Hm. That's much more thorough than my prior understanding of it ie. "If a thing seems either more or less likely than it probably is." Not flawless in any way but can definitely see how using it is a very reasonable compromise between accuracy and time saved. Before reading this I'dve thought it and 'common sense' were interchangeable. Thanks!

Wondering something. An example.

Say you're sitting at home and don't get many visitors. It's late in the afternoon and you hear a knock at the door. Who's behind the door? You know this is around the time the mail services deliver and you ordered a package recently. Is it the deliveryman with your package or an old friend who decided to stop by out of nowhere. Easy to assume to former and it's very likely you'd be correct. Not guaranteed of course until you open the door. Would you say there are any parallels to Schrodinger's cat?

I'm gathering it's about reduction of assumption in a hypothesis to increase the likelihood of it being correct.

Say you do get visitors very often. I don't know maybe you're a drug dealer or something. :)

Your good friend said he would be stopping by for a few beers in an hour or two and it's been just about that long. You hear a knock at that door. Who's there? Is it your good friend, wearing white tennis shoes, with jeans that have a rip above the right knee, holding a case of imported beer, with a brand new tattoo he just got of a guitar? Or is it some guy wanting to buy drugs? Due to the excess of specific assumptions regarding the former, the latter is now most likely. Like the first example, you won't know for sure until after you've opened the door.

Am I understanding this well enough?

Pretty spot on definition in my book.

Pretending I didn't read that, I'd have said .. any observable and intentional arrangement of matter not done so for utility.

Seems to me like all this either is, or is being taken as, more of a semantic argument. Things being relative an obligation is something you either must or should do. This depends on the person. If you're a pious one it would include sheltering or assisting just about anyone who comes your way to the best of your ability, provided you have the means to do so. If not, it may only include doing so only to your family, for example. Virtue, meaning conducting oneself as devoutly as possible to whatever one's moral standards happen to be can either be essentially the same or extend a bit further. Piety is the word I believe you may be looking for.

He appeals to the masses. Simple. Relateable. Speaks his mind. And yes nods to the relevant majority. Somehow all while being a billionaire real estate tycoon. As a skeptic I could go on endlessly but. Yeah. Gotta hope for the best.

As open as you feel the need to be. It's a bodily function. As you said like eating, sleeping, or defecating. It's not really interesting to a second party who's not a potential partner. Unless you expect some kind of attention or respect from it.

That said it can be a personal topic that stirs up emotion. Someone who's been cheated on, etc. Imagine you're married and you found out your best friend who you've known for years, before you met your wife in this case, slept with her often beforehand. Or you suddenly find out an old friend of your wife who she has around, watches the kids, currently works for, whatever it may be, did the same and no one told you. The average person might look at him a little differently. To say the least.

Personally I like to keep personal/irrelevant business to myself. As far as partners go you were either real and up front at the beginning or you weren't. Whatever your mannerism is to the thing be it subtle or explicit it shouldn't take much thought.

Now that I'm older (heh I guess) I have to say I'm not a fan of promiscuity. When you mature you realize there's really no female close in your life you wish to be or have been. Naturally you'd be proud of your son to be so. Eh. Male hypocrisy/misogyny what can I say.

Other than the fact it's not real? People can hack smartcars and pacemakers already. Let's assume it cannot be and yes it's just constant pleasure. Wouldn't you get bored? Like getting massaged all day. Yeah it feels good but the human brain (especially today) is wired for a diverse appetite so to say. Maybe I'm misinterpreting/assuming. Say this AI can do it all. Give us thrills (which naturally involve risk/fear [this is most important], pleasure both physical and mental, and satisfy every sense, need, want, and desire. Eh. Guess I'm biased as I do have a deep rooted religious conviction in my own.

I want you to watch something for me if you can. "Twilight Zone - A Nice Place to Visit". And tell me what you think.

The idea would be one's real and one's not. Of course, you'd have to define real.

Oh, well, if you can't think of any. Hm .. can't quite find an emoticon list for a smirk. Ah well. Probably for the best.

Essentially, theology aside, whatever you call 'the Creator' be it an actual entity or millions of years of random evolution, is in control as opposed to just some guy sitting on a chair who might be having a bad day and decide to take it out on you. Though, some draw parallels between the two :D

Probably. Or this sentence. You either do something or you don't.

