I'm an agnostic atheist who used to be more "angry" about it. I don't really talk about these things with most people-- it just gets too tense too often. I've been called close-minded for not being a believer, I've heard the "it takes more faith to be an atheist" thing so many times. I hate hearing people claiming supernatural things as if its empirically objectively true. I hear people straight up claiming to possess psychic powers. Yet if I were to say anything non-affirmative about any of that stuff, I know I would be attacked. Why can people just claim crazy made up shit, and its taken seriously and respectfully? Then if I don't go along with it, im the asshole? I think it takes a lot more nerve to make these wild claims than to say "there is no way of knowing, there is no reliable evidence, so why take a position?" I genuinely think atheists are discriminated against in a lot of social ways. I resent this dynamic. I guess it really depends on what type of social circle one is in.
https://www.manutd.com/en/matches/matchcenter?matchId=2244637
Full Quotes:
Bailly's ready
"Yeah he’s been really keen. He’s worked really hard and trained really well. Of course he’s played a few games with Ivory Coast as well, so he’ll be ready."
Rashford and Pogba also come in
"We’re hoping to see the best of Marcus and Paul. I thought Marcus was very good v Atalanta at Old Trafford. He caused problems with his dynamism and runs in behind. Of course, Paul can create chances and we hope to see the best of him too."
Facing Atalanta again
"You’re away from home. You can’t expect to give two goals away and come back and win 3-2. Our fans were unbelievable, but we need to start better, be hard working and humble as we were against Tottenham. With the players we’ve got we’re always going to create chances and hopefully score goals."
Ok, so I’m most likely going to miss some things and misunderstand others, but I hope my overall thoughts will make sense here. I’m only trying to find an answer to a question I’ve had for some time.
In most (if not all) religious literature about the nature of God, it is said that God is perfectly good, perfectly holy, and so on. My understanding of these texts seems to suggest that, if God were, than His nature is, in some sense, static. That being said, much religious literature also suggests that God is personal/dynamic, insofar as God inserts His will and power into the world to affect change: influence in terms of signs, communication, and so on. And yes, I know in many instances of this, the interlocutor(s) is/are angels, messengers otherwise, the Holy Spirit, Satan (as in the OT/Jewish understanding - as an accuser), etc.
I suppose my question is this: if God is indeed accepted to be an all-perfection of goodness, love, and the sacred, how is it that God can “cross” the metaphysical boundary of a fallen world to engender any kind of change at all? Ought I to accept the views of Origen on the “spirit” of God? Are the Gnostics correct? Does the Holy Spirit take this role in the world? Can I reasonably accept that it could be my own “humanness” that keeps me from understanding how a divine “Being” might be able to be all things at once, all good but also able to instigate change in a world that is anything but all good (this seems to suggest pantheism)? In other words, is this where faith comes into play?
To reiterate, I’m not trying to create debate for no reason, I’m simply looking to understand. It probably goes without saying at this point, but my bias here is one of a “western, christian” persuasion. I’ve read a lot of different religious texts: the Torah, the Koran, Buddhist literature, obviously the New Testament, tons of syncretic philosotheology, occult and mystical texts, and many others. I still find traces of this issue in a lot of religious readings, but can’t help but to frame them in an occidental manner. I truly appreciate anyone who has taken the time to read, and any answers ahead of time.
TL;DR: how can a spiritually pure “Being” cross the boundary into a fallen, subjectively immanent world to affect change or to influence?
I watched the Google I/O 2021 live and honestly loved Matías Duarte's presentation of Material You. It was new, bold and exciting.
There is so much more going on with the added animations and feedback. It's honestly great.
When the Android 12 beta replaced the true black elements with gray, I always assumed they would back by the final builds. Why would they take the true black away when so much of the industry including the web and so many apps have embraced it.
Same goes for the simple yet deep customisation options called "Styles" baked into android 11 like the font changer, so many accent colour options and the like. They were easy to use, well designed and meaningful. A simple change could make using the phone feel fresh and new. Much like changing the wallpaper.
