Hammer Of The Dogs

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon If you are asking what issues I see with a "logic based" method of finding truth? First, would be the is-ought issue. Second, logic has to start with premises. So what are they and how did you come to them?

@DogsHammer @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon My method of determining value or virtue is Socratic. Logic based. The same principle that the scientific method is built on. What exactly are you not aligned with?

“You can’t argue against mass immigration… if everything you’re arguing is just coming from a me perspective.” Andrew Wilson and @KonstantinKisin discuss secular morality, culture, and mass immigration. @paleochristcon argues that if morality is only “a stance,” as the secular framing suggests… what does it actually mean to call anything right or wrong? When there’s no shared grounding, even serious arguments start sliding into preference rather than truth.

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon With that definition of truth, I'd say I agree it's wrong. I can only go off thoughts and feelings because I don't know it's objectively true. I'd be honest about my limitations to access objective reality. Agreeing with your conclusion but not with your method of determining it.

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon People define truth in different ways, and like you mentioned, it can be slippery. But seems obvious the post we're having this discussion on is about objective truth, which is a specific category of truth. One that's independent of our minds. 1/

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon You've already given an answer to your question in your previous comment. No. Searching for truth is fantastic and I wish everyone would do it. But if someone claims to have found it, it seems that examining and critiquing their claims would be the wise thing to do. No?

How do you know, tho? What even is truth? If anyone strives for the truth, we should criticize it no matter if it’s accurate or not? Simply because they’re striving for a greater understanding.? or because they’re foolish enough to think that they can even get close? Your criticism isn’t constructive.

@Max_Rodes11 @gracefool @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Max, are you okay?

@DogsHammer @gracefool @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon So you’re just yapping to the sake of yapping? Got it

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon I'm not here to debate anyone's religion. From my position both the religious and the atheists appear to have the same problem. They both claim to know things they don't really know. I prefer humility and the truth of my limitations.

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Agree what most people think doesn't make something true. That was me trying to nicely say that people don't believe what you believe because it doesn't appear to be true. I'm not here to step on your faith. I have faith in things I can't prove to be true. 1/

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon If you want to believe that something was proven, go right ahead. But most people do not agree with that, or that God wrote the bible through men. Which brings us back to what I said at the beginning, which is that it comes across as 'just trust me bro' to non-Christians.

@DogsHammer @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon The idea that the Bible was edited at a later date has little evidence. It wasn't merely written by men, it was inspired by God. Various prophecies, especially those predicting Jesus, prove it.

@EPoe187 Been saying this for sometime x.com/DogsHammer/sta…

"Did Trump lose in 2020" is to Republicans what "Can a man become a women" is to Democrats. They all know the answer, but can't violate their tribe's sacred dogma.

@AutistocratMS @EPoe187 Then why can't they provide any evidence? Everything I've heard so far is built on perceptions and maybes

@EPoe187 I'm no fan of Trump but yeah, the election was obviously stolen.

@EricTropicalTX @EPoe187 So you're saying men can get pregnant?

@EPoe187 Yes, we do know the answer. Trump won the election in 2020. Anyone who says otherwise is either a gdamn communist pr*ck or a mother f*cking liar. And Bo, you rat btrd, you just f*cking insulted me and other MAGA for insinuating that we believe he lost. He won. F'ckin Period!

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon We're trapped in our meat bodies with limited senses that didn't evolve to find truth, rather to survive. I feel like there is an objective truth out there. But I think we should criticize whatever methods people claim to use to access it.

Really great question. Thanks for asking. I understand a little bit better where you’re coming from now. No one knows what is correct or what is the truth, exactly. It’s a slippery question. What is truth ? How do you know what is true? That being said, you shouldn’t be throwing the baby out with the bathwater and saying that it can’t be ascertained, or that through dialogue we can strive to obtain it. (Truth) Logic is the most reliable means to approximate what we call truth, and I certainly don’t look to a book for it. Same principal that science is built upon: Socratic method While I find Andrew slimy as hell, he called out that it’s fallacious to assume something is good, simply because it’s good. Virtue is largely downstream of culture, which isn’t always aligned with what is actually ideal.

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon You can believe the authors had a specific meaning but you may never find it. But that is still just moving the problem one more level since subjective men wrote it in the first place. And then a group of subjective men edited it.

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon I agree corruption was also part of why the Reformation happened. But the bible only in Latin and the church clergy holding the power of interpretation was also a major part. They are infinitely interpretable, as all texts are. The larger, the more of a problem that is. 1/

Trump starts a redistricting battle, thinking Democrats won't retaliate, but they do, and gain more seats. Now Republicans cry foul at their self-imposed problem. Trump starts a trade war, expecting the world will take it. Instead, the US loses jobs, farms go bankrupt, manufacturing declines, and our trading partners make deals with China rather than with the US. Worst of all, Trump's tariffs are illegal, so the government ends up with nothing for all the trouble. Trump berates NATO and threatens to invade a NATO nation. Then, when Trump starts a war in Iran without talking to our allies first, he's shocked when they don't show up to help. Trump bombs Iran, expecting them to cave to his demands a few days later. Instead, Iran attacks US military bases and damages other nations' energy production. It closes the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting global energy markets, sending gas prices over $4 a gallon, and spiking US inflation to the highest in years. The war is in its eighth week. Trump is outmatched and continues to fail. His first term was a shock to America and the world, but this time, everyone was ready for him. Trump's bullying no longer works, and that's all he knows.

@Max_Rodes11 @gracefool @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Clearly, if objective morality exists it would transcend everything in our existence. Do you not realize that I was conversing with a Christian who brought up the subject?

@DogsHammer @gracefool @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Stop thinking just through the lens of Christianity. Morality transcends religion. It’s breaking your brain. 🧠

@Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon I'm not arguing for moral relativism. Objective morality may exist. My issue is with the limitations of humans to access it. You seem confident you know what it is and how to access it. Care to explain your method? How do you know you are correct?

@DogsHammer @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Relativism is a losing argument. Objective morality doesn’t need interpretation. There is an empirical reality that we all live in regardless of perception and opinion. It’s objectively a positive thing that murder is wrong. Do you disagree with that?

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Why do you think there are so many denominations of Christianity? They don't all agree on what the bible is saying. The point of the reformation was to take the single interpretation control of the bible away from the Catholic church and allow everyone to decide for themselves.

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon Yes, not only is text certainly subjective, but it is also infinitely interpretable. The people who wrote and edited it were subjective and every time someone reads it and attempts to describe what is means, they are being subjective. 1/

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon how do you access the information that homosexuality is bad other than through subjective interpretation? Both groups are being subjective. We have countless examples of men interpreting religious texts to their preferred view.

@gracefool @Max_Rodes11 @TrueDayInc @triggerpod @KonstantinKisin @paleochristcon No, I'm not saying that. I grew up in a Christian home and spent my childhood in Christian schools. I understand what Christians think generally. You're not addressing my point. Which is... 1/