Much more to it obviously. Some would say there is free will and there is best will.

Theology aside, as depending on belief would shake things up quite exponentially ('destiny' or the preordained if you subscribe to the notion), well for example.

Say you're from a wealthy family and have been raised in the family business of say managing a hotel chain. They paid for you to learn from the most prestigious schools and you know just about everything there is to know about the field and have a for-sure place earning more than you could ever spend. Then say remembering your adolescent love for music you start to find all that disinteresting and want to become a rockstar instead to the dismay of your family who would forever consider you the black sheep and cut you off financially. You could persue your interest, you might fail and end up homeless, then again you might make it and become a multi-millionaire cultural icon. At the same time maybe if you stuck with the 'for sure' thing and decided to stay in town someone could've ended up gunning you down while checking the mail one morning. Or the hotel chain could've gone bankrupt.

It's all a toss up in my view.

Hm. Yeah. I suppose if you're bungee jumping a harness is good too.

Never heard that explicit depiction before got to say. You got to remember you're talking about the guy who (according to Scripture) rose a man from the dead by uttering a few words and healed a gash on a soldier's face/head by merely touching it. Pretty sure, again according to relevant text, the guy could've done a little something something for himself. Then again. You visit a third world country what would it really be worth if you don't do like the locals do.

Personally, I just noticed one day it said 'Baptist' on the sign. One time I asked the pastor 'what is Baptist? What makes this a Baptist church?'. He said something along the lines of 'oh it's from John the Baptist.' Maybe I didn't pay much attention but I don't ever remember him speaking about him once. Point being I have no real understanding of what makes 'Baptist' different from other denominations it was just the closest church and I had to go there.

Anyhow. I often wonder about that same thing, why would God, who created everything, the universe, humans, angels, and everything in between need the offspring to die. Used to think about all this pretty often, the fact the 1st Commandment acknowledged there are (or were) multiple gods, etc. I came to the conclusion, absurd or irrelevant or simply incorrect as it may be. As a human do you really want a bunch of vengeful supermen running around, raising the dead, controlling the elements, duplicating anything and everything, and inevitably enslaving a bunch of people who really don't know any better? Probably not right?

New as in never thought of before? Probably not too many. As to the second question not everyone lives in a modern, connected world. History repeats itself they say. Or if you prefer, great minds think alike.

More broadly speaking. In this day and age of smartphones, constant social media bombardment, casual sex, Uber Eats, and Netflix? Unlikely.

Anytime. I love this kind of stuff. Honestly I had to Google 'Nicene creed' to learn what exactly it was. Was raised Baptist myself. Seeing as it was established A.D. by men and just a title I wouldn't say it's so much believing in 'it' as much as it is believing in what it states is Truth on the basis of Scripture.

Now bearing in mind I'm not exactly what you'd call devout nor a scholar in religion or philosophy nor do I have any understanding of the 'Nicene creed' other than what I've read about it from Wikipedia in five minutes. Here is my view. I don't know. Lol. Let me ask a few questions so you can help me define what exactly it entails.

The divinity of Jesus. I believe this. However. What does divine mean? From or of God? So are angels. Fallen ones even. Should we worship them? No, right? That's awesome sure but seems a bit like idolatry.

The cosubstantiation bit. By the right hand of God. I believe this as well. Now where I start to question things is the equivalence and/or replacement of God/the Father. Not to say I don't believe God/the Holy Spirit was there when important things were spoken or miracles were performed just to say depending on what the creed specifically implies one should make sure to not get confused.

At the end of the day I don't know. And I don't think anyone else does either. I believe in a loving and merciful God. Say you're born in a remote village in the mountains or the Sahara. You're told God is some guy sitting on a chair in a royal hut. You know nothing else but this. You live a selfless life helping others and putting yourself last doing great things for your community in the process. Would you exclude this person from salvation?

Nah I just imagine all the atheist philosophers here (who are exceptionally brilliant btw and can't wait to meet them later) reading this like .. Ha! Look at these guys debating their fairy tales :D

Pain. Wanting it to end. Not complicated really.

Some do have mental complexes that exasperate the problem. Of course others have just been dealt a horrible hand so to speak.

Not much more to think about then if I started jabbing you in the side and you decide you want to leave the room.

