Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why dont you just tell us in one sentence what it is about? It cant be that hard.
Do you prefer to be "lead by the nose?" I was thinking it might be better to solicit some ideas rather than just give my own. I am the one who laid it all out at the beginning of this thread after all. Explained more than a fair bit about what it's all about. I know you have your ideas too, and no doubt somewhat insulting, but I'm open to more interpretation if anyone care to think about the subject of this thread with less ego and more objectivity.
people are posting more in the other thread because it is a robust discussion of the ways in which the views presented in the list of ten opinions are problematic.
Yours is one opinion. Hardly surprising in the least, and to break from that robust discussion to post such a comment here? Classic, but I think myuen2's explanation hit the nail far more squarely on the head.
also the other thread opens the discussion to additional ideas, as reflected in the thread title "science as religion". i'd say consider it a compliment that this first thread has stimulated such active, robust, engaging discussion in exploring the many topics which sprang from it. that is a positive thing, and the OP of this thread can take credit for being catalyst for the many conversations still active.
Science was/is and always has been a part of this thread too. Not all that hard to read the truths that specifically mention both science and religion either. Right in the OP! Not that I haven't since much encouraged discussion from any perspective about these truths. Regardless whether they align with mine or not, but hey, what's not to expect with regard to human nature along these lines too?
You have your fun wherever you prefer, and all the best to you as I think it's time for me to sign off now and get on with preparing our BSB. This thread will just have to do without your contributions that are always so robust, enlightening and sensible. Shucks!
BSB then to watch the 9rs beat the Cowboys. I'd stay on a bit longer, but I'm starting to feel cornered again, and nobody likes that!
Do you prefer to be "lead by the nose?" I was thinking it might be better to solicit some ideas rather than just give my own. I am the one who laid it all out at the beginning of this thread after all. Explained more than a fair bit about what it's all about. I know you have your ideas too, and no doubt somewhat insulting, but I'm open to more interpretation if anyone care to think about the subject of this thread with less ego and more objectivity.
You own the statements you make and their meaning. If it does not hold together you should either agree it lacks in meaning, or restate it in a way that is understood. Failed communication is always due to the fault of the messed up message and the messenger. Blaming the recipient for lack of intelligence is the lamest form of gaslighting.
Do you prefer to be "lead by the nose?" I was thinking it might be better to solicit some ideas rather than just give my own. I am the one who laid it all out at the beginning of this thread after all. Explained more than a fair bit about what it's all about. I know you have your ideas too, and no doubt somewhat insulting, but I'm open to more interpretation if anyone care to think about the subject of this thread with less ego and more objectivity.
if someone is going to bandy about "ego" and "needs more objectivity"
then that applies to the list of ten as well. because the list of ten is not objective.
There is only one item on the list of ten that is objective, and that is number 2.
All the rest on the list are not objective.
That is why the list of ten stands on its own as a list of your opinions and views and beliefs,
but no, it is not objective.
Also: someone with different views beliefs and opinions does not equal "ego."
And knowing the difference between objective and subjective, does not equal "ego."
Yours is one opinion. Hardly surprising in the least, and to break from that robust discussion to post such a comment here? Classic, but I think myuen2's explanation hit the nail far more squarely on the head.
post above makes a good point: each individual person has their own views, opinions and beliefs. the list of ten is just that: a list of the author's own views, opinions and beliefs.
post above makes a good point: each individual person has their own views, opinions and beliefs. the list of ten is just that: a list of the author's own views, opinions and beliefs.
and that's what freedom of religion is, the freedom each person has to choose their own views, opinions, and beliefs with regards to their own chosen path of religion and spirituality.
each person also has their own individual reasons for the beliefs, views, and opinions they hold.
the list of ten is also exactly that: a list of the author's own reasons for their own beliefs, views, and opinions held.
here is where it becomes problematic:
not just sharing or stating your own beliefs views opinions
but claiming their own beliefs views opinions are "better" "more worthy" "more peace" "more reality" "more logic" "more reasonable" "more progress" "more forward" "more facts" "more truth" "more mature" and of course a long laundry list of pejoratives denigrating other views. all the while claiming to be "objective" and "scientific."
That is on a par with a kid saying their TV show is better than the TV show their brother wants to watch and wants to argue why his opinion is better than his brother's and yeah calling his brother a bunch of derogatory names, just like the list of ten does.
the list of ten is pure proselytizing . and by its very nature, proselytizing is not objective.
Tthe other thread was started in response to the proselytizing nature of the list of ten.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-22-2023 at 11:41 AM..
You own the statements you make and their meaning. If it does not hold together you should either agree it lacks in meaning, or restate it in a way that is understood. Failed communication is always due to the fault of the messed up message and the messenger. Blaming the recipient for lack of intelligence is the lamest form of gaslighting.
LearnMe has written extensively, not only in this thread, but now in two threads, about his beliefs regarding what he calls the "Ten Truths". Few people who post here have been as accommodating in describing his viewpoint(s).
Failed communication is not always the fault of the messenger. It can be the fault of either the messenger OR the fault of the recipient who isn't focusing on what is being said. That was the point of a couple of courses I took in college about communication. There is no gaslighting going on. And to claim so is a personal attack.
if someone is going to bandy about "ego" and "needs more objectivity"
then that applies to the list of ten as well. because the list of ten is not objective.
There is only one item on the list of ten that is objective, and that is number 2.
All the rest on the list are not objective.
That is why the list of ten stands on its own as a list of your opinions and views and beliefs,
but no, it is not objective.
Also: someone with different views beliefs and opinions does not equal "ego."
And knowing the difference between objective and subjective, does not equal "ego."
The vast majority of posts in this part of the forum are subjective and based on personal opinions and personal experiences. When one lectures others based on books they have read, they are adding in their own subjectivity, as well as the subjectivity of authors they have been reading.
The vast majority of posts in this part of the forum are subjective and based on personal opinions and personal experiences. When one lectures others based on books they have read, they are adding in their own subjectivity, as well as the subjectivity of authors they have been reading.
exactly. that's why it is not reasonable or logical or rational for the author of the list of ten to demand and claim objectivity, when the list of ten itself is not objective.
for someone to vaunt their own opinions views beliefs as "facts and truth" and claim they are "the best for all concerned"
while at the same time denigrating other opinions views beliefs as "speculation, supernatural, emotions, notions, conjecture, great harm, conflict, violence, war, sure madness, retarding progress, bad, falsehoods, fear, inculation, bigotry, ego, condemnation, ignorance, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, painful, backwards"
is (a) a huge disconnect, and (b) pure proselytizing
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-22-2023 at 12:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
