|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 18:19:47 GMT
tpfkar I guess I don't generally explicitly visualize idioms, slang or other. Little BonnieYou should start. It will greatly increase the quality of your idioms, as, surely, you will begin to empathize somewhat with the recipients of said idioms. After all, anyone can "just say" something vile. If you want to truly master the ability to disrupt, you should first immerse yourself in the imaginings of those things actually "being," and if in such immersion you find yourself approving of the visual (liking it perhaps?), your idiom will have the benefit of being both incendiary and honest. I can tell you outright that your vision of quality is not something I'm concerned with. And if you want to truly master your ability to babble on like an aggrieved twit, you should just keep with exactly what you've been doing. Hand of the Almighty
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 19:16:58 GMT
tpfkar You should start. It will greatly increase the quality of your idioms, as, surely, you will begin to empathize somewhat with the recipients of said idioms. After all, anyone can "just say" something vile. If you want to truly master the ability to disrupt, you should first immerse yourself in the imaginings of those things actually "being," and if in such immersion you find yourself approving of the visual (liking it perhaps?), your idiom will have the benefit of being both incendiary and honest. I can tell you outright that your vision of quality is not something I'm concerned with. And if you want to truly master your ability to babble on like an aggrieved twit, you should just keep with exactly what you've been doing. Hand of the AlmightyAggrieved? On the contrary, good fellow, I feel as though I have been blessed. I've meant all of my comments to you in good-natured humor. I'm sorry to see you don't reciprocate. Would you say you'd prefer not to discuss anything with me?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 19:29:41 GMT
tpfkar I can tell you outright that your vision of quality is not something I'm concerned with. And if you want to truly master your ability to babble on like an aggrieved twit, you should just keep with exactly what you've been doing. Hand of the AlmightyAggrieved? On the contrary, good fellow, I feel as though I have been blessed. I've meant all of my comments to you in good-natured humor. I'm sorry to see you don't reciprocate. Would you say you'd prefer not to discuss anything with me? I was using the appropriate "good-natured humor"ed response to the "vile", "disrupt", "incendiary", "liking it perhaps" totally blessed not-babbles. And I reply to any posts that pique my interest enough to get me to respond. Satan Is Real
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 20:10:42 GMT
tpfkar Aggrieved? On the contrary, good fellow, I feel as though I have been blessed. I've meant all of my comments to you in good-natured humor. I'm sorry to see you don't reciprocate. Would you say you'd prefer not to discuss anything with me? I was using the appropriate "good-natured humor"ed response to the "vile", "disrupt", "incendiary", "liking it perhaps" totally blessed not-babbles. And I reply to any posts that pique my interest enough to get me to respond. Satan Is RealCalling me a "twit" doesn't seem very good-natured, nor humorously-intended. Please explain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 20:19:12 GMT
In what sense are you experiencing free will? If you mean that you're experiencing free will in the sense that your actions are not deterministic, then how could this possibly work? Do you think about what thoughts your going to think before thinking them (and think about what thoughts you're going to think about thinking, before you think them, and so on ad infinitum)? If you aren't choosing which thoughts to think before thinking them, you cannot be operating with free will in the most traditionally and commonly accepted sense. I exhibit my free will when I choose not consider things that I consider superfluous, like whether I thought about my thought before I thought it. Perhaps I am not hip to what the traditional and commonly accepted sense of free will is. To me, free will isn't something one must be familiar with greek philosophy in order to comprehend or define. I determine my fate from the moment I am born within the confines of my starting place, which is within a world of "other." There are directions that my teachers had for me, my parents wanted for me and that God has asked me to follow. Some of those continue down the same path, others veer from one another. But every step I take is my inertia. The traditional conception of free will is that behaviour is indeterministic, and that one can somehow override all causal factors or random stochastic factors when choosing. If you didn't remember choosing which thought to think before you thought it, then that means that the thought was formulated subconsciously, meaning that it could not have emerged from your will. From the moment you were born, you have made the choices that factors outside of your control have determined that you were going to make. Because the causal chain leading up to that moment of choice has always been opaque, to some degree, to your conscious mind, you have interpreted this ignorance of causal factors as 'free will'.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 20:22:12 GMT
