|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on May 20, 2020 0:46:07 GMT
I have no desire to be an expert on anything other than my profession (or, at least, enough of an expert to be successful) and my greatest passions, which happen to be the arts. For everything else I'm content being a dilettante who merely learns from experts and who has the humility not to question them in my lack of expertise. IE, I strive not to be a Dunning-Kruger victim like yourself. FYI, my parents had, and continue to have, many wrong ideas. Their wrong ideas, in many respects, have spurred me to know what I do happen to know. One thing I cannot recommend is that you try to be a comedian. On that we can agree. 
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 1:19:47 GMT
So it's rational to believe there's an invisible dragon in your garage and that there's a teapot orbiting the sun? OK. No. But it's rational to believe in God. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on May 20, 2020 1:21:26 GMT
So it's rational to believe there's an invisible dragon in your garage and that there's a teapot orbiting the sun? OK. No. But it's rational to believe in God. LOL.. All these pages and it comes down to this crap? LOL. What a wank!
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on May 20, 2020 1:22:47 GMT
So it's rational to believe there's an invisible dragon in your garage and that there's a teapot orbiting the sun? OK. No. But it's rational to believe in God. What makes God different than the other two things?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 1:39:06 GMT
No. But it's rational to believe in God. What makes God different than the other two things? I have no reason to believe there's a dragon in my garage or whatever you were offering. It's sensible to consider a conscious intelligence behind the creation and operation of everything. With the contingency that it's not necessary. Couple that with the trial comparison of believing and not believing. With everything else being constant. Resulting in better results when believing. No proof. But any logical person would choose that which results in more benefits and less consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 2:33:30 GMT
Saying they feel guilty, is exactly the same as saying they are guilty. How can you possibly gauge this and WHAT is it that makes them feel guilty for not having religion? No it's not. You don't understand English. Being guilty and feeling guilty are two different things. Being guilty means you did something wrong. Feeling guilty means you feel like you did something wrong, but you may not have. Projection is why people who feel guilty attack me. They are projecting their own negative feelings on me. You are telling others that they are being wrong, or feel like they have done something wrong for not believing in religion. Not to mention that they are ignorant too. How is that not negative projection coming from you? You still haven't expressed why they should be feeling guilty about religion and enough with the confused and absurd semantics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 2:37:24 GMT
More nonsense. I don't need to think about his belief, other than what he means by it, especially since he has expounded on it.
His belief is his, but if he cares enough to express it, he has to own his own pov when challenged about it. He needs to accept that he can't assume that others are guilty and ignorant over not having religion, (his words), unless he can back it up with something valid and reasonable about what he is trying to say, otherwise he is best perhaps not saying anything. doesn't want me to tell him what he means. I only tell him what I guess he means. It is difficult to know. See the difference? I suspect you could retry things more often as well. The difference is Arlon, you want to tell others what they mean and also tell them what you mean as being an absolute and that only you know the way it is. movieliker is doing the same. If you don't know what you mean, which is often, or can't express it with clarity and lucidness, which is often, then you don't really have any meaning worth conveying.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 2:38:54 GMT
No it's not. You don't understand English. Being guilty and feeling guilty are two different things. Being guilty means you did something wrong. Feeling guilty means you feel like you did something wrong, but you may not have. Projection is why people who feel guilty attack me. They are projecting their own negative feelings on me. You are telling others that they are being wrong, or feel like they have done something wrong for not believing in religion. Not to mention that they are ignorant too. How is that not negative projection coming from you? You still haven't expressed why they should be feeling guilty about religion and enough with the confused and absurd semantics. I'm not attacking them. They're attacking me. They attack me. I'm explaining why. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 2:51:12 GMT
