You can see who voted your comments? How? I don’t think I can.

I don’t believe it would. Perfection can, and insofar as perfection exists in our reality does, exist alongside perceived contradiction as contradiction exists in all things.

By nature of being outside of our universe they are not subject to the same constants/restraints or our same concepts of space and time.

But I’m not necessarily saying it’s a requirement. That’s just the line of thought I lean towards personally at this point.

But contradiction exists everywhere in our understanding of nature and the universe.

Interesting, I’ve never heard of that term but I am partial towards the Maliki madhab which is highly influenced by the Asha’ri and I see them listed there.

I’ll be sure to look into this later.

I am genuinely curious what these conflicting attributes are in your view.

But also, from a dialectical lens, contradiction exists in all things in our own observable reality, from the lowest levels of the concept of movement to the highest levels of the organization of human society. Why would a seeming contradiction be proof that God cannot exist?

I believe in God because I think its the best explanation for the existence of our universe with it’s laws. A being outside of our current space/time setting our universe into motion just makes sense to me.

How do you know that?

“adults either know or don’t know” then you immediately acknowledge there is room for ambiguity. Revealing that you worked backwards from the premise of “belief in God is childish”.

Why else would your example of a reasonable “adult” usage of believe be valid but not

“Hey man is there a god” “I believe so but I haven’t seen him personally”

In both examples there is a being/place beyond our current reach which we believe to be there, for whatever reasons, but are unable to confirm at the moment.

Ironically in your rush to call others childish you posted the most childish response here by assuming your understanding is the only valid one.

They better watch out! They’re gonna have a problem with AOC!

Edit: Guess you all missed this from last week lol

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5298119-ocasio-cortez-warns-of-problem-if-democratic-colleagues-are-arrested/

Wait, I thought she was a radical antifa liberal who infiltrated a peaceful demonstration to try and cause chaos?

If nobody lessened their consumption habits and just switched to “vat grown meat”, that would not solve the core of the problem. While less resource intensive than farm grown meat, it’s still resource intensive.

As I said before, it can exist to fill the voids left by other solutions, but it is not a solution in and of itself. For this reason it should not be the priority as the priority should be on growing/promoting other less intensive alternatives and lessening consumption itself.

Within our current political-economic system? End subsidies for farmed meat, subsidize alternatives, and raise awareness on the issue as well as about health effects of excess meat consumption.

This will have the “push” effect of driving up farmed meat prices while having the “pull” effects of cheaper, healthier alternatives. There is nothing in particular to enforce.

Edit: and as the market on farmed meat becomes less profitable producers will leave the industry as well which leads to a sort of “spiral” as scarcity goes up, raising prices, pushing more away.

What did I say that isn’t true? I never said the energy cost of beef wasn’t huge. Quite the opposite in fact…

~ Germany, Dec 8 1941

I think it’s far more unreasonable to go along with a genocidal regime in the name of “following laws/orders”. Where do you draw the line on that front? Is joining the IDF and activily participating in genocide fine because it’s required by law and you can’t expect others to sacrifice anything of themselves in the name of opposing genocide?

My country is literally arbitrarily detaining and deporting/imprisoning people for advocating for a free Palestine. I still go to protests.

Free Palestine, from the river to the sea!

They literally can’t comprehend radical action beyond genocide.

It is an environmental problem because the resources required to obtain the same caloric/nutritional content from meat is far higher than the alternatives. If the “better method” is better than our current method of meat production but still too intensive to maintain at scale then it doesn’t solve the problem without reducing the scale of meat consumption.

That doesn’t mean nobody can eat meat, it just means that on average people need to eat LESS meat.

Why are you so against people eating less meat? Your arguments here are akin to the “nuclear energy” bros who rag on renewables all day. Just like we can use renewables and rely on nuclear to fill any gaps, we can lessen meat consumption and rely on less intensive forms of meat production to fill the gaps.