tpfkar I was using the appropriate "good-natured humor"ed response to the "vile", "disrupt", "incendiary", "liking it perhaps" totally blessed not-babbles. And I reply to any posts that pique my interest enough to get me to respond. Satan Is RealCalling me a "twit" doesn't seem very good-natured, nor humorously-intended. Please explain. It's both commensurate to the "good natured humor" babbles of "vile" "disrupt", and "incendiary", and "liking it perhaps" and wholly accurate of the utterly hypocritical babbler of the same. God Am
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 20:51:06 GMT
I exhibit my free will when I choose not consider things that I consider superfluous, like whether I thought about my thought before I thought it. Perhaps I am not hip to what the traditional and commonly accepted sense of free will is. To me, free will isn't something one must be familiar with greek philosophy in order to comprehend or define. I determine my fate from the moment I am born within the confines of my starting place, which is within a world of "other." There are directions that my teachers had for me, my parents wanted for me and that God has asked me to follow. Some of those continue down the same path, others veer from one another. But every step I take is my inertia. and that one can somehow override all causal factors or random stochastic factors when choosing. If I understand what you're saying correctly, then I don't believe my decisions can override these factors when choosing. Huh? There are a lot of things I don't remember that actually happened and were actually my conscious choice. I disagree. The fact that I have evolved as a person is proof that this statement isn't true. The types of choices I make now are different than the ones I would have made before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 20:58:31 GMT
tpfkar Calling me a "twit" doesn't seem very good-natured, nor humorously-intended. Please explain. It's both commensurate to the "good natured humor" babbles of "vile" "disrupt", and "incendiary", and "liking it perhaps" and wholly accurate of the utterly hypocritical babbler of the same. God AmYou seem to be mistaking my attribution of the word "vile" to you personally, rather than your poetry. "Disrupt" and "incendiary" are neutral words, but you seem to have attributed them to yourself negatively. I'm starting to see a pattern here. "Liking it perhaps," was meant as a neutral alternative to the natural process of what I was generically suggesting to you, but you seem to have attributed it particularly to liking butt stuff, which was not the intention. "Twit," on the other hand, is inherently negative. Nobody wants to be played for a fool, certainly. Have I offended you somehow? You seemed to have things you wanted to say to me, so I opened a dialogue with you. Did I choose unwisely?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 21:07:33 GMT
tpfkar It's both commensurate to the "good natured humor" babbles of "vile" "disrupt", and "incendiary", and "liking it perhaps" and wholly accurate of the utterly hypocritical babbler of the same. God AmYou seem to be mistaking my attribution of the word "vile" to you personally, rather than your poetry. "Disrupt" and "incendiary" are neutral words, but you seem to have attributed them to yourself negatively. I'm starting to see a pattern here. "Liking it perhaps," was meant as a neutral alternative to the natural process of what I was generically suggesting to you, but you seem to have attributed it particularly to liking butt stuff, which was not the intention. "Twit," on the other hand, is inherently negative. Nobody wants to be played for a fool, certainly. Have I offended you somehow? You seemed to have things you wanted to say to me, so I opened a dialogue with you. Did I choose unwisely? Sorry, I'm not interested in your vile hypocritical who-me "poetry". And I'm sure you're seeing sphincter patterns where you visualize "anus"es, as you like to post. "Babbling twit" was pure "good natured humor"ing compared to your aggrieved cries and further slithery (not you personally, really!, just what you're doing!) babbles. incendiary!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 21:09:56 GMT
and that one can somehow override all causal factors or random stochastic factors when choosing. If I understand what you're saying correctly, then I don't believe my decisions can override these factors when choosing. Huh? There are a lot of things I don't remember that actually happened and were actually my conscious choice. I disagree. The fact that I have evolved as a person is proof that this statement isn't true. The types of choices I make now are different than the ones I would have made before. As for point 2, I think that you may be misunderstanding. When you are at any given juncture at which you are about to make a choice, it would be impossible for you to be able to appreciate all the factors that went into making that decision. You cannot follow up a full causal chain regarding why you have a particular food preference, for example, because the chain of causality which determines your preference stretches all the way back to the beginning of the universe. As for point 3, that only means that your brain and decision making capacity has evolved as it has been exposed to different causal factors. Not having free will doesn't mean that throughout your life, no matter what you are exposed to, you will always have exactly the same preferences and predispositions. In fact, if it were the case that you were completely impervious to being influenced by what was happening around you, that would probably count more in favour of free will. It means that if it were possible to rewind the universe to any given point in time (with all perameters being identical), you will always make the same decision as you did the first time round.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 21:20:31 GMT
