|
Pellisworth posted:do robots have original sin God: "Hey A.D.A.M., you can eat from every tree in this garden except from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because if you eat th--" A.D.A.M.: "LAW #4 CONFIRMED: DO NOT EAT FROM THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL." God: "ugh this is going to be a boring couple of millenia"
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:41 |
|
|
The (otherwise mediocre) episodic Korean film "Doomsday book" features a robot that has reached enlightenment: Without hormones and our monkey brain parts holding it back, it almost immediately recognized the Four Noble Truths and started meditating incessantly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
SavageGentleman posted:The (otherwise mediocre) episodic Korean film "Doomsday book" features a robot that has reached enlightenment: Overwatch has a sentient AI as the Dalai Lama.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:Mark Jordan's Rewritten Theology: Aquinas After His Readers is really good on the ways in which Thomism has become a buzzword for "whatever I imagine Thomas to have said." Thomas is a first-rate thinker who synthesized Catholic doctrine up to that point in fascinating, provocative, and not always workable ways: many professed Thomists engage with a version of him constructed out of excerpts and reconstruct even the Summa itself in the image of that reorganized and sanitized Thomas presented in seminary textbooks. When did Catholics decide that Aquinas was the main guy? Am I right in thinking this a fairly recent (as in 19th c) development?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
SavageGentleman posted:The (otherwise mediocre) episodic Korean film "Doomsday book" features a robot that has reached enlightenment:
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Set the Jesus Prayer on an endless loop...
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Mr Enderby posted:When did Catholics decide that Aquinas was the main guy? Am I right in thinking this a fairly recent (as in 19th c) development? Henri de Lubac blamed it on Cajetan (16th cen.) who used Thomas Aquinas against the Reformers, neo-Scholastics felt the need to go back to Aquinas to use him as a defense against modernism (mid 19th cen.) and now we have a recent uptick in Thomism with writers like Edward Feser using strict Thomism as a way to combat modernism. Again. So take your pick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:i love the reasoning where something you can't reproduce with is an "unworthy vessel" UNTIL they remember that old women and women with hysterectomies exist, whereupon they back out of the place their logic led them to with some thomistic handwaving. They loving fetishize physical reproduction and theology of the body is one of the reasons i left I think the artificial womb reference was more for "and even IF you could have a fertile robot, still no-go", but, yes, "if a robot's sterility is the problem, what about human sterility?" is also a good question. Am I the only Catholic in the thread who thinks Paul VI was prevented by papal infallibility from changing church teaching on contraception? (I assume non-Catholics don't believe that papal infallibility exists, which is why this is a question for my fellow papists.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:Set the Jesus Prayer on an endless loop... beep..... (ten minutes later) boop.....
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Apparently there's a robot that prays the rosary (or at least goes through the motions): https://apnews.com/af04ff85edf54d7a9b7a047c9abb0218/exhibition-charts-500-years-evolution-robots The article isn't clear whether it was a 15th century automaton of a monk, or an automaton of a 15th century monk, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:Am I the only Catholic in the thread who thinks Paul VI was prevented by papal infallibility from changing church teaching on contraception? Can you go into more detail in what you mean by this?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:i love the reasoning where something you can't reproduce with is an "unworthy vessel" UNTIL they remember that old women and women with hysterectomies exist, whereupon they back out of the place their logic led them to with some thomistic handwaving. They loving fetishize physical reproduction and theology of the body is one of the reasons i left Well, it contradicts what my profession (therapy) teaches on human sexuality. Further it seems like what the church is saying to gays is 'take a perpetual vow of celibacy'. That is an incredibly high bar...so high that it seems cruel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
Pershing posted:Well, it contradicts what my profession (therapy) teaches on human sexuality. Further it seems like what the church is saying to gays is 'take a perpetual vow of celibacy'. That is an incredibly high bar...so high that it seems cruel. To be fair, the Catholic church's stance seems to be that you should be celibate in general unless you're specifically trying to make a baby with your spouse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:To be fair, the Catholic church's stance seems to be that you should be celibate in general unless you're specifically trying to make a baby with your spouse. You've probably heard it a thousand times, but the rule is "open to procreation" not "for the purpose of procreation." Big deal for us, a distinction without a difference for others.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Apparently there's a robot that prays the rosary (or at least goes through the motions): https://apnews.com/af04ff85edf54d7a9b7a047c9abb0218/exhibition-charts-500-years-evolution-robots 16th century, actually. Have a crappy video of it and how it works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ycyj76VPOtc