You are telling others that they are being wrong, or feel like they have done something wrong for not believing in religion. Not to mention that they are ignorant too. How is that not negative projection coming from you? You still haven't expressed why they should be feeling guilty about religion and enough with the confused and absurd semantics. I'm not attacking them. They're attacking me. They attack me. I'm explaining why. So you don't want others to challenge your pov that you express on here and just to accept it? You are discussing rfs, yet are giving off the impression that you think you know more than anyone else, just like Arlon. Are you not attacking others by claiming they are feeling guilty and ignorant? You still haven't answered how they are feeling guilty over religion and ignorant for not understanding your belief.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 3:04:07 GMT
I'm not attacking them. They're attacking me. They attack me. I'm explaining why. So you don't want others to challenge your pov that you express on here and just to accept it? You are discussing rfs, yet are giving off the impression that you think you know more than anyone else, just like Arlon. Are you not attacking others by claiming they are feeling guilty and ignorant? You still haven't answered how they are feeling guilty over religion and ignorant for not understanding your belief. Challenging me and attacking me are two different things. I don't think you have attacked me. (Maybe you did and I forgot.) I've never stopped talking with you. Asking why I believe, or asking me questions is different than just telling me I'm stupid for believing in an old guy with a white beard sitting on a cloud --- with magic powers. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 4:56:09 GMT
So you don't want others to challenge your pov that you express on here and just to accept it? You are discussing rfs, yet are giving off the impression that you think you know more than anyone else, just like Arlon. Are you not attacking others by claiming they are feeling guilty and ignorant? You still haven't answered how they are feeling guilty over religion and ignorant for not understanding your belief. Challenging me and attacking me are two different things. I don't think you have attacked me. (Maybe you did and I forgot.) I've never stopped talking with you. Asking why I believe, or asking me questions is different than just telling me I'm stupid for believing in an old guy with a white beard sitting on a cloud --- with magic powers. I haven’t read all the posts, but I don’t think anyone has put it that way. If the belief in religion or God is comfortable with you fine, I have just been curious as to why you take the stance you do with “assuming” that others are feeling guilty and are ignorant, based on what you hang your notion on about religion and God and if you are being challenged or attacked. The posters that have largely been engaging with you are not ignorant, nor are they guilty of any fallacy over religious belief, they just want proof or evidence of this belief that you have shared that doesn’t make sense to a logical and rational mind. Especially when you claim the belief is better to have than have not, as a condition of “just in case”.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 5:30:47 GMT
Challenging me and attacking me are two different things. I don't think you have attacked me. (Maybe you did and I forgot.) I've never stopped talking with you. Asking why I believe, or asking me questions is different than just telling me I'm stupid for believing in an old guy with a white beard sitting on a cloud --- with magic powers. I haven’t read all the posts, but I don’t think anyone has put it that way. If the belief in religion or God is comfortable with you fine, I have just been curious as to why you take the stance you do with “assuming” that others are feeling guilty and are ignorant, based on what you hang your notion on about religion and God and if you are being challenged or attacked. The posters that have largely been engaging with you are not ignorant, nor are they guilty of any fallacy over religious belief, they just want proof or evidence of this belief that you have shared that doesn’t make sense to a logical and rational mind. Especially when you claim the belief is better to have than have not, as a condition of “just in case”. For the millionth time --- there's no proof. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 5:34:58 GMT
I haven’t read all the posts, but I don’t think anyone has put it that way. If the belief in religion or God is comfortable with you fine, I have just been curious as to why you take the stance you do with “assuming” that others are feeling guilty and are ignorant, based on what you hang your notion on about religion and God and if you are being challenged or attacked. The posters that have largely been engaging with you are not ignorant, nor are they guilty of any fallacy over religious belief, they just want proof or evidence of this belief that you have shared that doesn’t make sense to a logical and rational mind. Especially when you claim the belief is better to have than have not, as a condition of “just in case”. For the millionth time --- there's no proof. That is why it makes no sense to a rational mind. There also has to be proof of your wild claims of guilt and ignorance towards them not believing in religion. If you can't say why, or come up with something that reasonable, it just isn't going to wash. Do you want for others to believe in what you do?
