Elfthreads!

[lintamande]

Eagles could eclipse but there are fewer than a thousand and I'mma say they didn't.

[MTC]

I don’t recall a previous mention of a Macalaurë’s opinions on musical instruments, they usually seem to be referred to just as singers. Does a Macalaurë learn how to play instruments as much as a Fëanáro learns languages, or do they mainly just stick to singing? Or some combination?

[MaggieoftheOwls]

Eagles aren't Maiar?

[kuuskytkolme]

"- one of those infinite flat worlds like Fairyland or the snake monster planet -"

...Is this a mistake or did they find Fairyland sans Bell off screen?

[Marri]

Probably they mean the daeva one?

[kuuskytkolme]

Ooooh, I see! That makes sense.

[DanielH]

Of course, that night have found a Visitor one just now.

[pedromvilar]

Oh my god Eru

[jalapeno_dude]

"...it is the morally relevant trait of universes."

*screaming*

[jalapeno_dude]

Some people actually believe this:

If the mathematical elegance of the universe were appreciated by a sentient Being
outside the universe, that might increase the goodness of the world to a maximum,
despite the sufferings within it. Goodness might be maximized if the Being had
all possible knowledge, leading to the hypothesis of omniscience for full appreciation.
Maximum goodness might also suggest the hypothesis that the Being has
omnipotence for actualizing the best possible world. If the Being actualizes a world
of maximum goodness, one might postulate that the Being is a Creator and has
omnibenevolence. Such an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent Creator would
fit the usual criteria for God.

Thus the assumption that the world has maximum goodness might suggest the
conclusion of the existence of God:

Without God, it would seem that the goodness of the universe could be increased
by violations of the laws of physics whenever such violations would lead to
more pleasure within the universe. However, with God, such violations might decrease
God’s pleasure so much that total goodness would be decreased. Perhaps the
actual world does maximize total goodness, despite suffering that is a consequence
of elegant laws.

God may grieve over unpleasant consequences of elegant laws of physics and
might even directly experience all of them Himself (as symbolized by the terrible
suffering He experienced in the Crucifixion), but there may be that inevitable trade off that God takes into account in maximizing total goodness. If God really does
maximize total goodness, He is doing what is best.

Let me give a draft syllogism for one form of this Optimal Argument for the
Existence of God:

Assumptions:
1. The world is described by the simple hypothesis that it is the best, maximizing
the pleasure within it.
2. It is most plausible that either (a) our universe exists in isolation, or (b) our
universe is created by God whose pleasure is affected by the universe and who has
a nature determining what gives Him pleasure.
3. Our universe could have had more pleasure.
4. If God exists, it is possible that the total pleasure of the world (including both
that within our universe and within God) is maximized subject to the constraint of
His nature.

Conclusions:
5. If our universe exists in isolation, 3 implies that it could have had more
pleasure and hence the world could have been better, contradicting 1.
6. Therefore, 1 and 3 imply that option (a) of 2 is false.
7. Then 2 and 4 implies that it is most plausible that God exists and created
our universe.

(From here, emphasis mine.)