Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Filehaus
Recent
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Orb: On the Movements of the Earth 1x8 Reaction Extended (YT link below) (Patreon)

Published:
2025-07-20 01:00:04
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Videos

  • 502018031.mp4

Downloads

  • 502018031.mp4

Missing 1 video.

Content

In Orb 1x8, We Must Become Icarus, we must fly, AUDACIOUSLY, towards the centric sun with wings of wax and stubbornness.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YouTube Link:

https://youtu.be/aNnSKR_i2Bo

Comments

Kieran

I have an edgy sense of humour, I'll often say outrageous/offensive things as a way of illustrating the ridculousness of certain beliefs/prejudices, but it's always profoundly uncomfortable when I'm interacting with someone and I realise that they're laughing at my jokes because they perceive it as revealing an element of reality. It's then also uncomfortable when I have pretty progressive views, and then someone assumes that I agree with all of the theoretical constructs of their idea of progressive philosophies. It's very interesting how some people can kind of default to assuming that the person they are talking to is being completely authentic and aligns with their own views. I can't think of any specific examples of me doing it (there have been times where I've thought someone was flirting with me but it turns out they weren't), but I know that I've done it before. Sorry, maybe not the most related to this episode, but you briefly touched on the topic

Kieran

I grew up in protestant/anglican churches, even when I became an atheist as a teenager I often attended youth groups for fun, and I never truly found a satisfying answer to the idea of a human being fundamentally sinful/condemned for actions that seemingly happened before their birth (between the protestants I've known, Adam and Eve is either viewed as literal or metaphorical). I remember often having debates about predestination, and it felt like we often went in circles. This could just be me not having the most scholarly youth leaders/priests, I often wonder if growing up Catholic may have given me more opportunities to discuss the idea in a scholarly capacity. As a child I used to view as a "le epic pwn" against the Christians, but as I get older I think that it would be a rich bed for interesting theological and metaphysical discussions. One day I'd love to sit down and have a discussion with an expert. Over time my views on Christianity and the Church has softened from "An instrument of pure evil" to "A flawed instrument that helped to keep European culture and innovation alive for a large portion of human history." A lot of scholarly work was done by monks in monasteries throughout the medieval era, I think people way overblow how the Church held back scientific development, but I still have a lot of research to do before I hold a firm opinion. This show can probably come off as anti-Church at times, but with time I think you can see how there is a lot of interesting meditations of the idea of faith and ones relationship with God. I kind of wish I was religious just so I could engage with theology in a way that feels like it directly impacts my life, but alas I simply do not have the faith for it.

Kieran

It always frightens me just how much our parents influence the type of people that we become. I was very lucky in this age to grow up with a father who was traditionally masculine (helped his fathers build houses when he was a teenager, often did DIY work around our own house, was loud, boisterous and confident) yet also exhibited a lot of empathy, consideration, and progressiveness (he stayed at home to raise us while my mother worked, he was always willing to answer any questions we had around sex/gender, would not shy away from talking about a lot of the inequality that exists in our world). Even though I had a chronic sense of low self esteem, I think it helped me from falling down that trap of the idea of alpha males and stuff that I've seen a lot of other guys I know fall down, as at their core the ideologies are sexist and materialistic, things which I've debated my father about for many years and steadily come over to his side. Now we have very nuanced discussions of geopolitics and the global economy, and we help build each other's knowledge on various issues. Of course, if my father say leaned more towards the right end of the spectrum, I'd probably be thinking about how lucky I am that I was raised to be man's man, or some such. Maybe that version of me would look down on the current me. But I also feel like he would not be as happy or content as I am, and he wouldn't be as willing to engage with the world and politics. That's probably just me justifying my own position and beliefs though.