Material You expanded on that aspect of creating a fresh experience and uniqueness. Which is great. But in the process it took away so much of what was great about Android 11.
Gone are the font options. And the accent colours have been brought down to 4. I don't see why they didn't retain the legacy style options. It's a shame.
To add to the dismay, black dark mode was removed and never added back in. They could have made the grey the default and added a true black toggle like Twitter app does. Again, it's a shame and I'm sure I'm not alone in missing this.
It feels like a step forward and backward again.
What are your thoughts?
Tech is a fast changing industry.
Frameworks will only be popular/in-demand for a few years before a new & more efficient framework is created. Same for programming languages. Trends are constantly changing
How does a tech professional keep pace with such rapid change? Imagine having to RE-LEARN most things every few years because things get outdated fast
To all seniors here, how do you stay relevant & keep yourself in-demand according to the trends?
For Example,
If software is in-demand, I shall find a job as a SWE
Now datascience becomes more popular (in-demand), so I wish to jump from SWE to datascience
And in future, a new technology X may appear which may be more in-demand, and i will wish to jump from datascience to tech X
Is there anyone with the same mindset and how do you achieve it in your career? (so that you will always be in an in-demand area to earn higher salaries?)
You’ve heard it many times - ”what you give comes back to you ten-fold”. I would like to offer an explanation as to how and why this is, based on A Course in Miracles.
Lets say that everything in the world is an idea before it’s anything else. This applies to money, actions, property, emotions, etc. Even before anything takes physical form, it would have been an idea first.
When you have an idea of any kind and you share with someone else, do you lose it? No. In fact, if the other person accepts the idea as their own, the idea will grow in your own mind. It hasn’t left its source, which is you - it has increased.
Therefore giving away anything can only increase it. Its returned form may be very different, and it might come from a different source to what you expect, but it will never be less valuable to you than what was given away in the first place. But because we often expect a very particular outcome, we usually end up completely missing this.
An exception to this is when you try to give away something that you think losing it will directly end up hurting you. For example, giving away all your money that you feel you need, or helping someone when you feel that you don’t have the capacity for it. This kind of ”giving” will increase your sense of lack and not abundance, because that is the idea where it came from in the first place. Furthermore, you may think this is humble and kind, but by hurting yourself, you are also attacking the other person. You will become resentful, which is essentially your projection of the guilt from betraying yourself. They, too, will then feel guilt. You haven’t extended love, you have projected guilt. A lot of relationships are actually built on these dynamics - we get into them because we feel a lack, but end up feeling even more deprived because of this (I wrote a post about this last week).
So true giving is actually a proof of having it. Withholding something is the same as not having it in the first place. This is directly true even in the physical world’s terms to some degree - imagine holding onto, say, your millions of dollars, never spending anything. It’s the same as if you never had it at all.
Feeling inspired to go on that shopping spree now? Don’t blame me, I’m just the messenger 😉
Like in Mage amd Werewolf. With the master builders being the Dynamism and President business being stasis/Technocratcy. The revel in the movie about how the plot is between a child and their overcontrolling dad, seems like it could be about the trinity
Hey everyone,
Two years ago I conducted an interview with rising Charlotte rapper MAVI before his show in Washington DC. It was an enlightening experience that I felt needed to be shared. However, the pandemic shelved the interview and it haunted me for months until I thought about restructuring the format and making it into a time capsule of a specific moment before the course of life changed forever. Today, with the help of my friend Mano Sundaresan and the permission of MAVI, that interview sees the light of day (as teased/leaked in this thread). Thanks again to the mods for letting me post this here and I'm glad it's come full circle.
Does the Bible express any kind of metaphysics? Is it monistic or dualistic? Does it understand being as dynamic or static? I know this assumes a lot but is there anything in the Bible that expresses anything like metaphysics?
If so, are the circumstances (core, religion, culture, CB) still fundamentally similar to 2.5?
I´m looking for fantasy (not just books, but video games, series and movies), where the themes of metaphysics are explored. I´m a big fan of the elder scrolls universe and metaphysics are one of the most interesting thing about it.
