Classical Greece was just one of my examples. My main point is that, even if all documented groups had spirituality and religious practices (which I don’t refute), is that you have not convinced me of the cause and effect between morality and spirituality in human society.

1. I do believe people did not need a modern formal education or a ton of free time to reflect and think at a high level. If that belief is an issue, then we fundamentally disagree on that point.

2. You continue to state that all societies have documented spiritual and religious practices, and I apologize that I didn’t make it clear enough that I understood you meant all societies and that I was only using a few societies as an example, but you have not stated why that means spirituality caused morality or needed to have caused morality. Genuinely, could you explain to me how it is implausible that any moral principals found in those religions were the product of societal morals of the time and not the other way around? Even if morals are subjective, religious interpretation is also subjective. As far as meanins to humans and structure goes, neither is more objective than the other in my opinion. Or maybe morals are more objective if we assume they were developed as guided by survival of the species rather than as guided by religion.

3. If you want to ignore everything else, here’s as simple a summary of my question as possible: Why do you insist religion -> morals? Why can it not be morals -> religion?

Garry’s Mod. There is a centralized location you can all get the relevent files from, or uploaf them to (Steam). Your game could be on a publicly accessable server. But, you are able to and pretty much must host the server yourself (or you could use a hosting service, but GMod won’t do it for you).

I feel a lot of the people disagreeing here are making assumptions about your beliefs, missing the point, and then simply refuting you to refute you without providing explaination. I think this is a fair and interesting premise. I disagree with it and will ecplain why, though do note I am not invested enough to specifically look anything up so if I say something inaccurate, please evaluate if the logic falls apart or not.

I think the first part of your main justifications has been hard to refute. Most, if not all societies we have known have had religion or spirituality. However, I think your following conclusion, “those societies must have then used morality based on those religions”, is where the flaw is. I think most societies had religion as a form of a “God of the gaps” and used it to explain phenomena they couldn’t. I would say that is the main reason they did have it. However, that doesn’t yet mean they didn’t use it for morality. To see that, I’d ask you to look at Greek and Roman mythology, or as known to them, religion. Now I believe, Zeus turning into a swan and doing Zeus things doesn’t have a moral (or not a useful one, it’s mainly that Zeus is an asshole)… Likewise, Aphrodite turning Arachne into a spider didn’t really inform some Greek moral of don’t be too pretty, just showed Aphrodite is, for lack of a better word, a fucking jealous bitch. Let’s similarly look at Norse mythology. Loki makes Fenrir and tries to kill other gods and generally does shenanigans. There’s not really a moral attached to that, he kinda just does shit cus he’s a hit of a dick.

My main point here is that while these religions existed, they did so to explain phenomena or were then essentially fanfic extensions of the reasons/personifications of those phenomena, and often were not the basis for morality of a culture (but very well likely were themselves molded by a cultures morality in a reversal of causation). Because Greece, Roman, and Norse cultures were more secular, they could therefore have stories without morals that just had assholery abound. Because the time around the formation of the Christian church was more tyrannical (now I’m guessing), the bible had much more heavy handed morals (ten commandments, 7 deadly sins etc).

I hope that was a better argument for disagreement. And, I don’t think your premise was as outlandish as so many others are making it out to be, despite my disagreement.

Yes

Just in case this isn’t a bit: OP, the structure in English should be “adjective noun.” The opposite to most romantic languages where you say the noun then the description word. So a cat girl is a girl (assumed human) that can be described as a cat (has the traits of a cat). A girl cat is more reasonably a cat that is a girl, though you’d probably say “female cat” more often. For allergies you’d want to look into hypoallergenic cats like the hairless sphynx.

Obviously it depends on the deck, but in general you want a large number of item cards and less pokemon and energy.

Item/trainer cards provide a lot of ways to draw/recycle and support your pokemon/energy and you’ll likely want to see a bigger ratio of them in your opening hand. Especially since you’re not going to go through too many more pokemon than you have prize cards and you can only have 1 active pokemon at a time with 6 total in play.

So the exact ratio depends on the deck and the pokemon you are trying to support, but essentially you shouldn’t be running more the 15 pokemon and 15 energy on a high end. 12 pokemon is pretty standard. Most of the rest of your deck should be search and draw cards which there should be plenty of.

Disclaimer: I don’t play this game.

I would increase the landmass on Earth such that the Earth itself was only 50% ocean. I would do so in a grand display of power utilizing some sort of ancient and supreme Titan, one that brings into undeniable question the foundation of all world religions and even evolution itself. Now having shown that I possess the power of a god. I would descend upon Israel and the surrounding lands and demand all of them migrate to one of the many new landmasses, so that I may reign in my new palace from a place of former conflict, symbolically showing that increasing the amount of landmass in the world helps end conflicts. Should any people resist, I shall simply displace them forcefully with a shower of Precipice Blades. The water displaced for the new land masses would be evaporated into the atmosphere, leaving behind a large amount of salt and eventually precipitating back down as fresh water. While in the atmosphere a large amount of the Earth would be covered in dense clouds cooling it and causing an Ice Age that staves off Global Warming, but creating harsh temporary conditions that the Israelites and Palestinians must learn to live and overcome together as they worship their new god… Me. Eventually power will corrupt me and I will grow tyrannical. Then the either binary son or daughter of an Israeli-Palestinian couple will stand up to me, capturing other beings of power to fight me in a grand battle, at the age of 10 uears old.

This is a plot point in an old manga series. I forget which one. Needless maybe?

It’s really got the same vibe as constantly comparing someone to your ex.

Neither of these extremes fit. Huh

In the same way you cannot see my comment, I cannot see your post.

I can imagine your service advisor smirking every time the customer complained and it brings me delight. Her and your manager make it sound like an amazing workplace.

Ah, another Joey user. It looks as though all 2-10 of us have moved to Lemmy. Incredible.

Yeah. I had the same reaction. I honestly think this is one of the greate 2/3rds of a movie of all time. But, it irks me that it only feels like 2/3rds of 1 movie rather than the 1st part to a 2 parter. I can get over it though and it doesn’t ruin the movie for me, just makes it much worse than it could’ve been. Technically Gwen’s subplot sort of got closure, but Miles was too much of a focus for it to feel like a satisfying mini arc to close on, especially when they still left the cliff hanger on Miles (and I loved Gwen’s arc). Felt like the second to last episode in a TV series rather than a movie like that.

That said, it is my headcanon that they had to do this in negotiation with the studio to keep from making the Spiderverse into another cinematic universe or something. They already had the plot and story written, but had to split it into two parts because of Sony and this was the best point for them to do so while still having enough to work with for a third movie. I don’t have any real basis for this, but it makes sense to me.

Accelerator already touched on the side dish/main dish concept being not really a thing for the most part. That being said it is important to note, that traditionally fried rice is basically a leftovers only dish. Like you wouldn’t cook fried rice to cook fried rice. You’d cook fried rice because you had leftover steamed rice from the other night (and you’d use other leftover ingredients too). So, I suppose in a lot of those instances you’d only be eating fried rice, thus making it a main course by technicality (though it doesn’t have to be).

Source: Am part Chinese. Would cook fried rice to cook fried rice and disgrace my ancestors.

No one has mentioned them here yet, but I’m really excited for Payday 3 to come out. Especially with how well they’ve supported Payday 2 throughout the years. I’m also hoping they bring back Overdrill so I can go for it this time around.

On a more indie scale, I’ve been waiting for Bomb Rush Cyberfunk to release since I finished playing Jet Set Radio Future.