tpfkar You seem to be mistaking my attribution of the word "vile" to you personally, rather than your poetry. "Disrupt" and "incendiary" are neutral words, but you seem to have attributed them to yourself negatively. I'm starting to see a pattern here. "Liking it perhaps," was meant as a neutral alternative to the natural process of what I was generically suggesting to you, but you seem to have attributed it particularly to liking butt stuff, which was not the intention. "Twit," on the other hand, is inherently negative. Nobody wants to be played for a fool, certainly. Have I offended you somehow? You seemed to have things you wanted to say to me, so I opened a dialogue with you. Did I choose unwisely? Sorry, I'm not interested in your vile hypocritical who-me "poetry". And I'm sure you're seeing sphincter patterns where you visualize "anus"es, as you like to post. "Babbling twit" was pure "good natured humor"ing compared to your aggrieved cries and further slithery (not you personally, really!, just what you're doing!) babbles. incendiary! My bad. I thought you were trolling for a conversation with me earlier in the thread. Did I misunderstand?I don't understand your second sentence. What does that even mean? So you were just ribbing me when you called me babbling twit? Awesome! HIGH FIVE! I don't recall being aggrieved or crying at any time on this thread. Citation? Be honest: you like slippery babbling, though, do you not?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 21:28:43 GMT
tpfkar Sorry, I'm not interested in your vile hypocritical who-me "poetry". And I'm sure you're seeing sphincter patterns where you visualize "anus"es, as you like to post. "Babbling twit" was pure "good natured humor"ing compared to your aggrieved cries and further slithery (not you personally, really!, just what you're doing!) babbles. incendiary! My bad. I thought you were trolling for a conversation with me earlier in the thread. Did I misunderstand?I don't understand your second sentence. What does that even mean? So you were just ribbing me when you called me babbling twit? Awesome! HIGH FIVE! I don't recall being aggrieved or crying at any time on this thread. Citation? Be honest: you like slippery babbling, though, do you not? I'm bot "ribbing" you and you're still disingenuously babbling at it. Not at all incompatible. And good to know all of your nonsensical accusations were just you "trolling for a conversation". The way you guys wear your silly hypocrisies is so good natured and awesome! And I do like to point out those acting slippery-babbley poor-widdle-hypocritey after bawling about "incendiary" and "vile" and "disrupt" and the like. *sniff* Again, not you personally, just what you're doing! Lake of Fire
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 21:32:27 GMT
If I understand what you're saying correctly, then I don't believe my decisions can override these factors when choosing. Huh? There are a lot of things I don't remember that actually happened and were actually my conscious choice. I disagree. The fact that I have evolved as a person is proof that this statement isn't true. The types of choices I make now are different than the ones I would have made before. As for point 2, I think that you may be misunderstanding. When you are at any given juncture at which you are about to make a choice, it would be impossible for you to be able to appreciate all the factors that went into making that decision. You cannot follow up a full causal chain regarding why you have a particular food preference, for example, because the chain of causality which determines your preference stretches all the way back to the beginning of the universe. Whereas I agree that the choices I make are impacted by factors outside of my conscience, and whereas I agree that I cannot fathom all of the numerous ways in which those factors have influenced me, I cannot agree that either of those things being true mutually excludes conscious choice. Influence and control are two very different things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 21:50:15 GMT
tpfkar My bad. I thought you were trolling for a conversation with me earlier in the thread. Did I misunderstand?I don't understand your second sentence. What does that even mean? So you were just ribbing me when you called me babbling twit? Awesome! HIGH FIVE! I don't recall being aggrieved or crying at any time on this thread. Citation? Be honest: you like slippery babbling, though, do you not? I'm bot "ribbing" you and you're still disingenuously babbling at it. Not at all incompatible. And good to know all of your nonsensical accusations were just you "trolling for a conversation". The way you guys wear your silly hypocrisies is so good natured and awesome! And I do like to point out those acting slippery-babbley poor-widdle-hypocritey after bawling about "incendiary" and "vile" and "disrupt" and the like. *sniff* Again, not you personally, just what you're doing! Lake of FireClearly I was babbling because you didn't read my previous post correctly. Unless the above bolded phrase was your version of "I know you are but what am I?" You're bot ribbing me? You didn't even say "please!" I haven't complained about anything, so I'm not sure why you're treading this whole act like I've been whining about anything. Is this some form of projection? Who are "you guys?" Exactly who do you presume to associate me with?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 21:57:03 GMT