Do you know other fantasy worlds/stories, where concepts like foundation of reality, role of the soul, other spiritual dimensions etc. are explored?
Thanks for all recommendations!
When reading through this sub, it is clear that there’s abundant literature on various aspects of religion, mythology - and so on and so on. But what also becomes apparent is that it’s all limited to a single continent, and that on that continent there seems to be a broad agreement on key aspects of the metaphysical state of the world. However, couldn’t it be the case that there are completely, radically different religions and interpretations of the world on other continents? That were more doing an anthropological study on how the different peoples of Tamriel perceive religion rather than gaining metaphysical truth and insight?
I'm writing an essay on the Metaphysics of Nietzsche for university and am going to use Nietzsche and Philosophy as my foundation. What are some of the best chapters etc. that outline his metaphysical standpoint (Sources outside of the text are also welcome)?
I’m (22F) considering going back to school for metaphysics. For a little background, I just graduated college with a degree in mechanical engineering and now have a full time job. I’ve been interning with this company for roughly 2 years, and while it’s not a bad gig, I come home and I’m always so tired. I don’t feel passionate about anything in my life at the moment. I guess I’m kind of in a gray area, but it’s driving me nuts. I’ve been thinking about going back to school for awhile now, but especially after I took a philosophy class in college right before I graduated. Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone here has gotten a degree in metaphysics, and if so what was your experience, and what do you do now? I would also love to hear about everyone’s journey with their spirituality, favorite books, or advice! Thank you for taking the time to read this. ❤️
Let me preface that Gunslinger and Drawing of the Three are the first books I read by Stephen King, so if some of the questions are redundant, I apologize.
1.Can someone give me a quick rundown of how the metaphysics work? If I understood correctly, (nearly) all of the author´s novels take place in the same universe and the titular Dark Tower is the nexus which connects all worlds. Furthermore, what is the name of Roland´s world and what is meant with Mid-, End- and In-World?
- In Drawing of the Three, the movie "The Shining" (1980) was mentioned two times (about which Mr. King seems to have a, let´s say, less than favourable opinion).
If the movie exists in the books, does this mean that the act of Stephen King writing these books in real life is also canon in the literary universe itself? (kind of like the stylistic device about an author who writes fantastical stories, but only he / she knows it´s real)
Or is the mention of Kubrick´s movie a sort of tongue in cheek?
- Are Marten and the Man in Black the same person? The main reason for my confusion are the following two lines:
-
"I made your father and I broke him", the man in black said grimly, "I came to your mother as Marten - there´s a truth you always suspected, is it not? - and took her." [Book 1, Chapter 5, Sub-Chapter 4]
-
"We know that Roland was forced to an early trial of manhood after discovering that his mother had become the mistress of Marten, a much greater sorcerer than Walter (who, unknown to Roland´s father, is Marten´s ally); we know Marten has planned Roland´s discovery, expecting Roland to fail and to be ´sent West´; we know that Roland triumphs in his test." [Book 2, Foreword by Stephen King]
At last, I have to say that I greatly enjoyed Book 2 and can´t wait to start the next one. The scene near the end, where Roland robbed the drug store from the POV of the owner, made me laugh out loud and the "Oh sh*t"-realization when the connection between the Pusher and Odetta was revealed were my favourite moments.
SHORT VERSION:
How do you limit mystical powers in your game?
(spells, force powers, psionics, whatever).
LONG VERSION:
So, depending on the setting, characters can have powers (magic, psionics, force powers, miracles, metaphysics, etc .). Unlike other systems which have built in "X capability per level" etc. D6 does not really have a robust method for limiting how many fireballs/force crush/mind controls etc. that a character can do in a game?
In low levels the lack of skill limits their use, but after a while - they get easier.
There are a couple of simplistic suggestions in some of the d6 materials, but I have not see anything more fleshed out.
(Note: I do not consider a story based "moral" method to be a useful mechanic - as it is incredibly subjective and not easy to use).
