new "Cult of 'Non-Beliefism' " aka (the state of being "unlocked")

[Neo-Scholastic]

I really dislike when people use formatting to express their personality (like Redbeard also does). It's obnoxious and hard to read. Or like those really long signatures that hijack your scrolling navigation.

Stop! Please, stop!

NeVeR.

Pretty please with sugar on top?

[henryp]

Er..that definition of 'belief' you linked is not the topmost google definition.  For someone with such a hard-on for semantics, you shouldn't crowbar in your own additions and then call it the 'top google definition.'

Sort of like, it's not a cult cult, it's like society is a cult.

[Alex K]

This reminds me of Athene's crazy 'logic' cult.

Yeah right - though I still believe that that is an experimental art project.

[RozKek]

This reminds me of Athene's crazy 'logic' cult.

Yeah right - though I still believe that that is an experimental art project.

It isn't, he truly believes his bs. He was debating with another youtuber that engages in philosophy, he tried so hard defeating all that crap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-L_ZCka...youtu.be&t

[Alex K]

Yeah right - though I still believe that that is an experimental art project.

It isn't, he truly believes his bs. He was debating with another youtuber that engages in philosophy, he tried so hard defeating all that crap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-L_ZCka...youtu.be&t

Do you know who the other people in his "documentary" are who give these testimonials?

[robvalue]

All he's saying here is that certainty is bad... right?

Of course it is. I am suspicious of anyone who posits certainty on any subject. But certainty and conditional, pragmatic beliefs are entirely different.

I believe that if I use what appears to be my brain to send a signal to what appears to be my left leg to tell it to move forward, then all being well, it will probably move forward, within the context of the assumed reality in which I appear to inhabit. If I didn't believe this to be the case, how would I go about moving without sizeable delays?

I can hold this belief without needing to be certain that any elements involved here are "real" or that the cause and effect chain is beyond question. It just works, that's all I need to know about it. As long as it works, I'll use it.

[RozKek]

It isn't, he truly believes his bs. He was debating with another youtuber that engages in philosophy, he tried so hard defeating all that crap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-L_ZCka...youtu.be&t

Do you know who the other people in his "documentary" are who give these testimonials?

I haven't watched his documentary, I've just gotten info from it from this debate and a bit reading.

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

(1)

So basically you don't know what the word "especially" means

---

No matter what you think about Programming_God Jordan, he provides outstanding entertainment value.

I agree.

Of course I have no belief in his entertainment value one way or the other.

I myself don't have beliefs. UNLIKE THOSE SILLY BELIEFISTS

As I prior wrote in linked articles, belief MAY OCCUR on non-science: https://medium.com/@uni.omniscient.x/sto....a0e2njtg5
This is particularly due to the 'ESPECIALLY' portion in belief's definition.


.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

---

This reminds me of Athene's crazy 'logic' cult.

Yeah right - though I still believe that that is an experimental art project.

(1) 
"unlocking" cult uses no beliefs, where as athenism does.



(2)
"Athenism" is SELF-CONTRADICTORY at best.

ATHENE: [*positive emotional* people drive logic.]
ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC DATA: [*neutral* people are better at logical tests.]


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4050437/


(3)
I have actually debated athene on the matter.
Athene however does not fancy public correction.

[robvalue]

He's having us on. I don't believe any of this.

I guess he wins there...?

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

He's having us on. I don't believe any of this.

I guess he wins there...?

I can hold this belief without needing to be certain that any elements involved here are "real" or that the cause and effect chain is beyond question. It just works, that's all I need to know about it. As long as it works, I'll use it.

Do you hold anything to be TRUE/ABSOLUTE [believe]?

Short answer: no.

Humans do things at best, in a probabilistic manner. (We only occupy distinct slices of time, of MANY SLICES, so we don't do ABSOLUTE/TOTAL actions)

Albeit, although we do things probabilistically, absent belief, attempting to believe/regard things as true/absolute likely induces that one select sub-optimal probabilities.
.
.
.
.
.
..

---

But dude.. he said he doesn't consider anything true he only considers things scientifically true.

Pffft. What are you gonna tell me next? That scientifically true is still true? Gimme a break dude! The guy SAID that he holds nothing to be true. He only holds things SCIENTIFICALLY true and beliefs are ESPECIALLY without proof.

Next you'll be teling me that "especially" doesn't mean "always"!!!



I mean, the guy asked us to join a cult.  Are you suggesting that he doesn't realize he's using the wrong words?

Silly suggestion indeed.


NOTE: Non-beliefism is empirically accurate. (You need only observe empirical data, whence such is not merely "say of mine")

See responses above. [AlisdairHam & Alex K & robvalue]