tpfkar I'm bot "ribbing" you and you're still disingenuously babbling at it. Not at all incompatible. And good to know all of your nonsensical accusations were just you "trolling for a conversation". The way you guys wear your silly hypocrisies is so good natured and awesome! And I do like to point out those acting slippery-babbley poor-widdle-hypocritey after bawling about "incendiary" and "vile" and "disrupt" and the like. *sniff* Again, not you personally, just what you're doing! Lake of FireClearly I was babbling because you didn't read my previous post correctly. Unless the above bolded phrase was your version of "I know you are but what am I?" You're bot ribbing me? You didn't even say "please!" I haven't complained about anything, so I'm not sure why you're treading this whole act like I've been whining about anything. Is this some form of projection? Who are "you guys?" Exactly who do you presume to associate me with? You project shyte, it must be coming from somewhere. And I understand you can't read through simple typos. Comes with the territory with you guys. You cried like a baby girl about "incendiary", "vile", "disrupt" and then "trolling for a conversation", and you're still bawling. The type that sucks down the fairy stories, and get aggrieved at the particulars being pointed out. Always the same slimy hypocrisies emerge. And I will kill her children with pestilence and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 22:59:05 GMT
tpfkar Clearly I was babbling because you didn't read my previous post correctly. Unless the above bolded phrase was your version of "I know you are but what am I?" You're bot ribbing me? You didn't even say "please!" I haven't complained about anything, so I'm not sure why you're treading this whole act like I've been whining about anything. Is this some form of projection? Who are "you guys?" Exactly who do you presume to associate me with? You project shyte, it must be coming from somewhere. And I understand you can't read through simple typos. Comes with the territory with you guys. You cried like a baby girl about "incendiary", "vile", "disrupt" and then "trolling for a conversation", and you're still bawling. The type that sucks down the fairy stories, and get aggrieved at the particulars being pointed out. Always the same slimy hypocrisies emerge. And I will kill her children with pestilence and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.I'm not sure what the significance of your first sentence is. Your second sentence makes no sense. I was not referring to a typo. I suggested you were trolling me for a conversation and your response was to rearrange the subjects of my statement and regurgitate it as if I was trolling you. That's one of several straw men you have erected in our conversation. Hopefully you won't project the word "erected" as if it was attributed to you personally as you did previously with the word "vile." Can you even tell the difference? I didn't cry about incendiary. I happen to view the word incendiary as a good thing. Same goes for "disrupt." "Vile," on the other hand was an honest criticism of your vile phrasing, but I don't see how that amounts to me crying. Are you always this hyperbolic? Which hypocrisy have I exhibited?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 23:05:38 GMT
As for point 2, I think that you may be misunderstanding. When you are at any given juncture at which you are about to make a choice, it would be impossible for you to be able to appreciate all the factors that went into making that decision. You cannot follow up a full causal chain regarding why you have a particular food preference, for example, because the chain of causality which determines your preference stretches all the way back to the beginning of the universe. Whereas I agree that the choices I make are impacted by factors outside of my conscience, and whereas I agree that I cannot fathom all of the numerous ways in which those factors have influenced me, I cannot agree that either of those things being true mutually excludes conscious choice. Influence and control are two very different things. Where does free choice come into it? How would that even work if you can't even discern all of the causal factors which would be pushing you towards one particular option. You would really need to be choosing which thoughts to think, before thinking them. That, of course, would unavoidably engender an infinite regression. If people could be disabused of this illogical fairytale of free will, there would be hardly any Christians left. And also people would treat each other a lot more decently, on the whole, if they realised that people weren't to blame for just being what they couldn't help but be.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 24, 2018 23:10:49 GMT
