Trying my hardest to be civil in this uncivilised world.

  • 0 Posts
  • 2.46K Comments
Joined 10 个月前
cake
Cake day: 2025年4月26日

help-circle




  • I understand “not taking risks” as a morally correct stance if you don’t have enough information (you could mistake the victim for the offender, for instance), but I understood these scenarios as something you’re present for, understand clearly and are capable of acting upon. I know this goes way beyond the original question, but, would you say that “the right thing to do” remains obvious, it’s just that it’s not so easy to be self-sacrificial? I mean, if you could singlehandedly stop a genocide from taking place, but you were gonna be somewhat traumatised for it, or someone in your family had to pay the price, I think stopping it remains the right thing to do, regardless of how willing we would be to do it, right?





  • Do you really think people just behave in certain, sex-related ways, because they’ve been told they’re this sex or the other? That sex-related behavioural differences don’t appear naturally (and are perhaps reinforced) but are just learned? Also, you definitely can “choose who you want to be”, lol, God made us all free-willed entities! But I cannot be a camel, nor can I be a non-material entity, or (ethnically) Nepali. We have degrees of freedom but we are fundamentally constrained by reality. If you deny reality (a very post modern, perspectivist approach that’s been very popular in the West for some decades now), then sure, you’re no longer constrained but then you lose the capacity to make any “objective” assertions about the world (because you denied an external reality).





  • RespectfulIy, I don’t think it does, and I’m a monotheist. It takes no faith to disregard any notion of the Divine, it takes no “stepping out of the comfort zone” of the material, the seen, but it does take faith and courage to believe in the unseen. And I’m not saying the existence of God is incompatible with a reasonable understanding of the universe, just that it cannot be encapsulated by it. Through reason you can make a regression until the beginning of the universe, but after that it’s all faith.



  • On Lemmy? Probably “God exists, and to God we will return on the Day of Judgement”. Or something like “there are marked, easily observable personality differences between the sexes on average” (think Big Five traits, like agreeableness and neuroticism, for example).

    Outside of Lemmy? Probably my dismissal of the hadiths (narrations regarding/involving prophet Muhammad), or at least my acknowledgement that (for Muslims) the Qur’an should be taken as an “axiomatic” message since it’s the word of God and everything else is up for debate (and, evidently, if the hadith contradicts the Qur’an, you should disregard it). Idk, seems pretty obvious to me but the ummah is quite sectarian, ritualistic and afraid to make their own judgements (when God, as seen in the Qur’an, exhorts people to think!).




  • He was raised in the streets and used to sell drugs, which is why he ended up in jail for 7 years. To this day, he doesn’t know his mom or dad. The man had no support. Fair enough, “morality is a skill” as in the more you choose right over wrong, the easier it gets, it becomes a part of your identity you’re proud of, but I don’t think it requires resources the way you see it. Also, people can be and have been self-sacrificial, even in the absence of resources. The poorest people are the ones that give more to charity, there’s more union and prosociality in Gaza amongst the bombs than in any American neighborhood… Idk man, I’m not buying this. I think that it’s a variable that can affect your decision making, especially if your moral framework is flimsy, but not the main variable behind moral decision making.

    Maybe I’m misunderstanding your point, TBF.



  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.worldtoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldTitle
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    12 小时前

    Do you consider Ukraine not a part of NATO/aligned with the West de facto? If not since they got couped, by now? What does that even mean and how would it have changed things? America wanted to “'contain” Russia, and for it it used Ukraine, and here we are. The rest is wind.