[colordrops]

Flippantly dismissing it as "the null hypothesis" is covering up an entire tradition of ideas around secular society's beliefs about the nature of reality. The evidence points to consciousness/subjective experience being the fundamental "matter" of reality, and this is beginning to gain traction again with scientists and philosophers. The "null hypothesis" in your context is built upon the logical positivist framework of the dualist belief that the mind and body are separate, and the objective world can be full apprehended rationally, which involves many a priori assumptions itself and is not a given. Most people are ignorant of the millennia of metaphysics that led to modern ways of looking at the world and just assume it to be ground truth rather than a complex mental construction just like the rest.

[notch656a]

You're right, the kids on youtube slowly dying of rabies unable to drink and convulsing in their bed are dying because they deserve it. The world is not a harsh place for them, and they were owed rabies.

It's pretty clear there are people that the universe in practice has offered a shit sandwich. That may not be true for everyone but it could be true to the commenter. Your view is just some self-centered objectivism.

[colordrops]

Another flippant dismissal that doesn't address what I said. I said nothing of anyone deserving suffering. Your snap judgement on the nature or reality based on a YouTube video doesn't mean that deep threads and traditions exploring the nature of reality completely ignore the existence of suffering.

> Your view is just some self-centered objectivism.

the irony of projection right here. Sneering at someone to prove your point is an effective technique to convince weaker minds to agree with you, I'll give you that, but it doesn't make you correct.

[notch656a]

So you're willing to entertain then that someone could have the objective view that the world isn't on their side? With feelings and a priori opinion removed, factually dying a horrible death of rabies in childhood before reaching even reproductive age cannot possibly be seen as the world/universe being on your side.

BTW, I didn't actually believe you thought people deserve to die of rabies, it was an inflammatory example to drive out how you can possibly defend this viewpoint necessarily being subjective and not objective.

[colordrops]

Anyone can have any view they wish about the world. What I'm saying is that it's very easy to take a superficial analysis of the nature of the reality built on gut feelings, personal anecdotes, and "i happen to be born in the right place at the right time in the right cultural tradition that has lock on truth" syndrome, and replace it with another superficial analysis of the reality built on gut feelings and personal anecdotes and "i happen to be born in the right place at the right time in the right cultural tradition that has a lock on truth" syndrome. Flapping from one superficial belief to another doesn't make the latter more true.

[notch656a]

I'm not sure deciding that "the world is on my side" is objectively false for some people is a superficial belief.

[colordrops]

"'the world is on my side" is objectively false" is not at all equivalent to "the world is a harsh place that doesn't owe anyone anything"