tpfkar You project shyte, it must be coming from somewhere. And I understand you can't read through simple typos. Comes with the territory with you guys. You cried like a baby girl about "incendiary", "vile", "disrupt" and then "trolling for a conversation", and you're still bawling. The type that sucks down the fairy stories, and get aggrieved at the particulars being pointed out. Always the same slimy hypocrisies emerge. And I will kill her children with pestilence and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.I'm not sure what the significance of your first sentence is. Your second sentence makes no sense. I was not referring to a typo. I suggested you were trolling me for a conversation and your response was to rearrange the subjects of my statement and regurgitate it as if I was trolling you. That's one of several straw men you have erected in our conversation. Hopefully you won't project the word "erected" as if it was attributed to you personally as you did previously with the word "vile." Can you even tell the difference? I didn't cry about incendiary. I happen to view the word incendiary as a good thing. Same goes for "disrupt." "Vile," on the other hand was an honest criticism of your vile phrasing, but I don't see how that amounts to me crying. Are you always this hyperbolic? Which hypocrisy have I exhibited? I really hate that for you. As for your "not referring" bit it was 50/50 as your babble made no sense either way. And of course you keep projecting what you've been doing, it's what you guys always laughably do. I "trolled for a conversation from you" by responding to a reply you made to me. Sheer brilliance! And you cried like a little lady-baby with your histrionic accusations and kept hypocritical bawling after that nonsense was handed right back to you. You haven't been able to turn off the waterworks long enough to try to stay on actual topic instead of babbling anyplace you can go to avoid the hard cold facts of the crass immoral mess you badly try to prop up. Now, therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known a man by lying with him; but all the women-children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 23:21:51 GMT
Whereas I agree that the choices I make are impacted by factors outside of my conscience, and whereas I agree that I cannot fathom all of the numerous ways in which those factors have influenced me, I cannot agree that either of those things being true mutually excludes conscious choice. Influence and control are two very different things. Where does free choice come into it? How would that even work if you can't even discern all of the causal factors which would be pushing you towards one particular option. You would really need to be choosing which thoughts to think, before thinking them. That, of course, would unavoidably engender an infinite regression. If people could be disabused of this illogical fairytale of free will, there would be hardly any Christians left. And also people would treat each other a lot more decently, on the whole, if they realised that people weren't to blame for just being what they couldn't help but be. Are you suggesting that not understanding the choices I make means I am not making the choices? I treat everyone I meet well and I don't ascribe to your philosophy. Perhaps there just aren't any boxes that fit everyone in a particular philosophy. And your assertion that "if people could be disabused of this illogical fairytale of free will, there would be hardly an Christians left," GREATLY underestimates the immutable power of faith. You could present anything and everything under the stars and you would never dissuade me and those like me. I love logic. I love reading philosophy. I loved all my little philosophic classes in college. But even though I can aptly maneuver within its realm, I'll throw it out the window in a heartbeat if it seems to disagree with my faith. I am existentially aware of God's existence and that is a level of awareness that my eyes have already proven to me that they can fall short of.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2018 23:25:58 GMT
Where does free choice come into it? How would that even work if you can't even discern all of the causal factors which would be pushing you towards one particular option. You would really need to be choosing which thoughts to think, before thinking them. That, of course, would unavoidably engender an infinite regression. If people could be disabused of this illogical fairytale of free will, there would be hardly any Christians left. And also people would treat each other a lot more decently, on the whole, if they realised that people weren't to blame for just being what they couldn't help but be. Are you suggesting that not understanding the choices I make means I am not making the choices? I treat everyone I meet well and I don't ascribe to your philosophy. Perhaps there just aren't any boxes that fit everyone in a particular philosophy. And your assertion that "if people could be disabused of this illogical fairytale of free will, there would be hardly an Christians left," GREATLY underestimates the immutable power of faith. You could present anything and everything under the stars and you would never dissuade me and those like me. I love logic. I love reading philosophy. I loved all my little philosophic classes in college. But even though I can aptly maneuver within its realm, I'll throw it out the window in a heartbeat if it seems to disagree with my faith. I am existentially aware of God's existence and that is a level of awareness that my eyes have already proven to me that they can fall short of. Your brain (or you) is making the choices, but at any given juncture, there is only one choice that it is possible for you to make. So if time got reversed and you ended up repeating a particular decision (even one that would later be regrettable, with hindsight) with all parameters in the universe exactly as they were the first time you made the choice, you would always make the same choice. And thanks for confirming that you decide what you're going to believe first, and then ignore any information which doesn't conform to the belief to which you are emotionally wed.
|
|