unknown_apostle

Now let's look at market cap. Redemption is no longer "looked at" but in progress.

Not just anti-imperialism but many other political and philosophical opinions too.

Many things in history and politics are dense. It's expected that people will disagree on these things.

But every so often something happens which is genuinely quite simple to understand. This Ukraine invasion allows you to discriminate between those who are still committed to reality and those who are not.

If you cannot understand that countries desire to join Nato (because they understand the Kremlin better than most Westerners); that ex-KGB Putin holding a candle once a year doesn't make him the grand protector of Christendom; that Russians are victims of this regime too; that this invasion was predicted by many (see Kasparov); etc etc... Then I really cannot take you serious anymore.

First, at least his big scheme wasn't "fake it till you make it"; it was explicitly and intentionally criminal from the beginning.

Second, I doubt whether serial delusions of grandeur would be unanimously lauded on HN.

It's amazing how some people are so optimistic and self-confident that they are simply incapable of learning. Reis kept going for "easy money" and risky ventures until the end. Complete lack of moral character aside, he apparently never accepted that, given the way in which he approached things by cutting all sorts of corners, the fallout from his failing schemes kept destroying the gains from his successful schemes, both for himself and for others.

Pls, tell us the answer.

War ain't over. Next week I'm going to plant a few rows of potatoes as a supporting food.

+1 pls tell us more :-)))))

Not as an investment vehicle but as a savings vehicle: it did better than the average 800-year old bond or 800-year old company share. Numismatic premium aside; the gold maintained its value throughout war, tyranny and pestilence. It would presumably also survive a G8 summit ordering major internet providers to block port 8333.

...some of which claim to be eye witness accounts, being weirdly restrained in describing the highly miraculous, placing these miracles against a backdrop of great received wisdom and mundane details, all the while sounding as if they actually have the personal backgrounds, sources and motives they claim to have.

No it's actually two book reviews, mixed up with the reviewer's own convoluted and confused mind map regarding the words "Catholic" and "CIA".

This article seems to be coming from 5 directions at once and I genuinely fail to bring it all together. I see a huge enumeration of various catholic laypeople. Do these people represent the supernatural Catholic Church, the Vatican or the magisterium? And who are these “right-wing bishops appointed by Popes John Paul II and Benedict”? Are there many of these or just a few? What is their exact relationship to the CIA, if any? And how does Trump (following a peculiar “prosperity gospel”) fit into all of this? What is the relation to the Second Vatican Council? What is the connection between a Church Council and the CIA? Does being conservative in liturgical and theological issues make you a political right winger? Is it related to being “impervious to facts”? Could we replace “Catholic Church” with “Hollywood” or “shoe industry” and get a similar article? Help me out here.

God desires that we make our own choices and then we are shown that reality is still constructed in such a way that all this freedom and these choices intersect to serve his timing.

What are good introductory books for logic (classical and intuitionistic)? For category theory? Do you know any similar representation of paraconsistent logic?

At first sight, this looks like an absolutely great resource for a friendly introduction to this stuff. Thanks HN (and author).

You're not going against the will of God by stopping at 3. Or by not having children at all.

But if you give contraception a fixed place in your life, to have sex which is fundamentally closed to children, then you have introduced a contradiction into your body and into your life.

And yes, He rules over 100 billion galaxies (more if we live in a multiverse) and cares about such things. If you think this is petty or spiteful, then you think too little of your sexuality and of yourself. These 100 billion galaxies were required for you to exist as a human being, called to (try) living a life that prepares you for Heaven.

Btw, the Catholic Church is not against birth control because it wants to fill up the planet with people.

The Church is obliged to teach that sex is supposed to be about a man and a woman taking part in God's ecstatic act of creation, a selfless act of love. Sex without being open to life is porn: without the act of self giving and preparedness to receive children, you are left with a corrupted, self-directed form of pleasure.

This is why the Church is not against quite effective natural methods like NFP, because in this method it's the people who change their own behaviour, based on a natural cycle. It's quite effective but does not close fertility in a mechanical way.

Second, if people were really listening to Jesus Christ and the Church, much more people would hear a calling to lead a consecrated life, as a priest or a monk or a nun.

No direct cable between US and Russia... e.g. linking up the Bering Strait. Anybody know the reason for this?

And that solution comes in many, many shades of gray. Picking the right shade is less obvious.

Not just incomplete but badly translated. Such as the warning against "vain repetition" in prayer in KJV Mt 6:7, targeting ancient Christian prayer practices like e.g. petition prayers and the Rosary (which are in direct continuation of old Jewish litanies, such as Psalm 136, and sanctioned by Heaven itself: "Sanctus Sanctus Sanctus"). "Battalogein" should refer to "babbling": using lots of grand words to impress God and other people, as opposed to the simple but dignified petition of a humble soul.

Working with coinduction. So that’s not a good definition :-)

Yes it's on a website on fashion, not a site focused on Christian spirituality :-)

In the text of the interview, it doesn't say "broke away from the Catholic Church" but "from the Catholic rule". Which is also a confusing phrasing in itself and probably the source of the error found in the abstract.

Consider hypnotics used during light medical procedures to keep you awake but compliant. From a state of more freedom you can freely choose to enter a state of arguably less freedom. Why would this be a contradiction?

> Edit: Also the definition of "mental illness" is somewhat nebulous and not historically fixed. Homosexuality was at one point called a mental illness.

Yep, insights and definitions of illness will keep changing. But while insights in the details of e.g. psychosis may vary, few would deny a correlation with chemical issues.

I personally find it highly likely that the decision mechanism emerges from physical computation in the brain.

However, when we talk about decision mechanisms, we inevitably introduce the question of whether this decision mechanism can work better or worse.

“Free will” may be seen as a computational notion of “health” for this decision mechanism, similar to how we use the term health for our physical bodies. A free will is a healthy will, in the sense that our decision mechanism is not broken by e.g. drugs, electrodes or mental illness.

Second, many people, myself included, hold the assumption that the ordering between options A and B is not purely subjective. If there exists an ordering of options which is objective and external to the agent of choice, then the choices that are actually made can be compared to that external ordering. Free will in this sense denotes the observation that our choices may reflect an ordering which is significantly different from the ordering imposed by reality. This is not a scientific claim and cannot be disproven scientifically. Holding this assumption is in fact a choice.

The elders used this logic to mock Christ suffering on the cross for many hours: "He trusted in God; let him deliver him now".

And yes, Christ told us to ask for the things we need, including material things.

Other reasons for prayer: thanking God; glorifying God; offering things to God, like our happiness or our good works but also our misery and our flaws. Contemplation; meditation; or just being silent and inviting Him to do the talking.

When you use that word "we", are you also speaking for me?

It's also an expression of choice and priorities. Every child is a new person that really exists, that can experience the world and continue to live forever in the love of God.

I looked up your papers... Then I noticed you have also worked on paraconsistent logic. So to just boldly go on a completely new tangent and ask a question I have long sought to ask: do you know a good introduction text for paraconsistent logic, for a graduate level computer science student?

Thanks! I'm bookmarking this to come back to for a while :-)

Very interesting remarks... never looked at it in this way. Thx!

Care to write a short but more explicit wrap up of how you see your two questions yourself?

Socialism every time the financial system needs to be bailed out with massive liquidity injections. But ultra aggressive capitalism for lower and middle class people.