Rocky

YES, it was a rationalization. You didn't hurt my feelings. You can't make a "reasonable determination" about my posts/comments without actually knowing what said comments are.

At least from the mortal human perspective.

Deconversion will become massively more rampant as AI advances.

If you feel the need to "VET" something I post as political, freakin' ask me for clarification.

Isn't that what's called rationalization? Again, Yuval Noah Harari isn't a politician. Isn't a pundit. Isn't a journalist. He's an historian. His latest book is Nexus and it's about the history of INFORMATION NETWORKS. He HAS called attention to the urgency figuring out how to deal with the implication and ramifications of AI. Rightly so. That I mentioned the urgency for guardrails to be established for development of AI is a universal concern. Get over yourself, Raf. Not everything that people actually SHOULD pay attention to is politics.

Harari does NOT get political. He's a historian. I was not asked for clarification about any potential political post I may have made. It simply disappeared without comment. While public policy decisions WILL need to be made regarding regulation of AI, and done soon, the only possible political implication was whether or not humanity would allow for AI to build further generations of AI that would/could reduce our capacity for self-determination.

Why don't you question God's reasoning... ANYONE? Because we accept/trust the canon? WHY should we accept the canon? Who says so? Deconvert this: Forgery and Memory at the End of the First Millenium. Why do I say this? Because I distrust the framing of reasons/reasoning of claims as "God declared" this or that as truth. I now point you to Noah Yuval Harari's latest book, Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI Harari's thesis goes directly to whether or not the canon of the bible is trustworthy. This YT discussion (featuring Harari) might be too long for you to view the entire clip. However, Information systems, including AI, are things that humanity needs to decide ethical and moral guardrails for VERY soon/quickly. Whether or not you will continue to believe the canon of the old or new testaments of the bible are trustworthy is a key question for each of us. I can't answer it for anyone but me.

Who says it is God who determines who gets to live and who "is allowed to die?" Modnote: Although this responds to a post that got political, we're letting it stand because it digresses enough from the political content and gets back into the subject of the thread.

From Goodreads, a blurb about Levi Roach's book An in-depth exploration of documentary forgery at the turn of the first millennium Forgery and Memory at the End of the First Millennium takes a fresh look at documentary forgery and historical memory in the Middle Ages. In the tenth and eleventh centuries, religious houses across Europe began falsifying texts to improve local documentary records on an unprecedented scale. As Levi Roach illustrates, the resulting wave of forgery signaled major shifts in society and political culture, shifts which would lay the foundations for the European ancien régime. Spanning documentary traditions across France, England, Germany and northern Italy, Roach examines five sets of falsified texts to demonstrate how forged records produced in this period gave voice to new collective identities within and beyond the Church. Above all, he indicates how this fad for falsification points to new attitudes toward past and present―a developing fascination with the signs of antiquity. These conclusions revise traditional master narratives about the development of antiquarianism in the modern era, showing that medieval forgers were every bit as sophisticated as their Renaissance successors. Medieval forgers were simply interested in different subjects―the history of the Church and their local realms, rather than the literary world of classical antiquity. A comparative history of falsified records at a crucial turning point in the Middle Ages, Forgery and Memory at the End of the First Millennium offers valuable insights into how institutions and individuals rewrote and reimagined the past.

Stormy today/tonight on Terceira.

Not me.

Hassan is a former Moonie. This 10 minute video is specifically about a process, mind control. He starts by citing Robert Lifton's 60+ year old book, on Thought Reform, a study of brainwashing in China (years ago). I purchased Lifton's book (in Kindle form) today for a dollar.

Heard from a few on FB. Of those, they're all fine. I did learn that an old friend in western NC, who was dealing with some aftermath of Helene was killed when he was trying to protect his home from downed tree damage. Gut wrenching sadness there.

Bermuda?

https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/video/milton-hurricane-gulf-florida-surge-threat

Weren't you suggesting she SHOULD have done it differently? Of course, curiosity to get her reasoning is a very good thing.

How is it YOUR place to determine what she should have done? It may have been nicer from your perspective for her to have done differently, but expecting someone else to do as you prefer? It seems like an emotional boundary problem. That's the BIG problem with twi. They far too often judged what other SHOULD have done, or should do. And when the person doesn't, do they hold a grudge? Sometimes. Again, the woman didn't invade your emotional boundaries by expressing her love for you the way she did. Did she? I hope you can let it go very quickly.

Even without God, humans still need community... (and belonging).

Well, I see the implication of that response to you completely differently. Instead of what it implies about YOU, I'm recognizing what it implies about her. Namely, that SHE VIEWS you with love and that's what she does to express that love for you. I still believe in prayer. But I don't view it as exclusive to Christians. I'm thankful that regardless of her beliefs, she expresses love for you and your grandson. What happens after that isn't up to either you or her.

Wow! Yeah, I suppose that's true. I don't prioritize obedience to any human's version of what God wants me to do or believe. I hope, Charity that you get comfort from what you're figuring out.

What is a fish storm? https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/video/breaking-down-the-phrase-a-fish-storm

A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. -- Shakespeare, Wm

Not necessarily directly. IMO, the problem is millennia-old orthodoxy that's extremely difficult for people to get beyond. Yes, many churches are problematic today. But not all of them. I think of definitions of cult, cults, and cultism as high-demand groups and organizations. Ones that are not high-demand groups still deal with problematic doctrine and orthodoxy, but can and in many cases do provide positive benefit to society. I am not interested in naming names of groups which aren't bad.

I didn't bring that up, though perhaps you thought of it as a result of reading my comment. I too hope my family find growing peace and inner strength. I believe we are millennia beyond blaming religious institutions for being part of the problem. The problem(s) is/are what gets built into the brains/minds of hundreds of millions of people, IMO. Solving it/them is (also IMO) massively complicated. Can society/civilization be changed? Gosh, wouldn't that be nice. Curiosity, aka spiritual hunger, has been a major factor in promulgation of cults. Actually, as I see it now, it's far bigger than I can imagine.