Aidan Pullen
>>181171728

While there's credit to the idea that you may have developed your opinions differently had you grown up Catholic, I think this is less an issue with entire denominations and more an issue of how much personal investment one has about being correct and having the "proper belief", or maybe how much they value the authority that comes with that. That's not to totally rule out the differences between denominations, I just don't think "growing up Catholic" would have necessarily changed much. I grew up in the Episcopal church, and from a young age my parents encouraged me to ask questions. When I started getting older and asked too many "difficult" ones, they and the sunday-school teachers organized times for me to chat and debate with our Church's Father (who I believe had a masters in theology) to try and... help me sort through my doubts. He was incredibly welcoming and kind and put forth arguments in good faith. Likewise I've had a wide variety of civil talks with Southern Baptists / Evangelicals. Conversely, I have a friend who grew up Catholic, but would be abused (often physically) when they questioned things. Being surrounded by the right people I think is more important than the overall group. I'll get to my point! Despite the fact I grew up with very productive conversations and a great amount of support for my inquisitive nature, I still went on a similar journey as you, and I've distanced myself from the church. I wouldn't say I'm atheist, but I certainly would not call myself a Christian anymore. I think many people who come out of the church like this respond to the cognitive dissonance and mental trauma with anger and frustration and start blaming the church for xyz (whether validated or not), and it takes real maturity and self-control to be able to look back on it all with a more fair and objective lens. Sure, the Church as an institution has done pretty vile things, but it's also been responsible for some incredible beauty. I don't think that being one type of christian or another would have really changed the journey you've taken. Just projecting my journey, and my nature, I probably would have always ended up in a place similar to where I am now, though perhaps it would have taken me a different amount of time. Sorry for the disjointed word salad, you got me thinking and I wanted to respond somehow :)

agoodwintv
>>181170792

That's what their interaction in the episode made me think about, where they're testing the boundaries of the their shared beliefs. What if there were some sort of floating disclaimer that covers: - talking about an idea or person is neither a net endorsement or an attack - I'll treat you the same regardless of the specific content or topics of our discussions - agreeing / disagreeing on one point doesn't mean I'm swearing fealty / opposition to any larger group or movement etc etc

agoodwintv
>>181172686

That's great to hear. If I had to take a guess I think the common element that might lead to the same overall positive effects on you and your relationship no matter WHAT particular viewpoints you both held is just the fact that he loves you and modeled values for you (inquisitiveness and critical thinking, humility, industry, being measured and having a balanced perspective, open communication, etc) that probably transcends and out endures any one specific viewpoint.

Perchiq

11:17 no americas on the globe

Ryan

Sorry I'm late to the discussion. Summer classes just finished and I just caught up with the show. Glad I got in before the amazing title pun on Episode 10, but just briefly, at 1:55, yes, it is indeed Ockham / Occam of Occam's razor fame. The "problem of universals" that they're talking about is in fact one of the philosophical questions where that razor was relevant. Basically, the question is, "do properties of objects exist beyond those objects?" Do things like "redness" or "coldness" or "smoothness" or "beauty" exist independently of the things that are red, cold, smooth, or beautiful? Plato and many others believed that such concepts were indeed real in some sense, and that, to translate it in more modern language, real-world objects that have those properties are somehow tapping into those pure concepts or fed from them. Occam supported and then greatly modified a different view called "nominalism" that argued that properties like "redness" or "coldness" were just "names" that did not exist separately from the human mind. More precisely, Occam said that the names themselves were arbitrary, and the properties were human concepts. Instead of needing to posit a nearly infinite number of independent properties/beings and then imagine what plane of existence they occupy and how they interact with the observable world, Occam proposed that we could eliminate almost all of that in favor of a much simpler model, and the rest is probably straightforward from there. :) Obviously, very much enjoying your reactions to a really provocative series. So many things I'd love to talk about (that "palpable moment of tension" when first getting to know people and their thoughts, the "life cycle of ideas" and the ability to violently reject an idea at first glance that later comes to be something you accept or at least tolerate, and so on), but I'm already stretching the limits of "brief."

Ryan
>>181319897

A really precious snapshot, and it wouldn't last too much later, either. :) Copernicus was born in 1473, so he was alive to learn of the Europeans' arrival in the New World.

Ethan Cragg

This show’s contradiction of having an overtly corrupt and truthless entity like the church so present while also having the underlying theme of the importance of the search for Truth even in the most seemingly ridiculous and backward ideas is very important indeed. That you are aware of the trap for both the viewers and the characters is nothing less than expected and admirable! Your description of the difference between being evil and being wrong is excellent! I hadn’t considered it in detail before, but it is a brilliant way of judging the merits of error. I also loved the entire segment on Original Sin at around the 10:00 minute mark. It’s easily one of the most concise and interesting interpretations on the topic I’ve heard in a long time. On top of that, I’ve always found the definition of God being the fullness of Truth, the essence and point of the universe, and the pure logic behind reality itself is remarkably similar to the Catholic understanding, even down to the very name of God in the first chapter of John being ‘Word’, or ‘Logos’, the all-encompassing logic. There’s still a whole lot of potential differences when taken as an absolute or final statement, but there’s no conflict in that alone. These videos have been some of my favorites on the channel, so I can’t wait to see what you think of later episodes!