Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

churchlifejournal.nd.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 243 posts

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#221

Post by dang »

achillesheels wrote: post #220
dang wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personal attacks will get you banned here. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.

Is it expected that I compose a tangential lengthy rebuttal to what amounts to a wildly ignorant hypothesis on the emergence of the Abrahamic faith's idea of an eternal God as a civilizing power in world history? I'd rather be pithy and insinuate anti-social behavior, because a proper socializing actually leads to a more mature appreciation of the facilitation of history between generations than something baselessly…

No, but it's expected that you do better than "You must be fun at parties." We're trying to avoid the classic downward spiral of internet forums here, or at least stave it off a little longer.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#222

Post by achillesheels »

dang wrote: post #221
achillesheels wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it expected that I compose a tangential lengthy rebuttal to what amounts to a wildly ignorant hypothesis on the emergence of the Abrahamic faith's idea of an eternal God as a civilizing power in world history? I'd rather be pithy and insinuate anti-social behavior, because a proper socializing actually leads to a more mature appreciation of the facilitation of history between generations than something baselessly…

No, but it's expected that you do better than "You must be fun at parties." We're trying to avoid the classic downward spiral of internet forums here, or at least stave it off a little longer. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I'll aim higher next time, sorry for being lazy.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#223

Post by dang »

achillesheels wrote: post #222
dang wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it's expected that you do better than "You must be fun at parties." We're trying to avoid the classic downward spiral of internet forums here, or at least stave it off a little longer. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I'll aim higher next time, sorry for being lazy.

Appreciated!

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#224

Post by foldr »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #215
foldr wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much more condescending to tell everyone in the humanities that (a) they should all follow the example of a physicist who never even wrote a book length work himself, and (b) that they are obliged only ever to work in the service of extremely impatient and poorly-read readers outside the humanities, whose preferences are the only ones that matter. Imagine if someone in the humanities expected the sciences to ope…

You seem to be looking to find grounds to criticize what I say, rather than first trying to understand it. This is leading you to creating strawmen - to the point that it begins to look deliberate. In case it's not, though, I'm going to try this one more time. You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say, and I deny you the right to do so. Did I say "ever"? No. I said that, when talking to those outside the h…

The article we're talking about is accessible to anyone with a bit of patience and a decent vocabulary (or the will to use a dictionary). I'm not in the humanities and I had no problem understanding it. I think it's really weird to use this particular article as an example of some kind of disconnect between the humanities and the culture at large.

Pop science is fashionable, but 90% of it is fluff or pure nonsense. The level of scientific knowledge of the general public remains miserably low. Are the humanities doing so much worse in engaging the public? This is not obvious to me.

I'm confused now about why you brought Feynman into this. Initially, you seemed to be contrasting successful pop science with unsuccessful attempts by the humanities to communicate with the general public, and suggesting that humanists should ape the communication style of Feynman and other famous scientists. I found this odd, since humanists communicate with the general public all the time, to a much greater extent than most scientists. Just read any high quality newspaper or magazine and you'll find lots of accessible articles by humanities professors, authors, critics, etc. (The article we're talking about is one example!)

Perhaps it would help if you could just give an example of some work in the humanities (not necessarily recent) that you actually like. Presumably you don't think that there's never been any good or accessible work in the humanities. So rather than pointing to Feynman, why not tell us which humanists other humanists should be emulating?

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#225

Post by tasuki »

lcall wrote: post #216
tasuki wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is life after death. It's just not going to be you living it. One day, you'll die. After that, it's eternal nothingness. It's not so terrible if you think about it.

My evidence might or might not be persuasive to you, but I did present it (in related comments) in detail. :)

Mind linking to the evidence? I promise I'll read it!

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#226

Post by tasuki »

lcall wrote: post #174
lcall wrote: post #166

Having learned for myself that life has a purpose and there is life after death, with a just judge (and merciful, for the merciful), and that all things will be put in good order (my wording, emphasis on good): that all changes everything, for me at least. Today is Easter, when we commemorate the empty tomb....

With any downvotes, I would appreciate a courteous, thoughtful comment. I have not understood the possible harm in what I said, only likely disagreement. Disagreement is OK, but it seems that it could be better to write clearly rather than just quietly hide.

If what you said was inaccurate, ie if there was no life after death, in my opinion it'd be harmful to claim that there is.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#228

Post by lcall »

tasuki wrote: post #225
lcall wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My evidence might or might not be persuasive to you, but I did present it (in related comments) in detail. :)

Mind linking to the evidence? I promise I'll read it!

http://lukecall.net/e-9223372036854587400.html

It is generated from my own extensive notes, using a tool linked from the homepage: http://lukecall.net

General discussion welcome if you like. I especially appreciate feedback (see site footer for example) on the usefulness and/or navigability & skimmability of the way the content is presented. (Font is the html default, so can be configured in the browser to suit one's general preference. Putting things all in one document would make it huge, and it would be unclear at any given time what should be included vs. omitted as the links go deep in many directions.)

Thanks.

(edit: Is there a link visble to you in my profile? I am of course happy to put it here also, but was only curious if that works as I thought :) All the best to you.)

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#229

Post by lcall »

tasuki wrote: post #226
lcall wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With any downvotes, I would appreciate a courteous, thoughtful comment. I have not understood the possible harm in what I said, only likely disagreement. Disagreement is OK, but it seems that it could be better to write clearly rather than just quietly hide.

If what you said was inaccurate, ie if there was no life after death, in my opinion it'd be harmful to claim that there is.

I like how you put that, and I think I agree with you. I am also extremely grateful for what I know, and for knowing it (per links provided in the other response). If I can be of service in answering questions I will try.

Re: You're a Slave to Money, Then You Die

#230

Post by phaemon »

ThomPete wrote: post #201
phaemon wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then perhaps you should have made that comment rather than a nonsensical one about machines?

Why? If you are making money when you sleep the chances that you are using machines to make money is quite large. I am doing that and I don't have any slaves working for me. If you can't see the slave analogy being what is nonsensical here then nothing I can say or do is going to convince you. So I guess by your definition you are either a slave or a slave owner. Oh well.

What on earth are you talking about? Do you know what is meant by"equity"? Are you following the context of this article? It seems like you're just spouting random phrases without a clue what we're discussing.
Post reply on HN