic specifically to any decision, so it is free will. Again, I think this is a distinction without a difference, no? Isn't it just pedantic to say: "we are the sum result of who we are, and our "choices" are illusory because we'd always make the one we'd make given who we are, but we can't tell what is affecting us, how much, or in what ways" is free will. Free will is ostensibly "choices" we make that we believe to be making of our own accord. Technically, that is saying that it is us who make the choices, there's nothing saying it can't come from a self that subconsciously knows what choices it'll make - but because your conscious self doesn't, that's where free will lives.

 

TL;DR: Basically, if you don't consciously know which choice you'll definitively make until after you make it practically speaking, isn't that free will? It doesn't matter if determinism is real if it doesn't help you figure out what choice you'll actually make.

 

I guess I should ask: how do you perceive free will, like what's your take? That might better help me understand.

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Free Will arguments are the best ones to put me to sleep on this board. Bad idea to read during a slow work night.  

[Anathema-]

lol atheists are so adorably "christian"

[Anathema-]

And of course you have free will. You can only perceive one reality at a time but you've already made every choice you could have made. Reality accommodates both free will and determinism simultaneously. 

[Greatoneshere]

5 hours ago, Anathema- said:

And of course you have free will. You can only perceive one reality at a time but you've already made every choice you could have made. Reality accommodates both free will and determinism simultaneously. 

 

Yes, thank you - what I was trying to say but with a lot more words.  

[Uaarkson]

5 hours ago, Anathema- said:

And of course you have free will. You can only perceive one reality at a time but you've already made every choice you could have made. Reality accommodates both free will and determinism simultaneously. 

If you’re talking about the many worlds interpretation, that’s not exactly a manifestation of free will either.

[DarkStar189]

This is unrelated to the Maryland story but in the late 90’s when I was a kid, there was always a week over summer vacation my dad would do a lot of work at a church. I would go with him and help out. Out of the 5 days I would probably only see the priest once or twice. Even as a kid just looking at the guy would creep me out. Like he looked slimey.  I remember his handshake being too “handsy”. Like I said I didn’t have much contact with him. But then this story came out years later and it made sense:

Priest who led Holy Name of Jesus expansion accused of sex abuse

WWW.PENNLIVE.COM

---

A priest who oversaw a huge expansion of Holy Name of Jesus Church in Lower Paxton Township is one of the 37 priests in the Diocese of Harrisburg who have been...

 

[best3444]

I was an alter boy in grade school and a few priests that came and went were absolutely perverted and on the hunt. I was never targeted because I was always with my twin brother and the priests couldn't get to us because there were two of us. 

 

The catholic church is beyond disgusting and after 8th grade I left the religion.

 

Sadly my older brother was molested by a catholic priests when he was around 9 yrs old and it completely fucked him up. He started lifting weights and got massive for protection purposes. Really sad situations going on out there.

[Greatoneshere]

3 hours ago, Uaarkson said:

If you’re talking about the many worlds interpretation, that’s not exactly a manifestation of free will either.

 

I don't think he is, I took it to mean that our ability to perceive determinism is essentially impossible except to know it exists, so choices are ostensibly free will as a result from a humans' perspective for all intents and purposes.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

I imagine an omnipotent god who knows about internet debates on free will and can’t kill themselves that’s always funny to me

[Uaarkson]

Omnimpotent 

[Anathema-]

8 hours ago, Uaarkson said:

If you’re talking about the many worlds interpretation, that’s not exactly a manifestation of free will either.

 

Not sure what you mean here.

 

What I mean is that you already made every choice. Free will is an illusion not because you have no control but because you can only perceive the results of one set of choices. 

[Uaarkson]

1 minute ago, Anathema- said:

 

Not sure what you mean here.

 

What I mean is that you already made every choice. Free will is an illusion not because you have no control but because you can only perceive results, and only the results of one set of choices. 

ooh gotcha

[Anathema-]

What's really going to bake your noodle is when you understand that validates manifestation. Simply believing a thing will happen to you will make that thing more likely to happen. Wave function collapse, but for reality. 

[CitizenVectron]

3 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

What's really going to bake your noodle is when you understand that validates manifestation. Simply believing a thing will happen to you will make that thing more likely to happen. Wave function collapse, but for reality. 

 

Except of course that it doesn't.

[TUFKAK]

3 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

What's really going to bake your noodle is when you understand that validates manifestation. Simply believing a thing will happen to you will make that thing more likely to happen. Wave function collapse, but for reality. 

As someone who tried to get to 300lbs and a pro card I call shenanigans.

😂