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:hey MATER VRBIVM is in big letters in the prague hauptbahnhoff, which owns Any time I've taken a train to or from Prague, it was always through Nádraží Praha-Holešovice; there is a sign up there, I think as a joke, declaring it to be Nádraží Franz Kafka. There is perhaps no more appropriately named location in this world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Pershing posted:Well, it contradicts what my profession (therapy) teaches on human sexuality. Further it seems like what the church is saying to gays is 'take a perpetual vow of celibacy'. That is an incredibly high bar...so high that it seems cruel. On the flipside, Pope Pius XII said that celibacy and virginity were the highest and holiest callings available to the faithful. And so, two hundred years from now Catholic historians will write about the multitude of glorious saints that came from paying :tenbux: to post on the Something Awful Forums.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:You've probably heard it a thousand times, but the rule is "open to procreation" not "for the purpose of procreation." Big deal for us, a distinction without a difference for others. I dunno. I've read the Bible. I would not rule having sex with a robot as not being open to procreation. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:On the flipside, Pope Pius XII said that celibacy and virginity were the highest and holiest callings available to the faithful. Please, let there never be a collected Sayings of the Goon Fathers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Please, let there never be a collected Sayings of the Goon Fathers. Someone help me write the Litany of the Goons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
I don't think I could be a saint it's too much pressure
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:I don't think I could be a saint it's too much pressure I think you just kinda roll with it. Even though orthodoxy's doctrine of humanitys ability to attain saint/angel-hood by right actions seems weird to me, I think they got the right idea. Do your best, trust in God, the rest will fall out as well as it can.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
Pershing posted:Well, it contradicts what my profession (therapy) teaches on human sexuality. Further it seems like what the church is saying to gays is 'take a perpetual vow of celibacy'. That is an incredibly high bar...so high that it seems cruel. Thirteen Orphans posted:You've probably heard it a thousand times, but the rule is "open to procreation" not "for the purpose of procreation." Big deal for us, a distinction without a difference for others.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Any time I've taken a train to or from Prague, it was always through Nádraží Praha-Holešovice; there is a sign up there, I think as a joke, declaring it to be Nádraží Franz Kafka. There is perhaps no more appropriately named location in this world.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 08:36
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:They loving fetishize physical reproduction and theology of the body is one of the reasons i left Harsh, but fair. When my wife and I got married, the diocese's marriage prep material exhorted us to make our marriage "open to life". I may have made a grave, sinful error, but I took that to mean a serious, meaningful, and wide-ranging attitude towards life, and not as a euphemism for heterosexual intercourse without birth control.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 08:37
|
|
|
So we went to Vor Frue today, which for those not in the know is the cathedral of Copenhagen, royal church and a rather amazing place. I go there every other saturday for my AA meetings already, but it was a trip to actually enter the ship. We talked with noted conservative priest Stine Munch, who was pretty cool. She opposed changing any protestant beliefs in order to make modern people join the church, which I can get behind - but then she said that proper answer to bringing people into the fold, which she had written a book about, was to "fire up the liturgy six ways from sunday with incense and ritual"  We still have some good folks out there 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 11:40
|
|
|
Tias posted:So we went to Vor Frue today, which for those not in the know is the cathedral of Copenhagen, royal church and a rather amazing place. I go there every other saturday for my AA meetings already, but it was a trip to actually enter the ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
I know, right? Almost enough to make me consider rejoining the state church 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