I was thinking about having any failures cause fatigue as a mechanic, or placing a limit based upon the relevant stat of the game system.... but if anyone with more experience has an idea, I am open to it.
Question: how are you limiting spells/powers in your day?
(that is, how many times can a character use their abilities before they no longer can).
I cant wait how the Animations look like... The Animator who spoke about the Raptor vs Rex fight said, that every fight is completely random, and that no fight will be the same. I just love, that they are going the Dynamic route. I really wonder, how it all will play out. Also another thing that no one seemed to mention yet. Since we have a Stamina system, and i think we get Dilophosaurus aswell, i wonder if they finally utilize her poision to drain Stamina or if they added a Unique "debuff" that will be handled with the Disease system. Really curious about that.
I watched the Google I/O 2021 live and honestly loved Matías Duarte's presentation of Material You. It was new, bold and exciting.
There is so much more going on with the added animations and feedback. It's honestly great.
When the Android 12 beta replaced the true black elements with gray, I always assumed they would back by the final builds. Why would they take the true black away when so much of the industry including the web and so many apps have embraced it.
Same goes for the simple yet deep customisation options called "Styles" baked into android 11 like the font changer, so many accent colour options and the like. They were easy to use, well designed and meaningful. A simple change could make using the phone feel fresh and new. Much like changing the wallpaper.
Material You expanded on that aspect of creating a fresh experience and uniqueness. Which is great. But in the process it took away so much of what was great about Android 11.
Gone are the font options. And the accent colours have been brought down to 4. I don't see why they didn't retain the legacy style options. It's a shame.
To add to the dismay, black dark mode was removed and never added back in. They could have made the grey the default and added a true black toggle like Twitter app does. Again, it's a shame and I'm sure I'm not alone in missing this.
It feels like a step forward and backward again.
What are your thoughts?
I watched the Google I/O 2021 live and honestly loved Matías Duarte's presentation of Material You. It was new, bold and exciting.
There is so much more going on with the added animations and feedback. It's honestly great.
When the Android 12 beta replaced the true black elements with gray, I always assumed they would back by the final builds. Why would they take the true black away when so much of the industry including the web and so many apps have embraced it.
Same goes for the simple yet deep customisation options called "Styles" baked into android 11 like the font changer, so many accent colour options and the like. They were easy to use, well designed and meaningful. A simple change could make using the phone feel fresh and new. Much like changing the wallpaper.
Material You expanded on that aspect of creating a fresh experience and uniqueness. Which is great. But in the process it took away so much of what was great about Android 11.
Gone are the font options. And the accent colours have been brought down to 4. I don't see why they didn't retain the legacy style options. It's a shame.
To add to the dismay, black dark mode was removed and never added back in. They could have made the grey the default and added a true black toggle like Twitter app does. Again, it's a shame and I'm sure I'm not alone in missing this.
It feels like a step forward and backward again.
What are your thoughts?
I watched the Google I/O 2021 live and honestly loved Matías Duarte's presentation of Material You. It was new, bold and exciting.
There is so much more going on with the added animations and feedback. It's honestly great.
When the Android 12 beta replaced the true black elements with gray, I always assumed they would back by the final builds. Why would they take the true black away when so much of the industry including the web and so many apps have embraced it.
Same goes for the simple yet deep customisation options called "Styles" baked into android 11 like the font changer, so many accent colour options and the like. They were easy to use, well designed and meaningful. A simple change could make using the phone feel fresh and new. Much like changing the wallpaper.
Material You expanded on that aspect of creating a fresh experience and uniqueness. Which is great. But in the process it took away so much of what was great about Android 11.
Gone are the font options. And the accent colours have been brought down to 4. I don't see why they didn't retain the legacy style options. It's a shame.
To add to the dismay, black dark mode was removed and never added back in. They could have made the grey the default and added a true black toggle like Twitter app does. Again, it's a shame and I'm sure I'm not alone in missing this.
It feels like a step forward and backward again.
What are your thoughts?
To me it’s the same as in here :)
)