(Sep 10, 2017 10:36 AM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]When I was about 15... a teacher asked a question in class (doesn't matter) and a boy (J*) gave the answer "God could send an angel.". The teacher let the class laughter answer for him. On another occasion a teacher was holding up a piece of wood with the symbol for a transistor painted on it. J* kept asking questions to the point where it became clear he couldn't see how pieces of wood like that could possibly fit into a transistor radio - they were simply too big. In fairness in his muddle of literal metaphorical and figurative he had managed to conclude that the teacher was speaking with a forked tongue. We have to wonder whether Syne will ever do the same.
That was perfect, C2.
Wow! You're getting crafty in your old age. I like it!
If Syne doesn't post soon I'm going to have to eat some worms.
(Sep 10, 2017 06:05 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm...new candidate for my ignore list. Those cowards who don't directly address the target of their criticism.
Thus saith the cognitive biases junkie. I think this may be one of the early warning signs of an overdose or incurable insanity.
(Sep 15, 2017 10:13 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]If Syne doesn't post soon I'm going to have to eat some worms.
Better to eat them than go fishing for "likes". Who says that we have to be likeable anyway, Zuckerberg, with his fucking friend frenzy? Quelling social unease with meaningless platitudes is not my thang. You know me, I can’t hang where conformity reigns. Besides, Syne did say that he was chasing opposition. I just can’t believe that he actually expected me of all people to go along with his fictional argumentation of "the devil is in the details" or was it "God is in the details"? God’s will?—Satan’s will?—Who’s on first? Who in the hell cares when neither exist? We’re alone. There’s no god to legitimize our behavior. You can either grow some stones or spend your time spit polishing the stones of dead men. I mean, that’s apologetics in a nutshell, right?
(Sep 17, 2017 02:08 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ] (Sep 10, 2017 06:05 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm...new candidate for my ignore list. Those cowards who don't directly address the target of their criticism.
Thus saith the cognitive biases junkie. I think this may be one of the early warning signs of an overdose or incurable insanity.
(Oct 2, 2016 08:22 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]If your primary interest is to "gain confidence in your own views" then you really have no interest in debate from the onset. Ignoring those who disagree with you and seeking to affirm your own views is the definition of confirming your own cognitive biases.
I'm here to have my biases challenged.
Yeah, there's a difference between engaging trolls who only lob vague ad hominems in lieu of refuting anything actually said and being open to legitimate counterargument. Oh, that's right, you don't understand the difference either.
Quote:
(Sep 15, 2017 10:13 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]If Syne doesn't post soon I'm going to have to eat some worms.
Better to eat them than go fishing for "likes". Who says that we have to be likeable anyway, Zuckerberg, with his fucking friend frenzy? Quelling social unease with meaningless platitudes is not my thang. You know me, I can’t hang where conformity reigns. Besides, Syne did say that he was chasing opposition.
Ad hominems are not true opposition. Ideas can only be challenged by reason...not insult.
Quote:I just can’t believe that he actually expected me of all people to go along with his fictional argumentation of "the devil is in the details" or was it "God is in the details"? God’s will?—Satan’s will?—Who’s on first? Who in the hell cares when neither exist? We’re alone. There’s no god to legitimize our behavior. You can either grow some stones or spend your time spit polishing the stones of dead men. I mean, that’s apologetics in a nutshell, right?
See? You're so insecure that you feel the need to do everything you can to avoid understanding different views. It must be so comforting to just dismiss cognitive dissonance out of hand like that. And you seem to think your so-called friends don't perceive this utter contempt you regard them with.
It's truly sad that you really don't seem to know what a real friend is at all.
SS Wrote:There’s no god to legitimize our behavior.
I acknowledge a debt and a duty as a guest - obviously(?) I am in debt to Stryder and the duty is ... that of a guest.
(Sep 17, 2017 02:08 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]You can either grow some stones or spend your time spit polishing the stones of dead men. I mean, that’s apologetics in a nutshell, right?
Apologetcis - reasoned arguments or writings in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.
I will clarify that my initial comment was triggered by Syne pointing out the difference between Pantheism and Panentheism - each as bonkers as the other.
And what do you believe? O_o
Is there more evidence for panentheism than there is for theism? O_o
Who said there was evidence for either? O_o