Gritty's ugly brother

I prefer to believe as many true things as possible.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

Objective/subjective morality work in progress analogy. Opinions welcomed.

A programmer creates a virtual world where NPC's have the freedom to roam their world and interact with one another. Per the rules of the game, stealing is considered good and, in fact, rewarded

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@wendelltalks How do we know it was absolute nothingness prior to big bang?

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@PapaToest @wendelltalks Not by any standard definition of these words does this make sense.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@ayteexbt @ReasonUnchains @wendelltalks How does that follow?

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@darwintojesus Correct, you can't believe God is all good, all powerful, all knowing, and creator of everything and believe God didn't create Bundy as evil and just carrying out god's will. That's the problem of evil you theists face.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@mdwfmom @Banasess @TSZarathustra @darwintojesus including from theists. Claiming god as moral standard doesn't solve the problem since there are so many interpretations anyway, including justifying slavery, for example.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@mdwfmom @Banasess @TSZarathustra @darwintojesus Not necessarily, but that's the practical starting point. Majority opinion, although fallible, limits any individual's misconception of right/wrong, and relies on collective reasoning/empathy, like how we moved past slavery despite majority support,

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@mdwfmom @Banasess @TSZarathustra @darwintojesus Correct. Based on my moral opinions, it's wrong, and hence the need for collective agreement since the universe is entirely indifferent to it. Not sure what "but you don't like that" is referring to though. That the universe is indifferent?

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@mdwfmom @Banasess @TSZarathustra @darwintojesus Ad hominem. They actually did say it was wrong. We collectively decide the rules we live by. We, including christians, accepted slavery as legal, now we collectively don't. And yes, our brains get things wrong all the time, e.g. no one agreeing on who god is.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@tscottme @darwintojesus Where did you get that #? And does it account for converts?

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@AgainstAtheismX I rose from the dead, never mind the lack of evidence proving it, so you should take my arguments seriously. I'm not even telling you to stop believing in god. Just stop posting logically flawed arguments and focus on verifiably proving it exists.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@beyondtheavi @PursueInfinite @NotEvolution1 I'm in agreement. Hating god seems to presuppose god exists thereby making the person not an atheist.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@NotEvolution1 What exactly is heaven? Why is it worth going to, assuming it is real?

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@NotEvolution1 @wiguy45 That didn't answer their question.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@ThomasTillerman @darwintojesus Sorry, did not. To respond to you, it's easier to do from a desktop, not a phone. I apologize for not being more timely.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@NotEvolution1 I can make baseless claims too: it's dumb to pretend there's a god.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@PursueInfinite @NotEvolution1 I'm an atheist and I don't hate god. So your blanket statement seems to be false.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@darwintojesus It's possible, but it still doesn't prove god. This would be more appropriate to pose to the theists that deny certain processes, such as evolution. It would be a nice analogy to show objective morality as just being the subjective view of the programmer though.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@Orville54310141 @darwintojesus Making a choice doesn't inherently make it an intelligent choice.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@SirAllisterGrey @DakariusAshby @AayushSapien @darwintojesus the 1st cause as an emergent feature open, and the universe possibly being a brute fact. Both of which would confirm aayush's concern about the composition fallacy.

[Gritty's ugly brother @Almostmiddleag1]

@SirAllisterGrey @DakariusAshby @AayushSapien @darwintojesus Evidence only gets us back so far and doesn't say what the state of the universe was prior to that point. Quantum eternal models Carroll has spoke of are compatible with known understanding of physics and quantum mechanics, leaving the possibility of an eternal universe open,