Olight clipped in front left.
RAT I pocket knife also clipped in front left.
Wallet back left.
Watch right wrist.
Phone front right.

It’s part of a banjo song. Bender is doing that to imply the mere people are hill billies or trashy poor southerners. Song is Dueling Banjos

Yeah, we definitely agree with each other.

That is my point. I can be near a rock and an ant can be closer to the rock. The observer dependent position of the ant does not affect my proximity to the rock. We would have to agree on a frame of reference before we could begin debating my absolute position relative to said rock.

Your post and the previous are making the materialist argument (which in real life I agree with.) I was trying to further explain the Christian argument for free will in a world where omniscience is possible. An omniscient observer doesn’t affect the lived experience of free will for anything else. The watchmaker god theory is a popular way to reconcile this point. Even if free will as a discrete and measurable phenomenon does not exist e.g. one cannot show me they have x units of free will or whenever, that does not change the experience of free will for the individual.

Arguing for or against some imagined omniscience by switching the frame of reference to that of an imagined all knowing system or all encompassing formula and then using that framing to invalidate choice isn’t very sound reasoning. It may or may not be correct and it is falsifiable but we can’t test it in any meaningful way.

You’re doing it wrong now but of course that is your right. Shake it dry, zip up.

If free will is observer dependent than why would the omniscience of some other observer relieve us, the observer who is not omniscient, of free will? Something else being able to predict my actions has no effect on my ability to predict the actions of others.

If god is all powerful everything is a choice and there are no natural restrictions. Why an omniscient and supposedly loving deity created us to suffer and die is a question of theodicy and that is separate from the question of free will. Because god is a jerk is a likely and valid argument in this framework.

A better example for the god is a jerk is Satan/Lucifer. Angels were not given free will and are servants of God by design. Still, Satan and his host were cast down and separated from the light of God’s love for their rebellion. Not being endowed with free will, the angels were apparently set up. In this situation, god made beings a certain way and then punished them for it while not giving them access to the tools of salvation (free will.)

You don’t have to agree with the poster but they already answered that. There can be no acceptance without the ability to reject. Consent is meaningless without the capacity for dissent. Theodicy is a different matter.

Lol bleak

I bet if you put up an ad, on Facebook marketplace or whatever your equivalent is, stating that you are willing to pick up boxes of books (I’d recommend a 3 or 4 box minimum but whatever) people will contact you.

You should workshop something with that for a holiday special username

Reminds me of

I can’t decide if he is sighing or sobbing

Webtv was my real intro to the Internet as not just a place to look up stuff for school. I was introduced to IRC, Usenet, multiplayer online games all from our webtv set top

Second vote for kagi small web. One of my favorite feeds

Made in a facility that also makes chocolate covered shrimp and candied mussels.