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 5:41:02 GMT
For the millionth time --- there's no proof. That is why it makes no sense to a rational mind. There also has to be proof of your wild claims of guilt and ignorance towards them not believing in religion. If you can't say why, or come up with something that reasonable, it just isn't going to wash. Do you want for others to believe in what you do? Well, no offense. But your inability to understand can be chalked up to mental inability. In other words --- ignorance. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 5:48:51 GMT
That is why it makes no sense to a rational mind. There also has to be proof of your wild claims of guilt and ignorance towards them not believing in religion. If you can't say why, or come up with something that reasonable, it just isn't going to wash. Do you want for others to believe in what you do? Well, no offense. But your inability to understand can be chalked up to mental inability. In other words --- ignorance. I could say it is ignorance on your part, for evading all the questions that have been thrown at you, because you have no answer for them and expecting others to understand what only you can make clear. You have own your own belief and reason to believe in it, but the nonsense you have been talking about why you believe, is where you are getting backed into a corner. If you can't see this, then it is just banging your head against a wall regarding your own belief. The bruising has to be felt at some stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on May 20, 2020 6:07:57 GMT
Well, no offense. But your inability to understand can be chalked up to mental inability. In other words --- ignorance. I could say it is ignorance on your part, for evading all the questions that have been thrown at you, because you have no answer for them and expecting others to understand what only you can make clear. You have own your own belief and reason to believe in it, but the nonsense you have been talking about why you believe, is where you are getting backed into a corner. If you can't see this, then it is just banging your head against a wall regarding your own belief. The bruising has to be felt at some stage. What questions have I not answered? |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on May 20, 2020 6:56:05 GMT
I could say it is ignorance on your part, for evading all the questions that have been thrown at you, because you have no answer for them and expecting others to understand what only you can make clear. You have own your own belief and reason to believe in it, but the nonsense you have been talking about why you believe, is where you are getting backed into a corner. If you can't see this, then it is just banging your head against a wall regarding your own belief. The bruising has to be felt at some stage. What questions have I not answered? You have given plenty of responses, without really giving anything "authentic" about what you claim. As long as it works for you, you can slug it out with others, or even on your own now.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on May 20, 2020 11:07:30 GMT
Well that's odd. What is it about those knowledgeable non-believers that makes them not attack you, and what it is about those ignorant non-believers that do? A cynic might suggest that the minute someone "attacks you" you simply categorize them as an ignorant non-believer. No. Intelligent believers and non believers know there is no proof one way or another. And they respect my decision to believe. Ignorant believers and non-believers think they know that which is unknowable. And proceed to tell anybody who doesn't agree with them that they are stupid. Is this the same movieliker who called me a 'retard' and 'stupid' on this very thread?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 20, 2020 11:25:01 GMT
FilmFlaneur doesn't want me to tell him what he means. I only tell him what I guess he means. It is difficult to know. See the difference? I suspect you could retry things more often as well. The difference is Arlon, you want to tell others what they mean and also tell them what you mean as being an absolute and that only you know the way it is. movieliker is doing the same. If you don't know what you mean, which is often, or can't express it with clarity and lucidness, which is often, then you don't really have any meaning worth conveying. If you are not sure what he is saying how do you know there is anything wrong with it? I suppose FilmFlaneur might make sense in some realm or other, just not addressing my concerns.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on May 20, 2020 11:30:57 GMT
The difference is Arlon, you want to tell others what they mean and also tell them what you mean as being an absolute and that only you know the way it is. movieliker is doing the same. If you don't know what you mean, which is often, or can't express it with clarity and lucidness, which is often, then you don't really have any meaning worth conveying. If you are not sure what he is saying how do you know there is anything wrong with it? I suppose FilmFlaneur might make sense in some realm or other, just not addressing my concerns. If you have any problems making sense of what I am saying, Arlon, then just ask someone with advanced reading skills for help.
|
|