That's why you don't just do things for your own foolish enjoyment and pleasure.

Yeah you can work like crazy and gain enough money to buy a giant house, cars, and go on crazy vacations. Or. You can do something to benefit what's important to you.

Say you like philosophy. You can use your wealth or influence to maybe create a school or foundation to advance that interest. If you really care about it and you die and can't be around to see it and get admiration, boo hoo. Others will benefit from your work and maybe even think back and be like... man
That guy was cool. If that's so important.

A great read. My thoughts.

People want to be part of the majority. Depending on where you are, that's Christianity. Anyone can say they're anything and be accepted as that solely by the fact they said so. Not everyone lives by the main tenets of their own professed religion. This one being "Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul" and "Love others as you love yourself". A wonderful ideology. There would be much less suffering, strife, and war if this was adhered to by all.

Taking history at face value (did you witness it or any 'evidence' being discovered yourself? You can carve over a 5,000 year old artifact and guess what. It will carbon date the same.) I read Constantine (or others near him) witnessed miracles first hand one of which being Christians thrown into boiling oil yet being unharmed. Let's face it that's pretty cool and more than enough to make you think.

As far as the 'domination of thought and conduct' aspect that's one of the main criticisms of all religion. It's a control mechanism. It definitely is used as such by some however if the premise is true, there is a God and we are to live peacefully 'or else', well that would be that wouldn't it? Look at some factions of society, here and everywhere. The violence, animosity, and suffering. An atheist would note the positive benefits religion has for not just others but even them.

From my understanding Christianity is essentially the belief that the prophecized Messiah or 'redeemer' who allows us to make mistakes and sin or essentially 'just be human' without eternal damnation was in fact, Jesus Christ. Older religions do not believe this and that the Old Testament laws still apply. Some do believe in a Messiah/redeemer who will arrive and do this, simply that it was not Jesus.

All that aside I'm skeptic minded myself. I wouldn't say it's impossible the religious books we have today are not the original texts. Or that things weren't added or omitted.

Would you really want to preserve or prolong what is as you say, nothingness and futility though?

Watch "Tales from the Darkside - A Choice of Dreams" and/or "Twilight Zone - The Pool Guy", if you can. You'd like or at least appreciate them both I suspect.

Science is little more than observing with as one could assume you'd think, our limited animalesque senses to notice patterns and from there provable and repeatable events that then become scientific law. It is changing constantly. A while back the Earth was the center of the universe and flight was impossible. Ideas to the contrary would often get you ridiculed or imprisoned. In that sense faith is part of science in a way. You have faith in a theory, enough to work to prove it right.

That aside who knows maybe there are aliens. That'd be cool huh.

I've noticed most intelligent religious people have a certain line of thinking. Not quite this but I feel there are parallels. Imagine yourself as a rich, powerful, and happy man. Who's also wise. Now imagine a beautiful yet flawed woman. If you flaunt your wealth or power without first using wisdom to discern if this is really someone you want in your life, you could easily lose all three. I imagine a heaven as a place full of wise philosophers passing the time with debate and reason who are intellectually content. Or at least decent people. Wouldnt you?

Tend to agree with the poster who mentioned that logic applies more to advertising for the many as opposed to wisdom for the few.

Simplicity, let's face it we all want things done as easy as possible. That covers 'stupid' and 'lazy'.

And yes logic should have a 'point' so to speak. Clear, concise, useful, and of blatant utility. The 'mean' either benefit from it or do not.

I'd say it's more of having to reach the following three: the simple, the stubborn, and the uninformed.

Other forums got too political and depraved. Low brow I guess. Other than that to try and be around folks who really think and have something useful to say. Like how things used to be. A while back Id've said 'to be smarter' or to make wiser choices that will benefit me and whatever I'm doing at that moment. As religious as I've become I consider most of that much less important now. For me it's like seeing a blackboard with a complicated equation on it. You kind of just want to be able to understand it.

I just like smart people I guess.

Less eloquently put, yes you did hear the entire piece. That is to say every audible bit of it did reach your eardrums and your brain did process it.

Often people differentiate between hearing and listening.

You ask someone to hear something it's often a random sound. You ask someone to listen to something there's usually some message they wish you to receive. If theres a message to the piece, say the beginning alludes to self indulgence and the end conveys there is something greater to that. Perhaps not?