this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2024
321 points (93.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43906 readers
1039 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The real question is why do you feel so angry and upset about your life? I would start focusing on the good things not just the bad ones.
What a wild assumption to make based off someone seeing all the evil in the world and the garbage religious people justify, and thinking they are angry about their life.
Sure, but that is if they are focusing on only the bad things and ignoring the good things. Someone that is wildly happy with their life is not thinking how life is so terrible and evil.
This isn't a zero sum game.
You can be happy and recognize that life is also terrible and evil.
Sure, but people that are wildly happy is unlikely to see everything as evil.
Are you trying to advocate for bliss in ignorance?
Please tell me you're joking?
The whole post is a matter of opinion. Are you claiming people with shitty lives will just as likely to have the OPs opinion of someone living a good life?
Yes. Questioning things is sign of intelligence not quality of life.
If by intelligence you mean sentience, then I would agree.
I definitely do not mean that as that would be very, very wrong. Most animals are sentient but they do not question things.
I dont know about how animals brain work, but someone questioning something doesnt indicate any higher levels of intelligence as far as I am aware. I think we would both agree that people questioning if the earth is flat doesnt mean they are smarter than usual for that question.
Well, it does.
Just because asking question is an indicator intelligence doesn't mean everyone that asks a question is intelligent. It's a corallation. Also you can be intelligent while also being misinformed or having wrong facts. They are not mutually exclusive.
Asking a dumb question can actually indicate lower intelligence because they dont understand or can directly disregard false information. I am not seeing how you can relate asking question to intelligence, I dont think there is any correlation.
Yes, obviously some questions are excluded. Asking for the time is definitly not a time of intelligence. I didn't think I needed to mention that.
I dont think its the question but why someone is asking a question. If you take vaccines, someone could be questioning the COVID shot due to someone yelling on a podcast saying it will kill them vs someone being able to look at statistics and wondering if its effective.
Answer my question.
No, I already explained myself fully.
No, you didn't.
The post isn't a matter of opinion. He didn't ask whether his view is correct or true, he asked what its academic name was. He is seeking a specific answer. You're the one injecting opinion into a conversation that didn't ask for any.
If I asked what the name of the god of the Hindu religion was, it wouldn't be an open invitation to begin debating the merits of said religion. And even if u decided that it was, it sure as hell isn't were you get asked a simple question like "are u advocating for ignorant bliss", and then say "well this whole post is a matter of opinion" which is both complete bullshit as I've now shown, and also a cowards move, because you are pivoting the conversation as a means to not answer a simple question since you can tell you've lost the argument.
You might consider reflecting on your own viewpoints, because if they cant stand up to simple questions about their own merits, then maybe you should get a new viewpoint, or at a minimum you stop spreading them on the internet to people who didn't ask.
Sometimes people need a different question answered than the one they asked. The dude is asking a philosophically foolish question with no real merit, the only reason you guys like it is that you dont God or believe he exists.
I disagree that it's without merit. Again, OP is not asking the question "Is God evil?" - they've come to that conclusion already and aren't presenting it for debate. They're asking if there is a term for this position. It's a fair question, and probably an entry point for them to do additional reading and thinking on the idea (after which point it may or may not be revised). If there was a more even mix of theists, atheists, and folks in between who wonder about this stuff on Lemmy, I'd hope OP would come back to discuss the idea, but that's not what's happening rn.
If it helps, I'm coming at this as someone who believes in small g god - to borrow the Christian idea of the trinity, God the Father does not exist as an independent entity, God the Son is a more interesting discussion, but god the holy spirit does exist - rather than a pure atheist. Happy to yap about that more but it's kind of off topic.
I dont disagree with what you are saying about them, I am just saying that they came to that conclusion because their own life sucks and then they throw in some atheist style logic about God being evil. Its two different topics that probably made them reach the conclusion they came to.
Lol I've got a question you didn't ask
"Are you just a clown?"
Yes...
I am, I really liked clown school and one thing led to another. Thank you for asking!
That's completely irrelevant. You can be working hard towards something and achieve it while there is someone always trying to sabotage you. I am asking about the saboteur
Persepctive is extremely relevant. For example if you live under a government and things are going great for you, you will more likely think the government is good than someone that is in poverty and under attack by the government.
What in your life is not going so great that you are unhappy? Writing someone might actually help.
Your adding the baseless implication that there is something wrong in their life. I'm not a 10 year old being murdered by Israels missles, or a Ukrainian forced to go to war, or a toddler dying of leukemia, but those things exist in this world. Whether they affect me or not they exist, hence ur making the assumption this is a complaint on their own life.
I am making that assumption and it is probably accurate. I could be wrong but probably not, happy people dont tend to rail against how terrible life is.
"I am making assumptions"
Full stop, you did it. You do not know a single thing about this person but believe ur assumptions to be truth based on personal experience, such that now you believe it's ok for you to make public accusations about their mental health, that is ignorant, you are a clown.
We make assumptions every hour of everyday, and I didnt say anything about his mental health, I just know they are probably very unhappy and have lived a life that needs changed.
Most likely the saboteur doesn't exist and you're having bias reviewing your life.
How can you assume that? There is no data which supports the absence of a creator. As long as the initial cause is not determined it's all hypothetical. It's like arguing between Copenhagen interpretation and Many worlds. All arguments are moot without data.
I have changed my mind about how much we should bet on the fucker actually existing. The dude who sent the Carl Sagan video... You da mvp
https://youtu.be/KNzlfYJaaCg?feature=shared
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/KNzlfYJaaCg?feature=shared
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I said "most likely". If you have material, objective, reproducible evidence that skeptics can examine proving the existence of a god, please present it. And win a Nobel prize.
What I mean is that we don't have any data to even comment on the likelihood. You can't say most likely.
And in that situation, the safest bet is to say no. See: the invisible dragon https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage
Apply your comment to fairies. Do you arrive to the same conclusion? If not, why?