I’d also like a dumbed down version.

From what I read it looks like the author is saying that information can change between a subset and a larger set leading to it processing inputs more or less efficiently.

If I understood the logic gate portion correctly it seems as simple as saying 1+1+1+1+1 isn’t quite the same as saying 5 because to do 5+1 you just do two steps and to do 1+1+1+1+1+1 you do a bunch of steps lol, but I am probably missing something.

Ed: also that when you add variability to it, for some things the smaller scale is not as consistent as the larger scale or vice versa, and the idea is that there’s different optimal scales to look at different things to get the most useful information.

[removed]

Fair enough. Thank you so much for this little chat.

The Holy Sprit is the God within all of us. The "Holy Spirit" is Divine Accountability.

If a person is willing to be baptized in the name of Christ, he/she is willing to receive/activate the Holy Sprit within themselves. If they continue to establish and build their own relationship with God, God will guide them on the path in which they will fulfill the Will that He has for them.

Upon receiving the Holy Spirit (and if they desire to have a personal relationship with God), then what sin is will be established within THEIR Holy Spirit (Which is the God in All of Us). As long as they continue to nurture it within the word and context of their life, then The Spirit will grow and guide them for as long as they continue to honor God and Christ.

Let's say someone decided to honor God by not eating meat. Does that mean that they can tell others that it's sinful to eat meat? Absolutely not.

Does that mean I can shame them for not eating meat because of God saying "Anything that I created is Not Unclean"? Absolutely not.

Now let's talk about Apostle Paul, back when he was Saul. Saul persecuted and executed many Jews, and God used HIM as a vessel to deliver the Gospel. He was made blind, and he along with his companions were told to seek Ananias, one of the Disciples of Christ.

Essentially, what Saul was doing was not "sin" in the eyes of Man... Just like when Jesus was persecuted and sacrificed... No one was jailed, not even Judas.

God eventually handled the fate of Judas... But, God also forgave Saul... Saul changed his name to Paul and became a great and devout Christian/Apostle.

Do you understand the catalyst for God sending his Son here? Jewish Priests had essentially claimed Dominion over God; They created hundreds upon hundreds of Laws... Priest telling people what was sinful and NOT sinful, telling people who to heal and who NOT to heal. Telling Jesus that he's committing a sin by feeding unclean people bread with unclean hands! Jesus called them Hypocrites right to their faces and they became furious. Who could challenge the Jews but the Son of God himself!

When you are trying to keep people from sin/telling people what is sinful, you are doing the same thing that Jesus accused the Jews of doing. Your relationship with God is a unique one, and I seriously doubt if you can (spiritually) convict anyone outside of being a murderer, thief, or adulterous. The most Christian trait you can have is one of forgiveness; I am not a perfect man, but I appreciate his forgiveness and mercy more because of it. The book of Ecclesiastes even tells people not to be too righteous as doing so can be associated with vanity.

No one on this Earth can pass true spiritual judgement, because no one is without Sin. To call something sinful is to pass judgement, and the foolishness of God is greater than the greatest wisdom of mankind... God's Will for someone else is beyond our comprehension. If He is taking someone along a path of salvation, who knows what sins they will commit prior to that moment! But, at that moment, they will be all the more appreciative of God's grace. You can help, but be careful as to not be a stumbling block on their journey. Your intentions don't protect you from wrongdoing. Only offer guidance if God placed in that person's heart to ASK you for it. If they do? You have a divine responsibility to NOT convict them, but comfort and accommodate them.

Thank you for this nomenclature and for the perspective it gives us on morality. I find it useful but incomplete. It seems to me that there is more to the "we" of moral interaction than informed by the pragmatics of collaboration. "Sacrifice" of self-interest and even of self can be willful or instinctive, and in either case not required by the normative goals of thriving, surviving or reproducing.

[deleted]

Bayer holds a Ph.D. in philosophy

Ah yes, Sam Harris, Stephen Pinker, and Michael Shermer--the leading voices at the forefront of moral philosophy!

I would summarize the article "Three people who never studied moral philosophy said that science can solve moral problems. So scientists should do that. How, you ask? Aristotle or something."

I would be shocked if whoever wrote this has even taken Phil 101. There are many folks studying experimental philosophy and a lot of cool work is coming out of that area. But it's clear this author has never even heard of it.

🫰

Look, I know this is a philosophy forum and I don't want to get into politics, but your "The defining thing about liberals..." remark made me actually laugh.

rAmen

Haha, I was thinking "Come on, that's just a bad misreading of Aristotle and has been widely refuted for 2,000 years."

Then I saw it was from Ayn Rand (an Aristotelean who never seriously studied philosophy and is best known--in philosophy--for butchering Aristotle and pretty much everyone else she wrote about).

Ya, that checks out.

Thanks! I like scholasticism, and I think the stoics are close to it.

You are correct. There is the possibility that all Christian truths simply cannot be found (which would be bad news for Christianity).

Now this is outside of the scope of the argument, but fortunately, most Christian denominations agree that the Christians truths (at least some of them) can be found by reason, so that faith is not blind.

Thank you for the feedback!

>can't you switch out Christianity in your argument with any other thing (e.g. the Spaghetti monster) ? The real deal is to explain why you put Christianity in your Argument, and not anything else imaginable.

At this stage, yes, anything that is true can go in the argument. But this is an introduction video for Christian Philosophy. In subsequent videos, I will argue why Christianity is more reasonable than the other religions.

>Plus, your definition of Philosophy stems from an old Tradition, i don't think all modern Philosophers would agree.

Agreed as well. As I explain in the next video, the modern-day definition is actually "search for truth that is not empirically verifiable" (otherwise it is part of science). But I like the pre-modern definition so as to not limit ourselves to strictly using philosophy (in the modern sense) or science when searching for truth.

>Philosophy is the love for Wisdom, and that can entail the fact that there are no truths at all (in an objective sence atleast).

The statement "there is no objective truth" is a self-contradiction, because then this very statement cannot be objectively true ;)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-contemporary

[deleted]

Autism like many other disorder is on a spectrum. I applaud you for your progress and the way you fought your disorder. Others, not as functioning as you, might need more than just be treated like a normal human being, (which they are). Do you think that if one is on the Autism spectrum, struggle with social interactions or day to day tasks, that person is necessarily lazy and don’t want to fix their problems?

>Preferring A to B is a philosophical position, is it not?

I don't think so. I mean maybe the word "prefer" makes it a philosophical issue but the core issue is a scientific one. Many people "prefer" a flat earth theory but whether or not the earth is flat is a scientific question.

> Does the emergent phenomenon you are referring you actually justify the value?

It is a description of what value is or means. You have some value or another because some electrochemical reaction is taking place in your brain. That's what I believe. I don't think you have a "choice" in your values because "you" are just an emergent phenomena from from atoms interacting with each other.

Can somebody dumb this down for me please? I am interested, but I've noticed that there is much jargon that I don't understand.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Be Respectful

>Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Be Respectful

>Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Be Respectful

>Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.

[removed]

Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:

>Read the Post Before You Reply

>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.

This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.