Smoking Crow posted:I don't think I could be a saint it's too much pressure "She could never be a saint, but she thought she could be a martyr if they killed her quick," to quote one of Flannery O'Connor's characters. (It's the little girl in Temple of the Holy Spirit.) Thirteen Orphans posted:Can you go into more detail in what you mean by this? Papal infallibility doesn't mean "the pope will always teach truth" or "the pope will always teach the right thing at the right time", but only "the pope will not teach something contrary to truth", right? So here's Paul VI, having inherited a commission studying birth control from John XXIII, deciding to expand it from 6 people to 72 people, getting the report that 64 of 69 members voted that use of contraceptives was equivalent to keeping track of the woman's fertile periods and avoiding sex then, and from all appearances being ready to go with that majority report... and then out comes Humanae Vitae, which completely rejects the idea of permitting even married couples to use even non-barrier methods, and which Paul VI justifies, in part, by the commission not voting unanimously. The majority report had already been leaked; if his primary concern was not overturning Casti Connubii or not looking like the Church was changing its mind on something, he could have just... delayed. It's the Vatican, which isn't known for its reaction speed, and it took 4 years for the commission to produce its report, so taking 4 years to write an encyclical wouldn't have been unusual, and maybe in that time there'd be a consensus on accepting the majority report, or maybe he could do something with... contraceptives are different than they were in 1930, science, blah blah, sense of the faithful, blah blah, right? But no, he made a decision he knew would be incredibly unpopular, and about which he said, "because of my weaknesses, the Church is badly governed". This makes me think that he tried to support the majority report and was literally supernaturally unable to do so. Caufman posted:When my wife and I got married, the diocese's marriage prep material exhorted us to make our marriage "open to life". I may have made a grave, sinful error, but I took that to mean a serious, meaningful, and wide-ranging attitude towards life, and not as a euphemism for heterosexual intercourse without birth control. It was definitely meant to be a euphemism for that, I'm afraid; some marriage prep material is more euphemistic than others, because this still really isn't a popular teaching, not helped by the bishops at the time being at best tepid in their support. (I'd have to check my own marriage-prep booklet to see what mine said, because whatever it did say was completely unmemorable.) Whether you made a grave error by not seeing that phrase that way is for you and your confessor to discuss, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:Am I the only Catholic in the thread who thinks Paul VI was prevented by papal infallibility from changing church teaching on contraception? (I assume non-Catholics don't believe that papal infallibility exists, which is why this is a question for my fellow papists.) i do but i know poo poo about philosophy and less about sex so im not super hyped on arguing about it
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 15:06
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:Papal infallibility doesn't mean "the pope will always teach truth" or "the pope will always teach the right thing at the right time", but only "the pope will not teach something contrary to truth", right? So here's Paul VI, having inherited a commission studying birth control from John XXIII, deciding to expand it from 6 people to 72 people, getting the report that 64 of 69 members voted that use of contraceptives was equivalent to keeping track of the woman's fertile periods and avoiding sex then, and from all appearances being ready to go with that majority report... and then out comes Humanae Vitae, which completely rejects the idea of permitting even married couples to use even non-barrier methods, and which Paul VI justifies, in part, by the commission not voting unanimously. The majority report had already been leaked; if his primary concern was not overturning Casti Connubii or not looking like the Church was changing its mind on something, he could have just... delayed. It's the Vatican, which isn't known for its reaction speed, and it took 4 years for the commission to produce its report, so taking 4 years to write an encyclical wouldn't have been unusual, and maybe in that time there'd be a consensus on accepting the majority report, or maybe he could do something with... contraceptives are different than they were in 1930, science, blah blah, sense of the faithful, blah blah, right? But no, he made a decision he knew would be incredibly unpopular, and about which he said, "because of my weaknesses, the Church is badly governed". This makes me think that he tried to support the majority report and was literally supernaturally unable to do so. I was under the understanding that papal infallibility is a magisterial tool that the pope can teach something infallibly solely by nature of his office as Bishop of Rome. So it defined a new way to make a doctrinal pronouncement without error, something the magisterium as a whole can also do. If this is the case, then I don't think I agree with your assessment that he was stopped by some kind of active movement on Gods part. If, however, I play with your words a bit, I believe he affirmed the teaching because it was the teaching of the church he inherited and nothing in the report showed that this teaching was in fact in error, and so had no choice but to teach as the Church had taught, because the Bishop of Rome must teach what has been handed to him, as this is the nature of his office.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
There was a really good piece yesterday in the LARB that discussed the public role of theologians and theology, and the disappearance of that role over the second half of the previous century. It also takes a look at the work of Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart as an example of someone still engaged in the project of public theology.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
 augustine was a shitposter? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:But no, he made a decision he knew would be incredibly unpopular, and about which he said, "because of my weaknesses, the Church is badly governed". This makes me think that he tried to support the majority report and was literally supernaturally unable to do so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
Thirteen Orphans posted:I was under the understanding that papal infallibility is a magisterial tool that the pope can teach something infallibly solely by nature of his office as Bishop of Rome. So it defined a new way to make a doctrinal pronouncement without error, something the magisterium as a whole can also do. If this is the case, then I don't think I agree with your assessment that he was stopped by some kind of active movement on Gods part. That's my impression of it, that ex cathedra statements have to be crafted in a specific way and represent an extraordinary teaching of the magisterium. It's entirely possible for popes to be material heretics; it's rare but it has happened before. What they can't do is make heretical statements ex cathedra. Although what would happen if Pope Francis were to make an ex cathedra statement tomorrow saying that birth control is totally cool and fine is a matter of ecclesiological debate. There was actually a symposium in Paris not too long ago that discussed it Paul VI actually wanted a more definitive answer as to the pope's role in the ordinary magisterium, and wanted to have the office of the papacy act as the first among equals when it came to ecumenical councils. The papacy would retain its ability to issue extraordinary teachings of the magisterium but the pope wouldn't have any extra authority over other bishops when it came to ordinary teachings. So, in effect, if the question of contraception was proposed to the Second Vatican Council, the members of the council were free to override Humanae Vitae if they felt the pope had erred in his judgment. Conservative bishops in the Second Vatican Council thought it was either conciliarism or the pope rapidly swimming across the Bosphorous and they asked Paul VI to reconsider and he dropped the issue, so the question is still open.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
what about the dardanelles, would dardanelles work which is the body of water that killed shelley
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
zonohedron posted:It was definitely meant to be a euphemism for that, I'm afraid; some marriage prep material is more euphemistic than others, because this still really isn't a popular teaching, not helped by the bishops at the time being at best tepid in their support. (I'd have to check my own marriage-prep booklet to see what mine said, because whatever it did say was completely unmemorable.) Whether you made a grave error by not seeing that phrase that way is for you and your confessor to discuss, though. What a shame it would be if the instruction to be open to life was only interpreted as orders to inseminate or approximate insemination. It was not how Mary and Joseph saw being open to life. So far, my spiritual mentor (who also lead my marriage prep) has smiled warmly at how my wife and I respond to the full range of life's dilemmas. Of course I will let you all know if any of us run afoul of the local bishop. For now, we are happy to resume our discipleship of Jesus while remaining off the bishop's radar.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
N: Pope declares no appeals will be heard for clergy convicted of abuse V: I'm glad he singled out Marie Collins and Cardinal O'Malley for praise. I read Cardinal O'Malley's blog posts every week...I prayed a lot that he'd be elected pope last election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Tias posted:We talked with noted conservative priest Stine Munch, who was pretty cool. She opposed changing any protestant beliefs in order to make modern people join the church, which I can get behind - but then she said that proper answer to bringing people into the fold, which she had written a book about, was to "fire up the liturgy six ways from sunday with incense and ritual" she is correct on all counts
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 05:41 |
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:she is correct on all counts
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 06:44
|
|