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.
The bold is rather convenient for the one asserting the truth as you are. It is often referred to as the "catbird seat"! That is why I preferred to refer to them as your Ten Assertions rather than the arrogant and hubristic "Truths."
While I too would not call them truths, neither are they assertions, your usual arrogant dismissal of evidence you do not like).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You have not afforded us the level of universality and unchangeable certainty that would justify asking us to prove you wrong.
This is just evasion. There are valid points in the 10 arguments, and it is a valuable exercise to read them and see where one agrees or disagrees with the various points raised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
That unjustifiably assumes it is the Truth unit proven otherwise, also again known as the "catbird seat." Ironically, or perhaps not, you have the same "assumptive arrogance" with the existence of God.
Ironic, considering your "assumptive arrogance" that other people are actually worshiping your god, they just have mistaken beliefs about it, unlike you, who is actually honored to have been selected to be the chosen one that communicates with this god.
Also, it is not "assumptive arrogance" with the existence of gods, it is the lack of credible evidence for them.
Problem when Internet surfing is considered adequate replacement for deep study. Onecwould not know nonsense from th Truth. Ironic.
He has attributed it to Buddha sideways.
You too just can't resist being part of this bandwagon that forever weaves wildly from one side of the road to the other without a care whatsoever about the actual truth of these matters. About me, my comments, my intentions, and certainly not the topic of these threads. Just as long as it's petty bickering and childish insult about nothing. All that continues to fuel the Tzap and CB bandwagon hell bent on bashing whatever gets in its path to nowhere.
And then to claim all levels of enlightenment that you and Tzap love to claim all along the way? Really just too rich for words!
I've always felt that wisdom can be found in many different places. It's nice to know if Buddha (or whoever) said something, but what's most important is how wise is the saying.
On the other hand, constantly wagging one's finger at someone is not very wise. We atheists need to get used to that as a common tactic of religionists.
Thanks!
And though one might also pick away at your choice of words or whether it's just atheists who need to call out the sort of nonsense we are both addressing here, I agree that it's more about the overall truth of these matters as you too seem to be trying to highlight here. Not the semantics, minor missteps and all the rest of this childishness that gives rise to these utter misrepresentations of fact or truth. Mindless fodder for people who prefer to wallow in petty, nasty, never-ending wagging of one's finger for no good reason whatsoever.
Hard for anyone to get used to this sort of crap. No matter how long we're forced to try.
And though one might also pick away at your choice of words or whether it's just atheists who need to call out the sort of nonsense we are both addressing here, I agree that it's more about the overall truth of these matters as you too seem to be trying to highlight here. Not the semantics, minor missteps and all the rest of this childishness that gives rise to these utter misrepresentations of fact or truth. Mindless fodder for people who prefer to wallow in petty, nasty, never-ending wagging of one's finger for no good reason whatsoever.
Hard for anyone to get used to this sort of crap. No matter how long we're forced to try.
I was thinking today of the first time I got a promotion from teacher to school administrator. Later, the principal who hired me said that one of the things that clinched the job for me above other candidates was that in my packet I included something he had never seen another candidate have: a statement of educational philosophy. He said that he didn't necessarily agree with everything in my statement of philosophy, but he chose me because at least I had thought about why I'm an educator that went far beyond simply 'it's a job'.
While I too would not call them truths, neither are they assertions, your usual arrogant dismissal of evidence you do not like).
This is just evasion. There are valid points in the 10 arguments, and it is a valuable exercise to read them and see where one agrees or disagrees with the various points raised.
Ironic, considering your "assumptive arrogance" that other people are actually worshiping your god, they just have mistaken beliefs about it, unlike you, who is actually honored to have been selected to be the chosen one that communicates with this god.
Also, it is not "assumptive arrogance" with the existence of gods, it is the lack of credible evidence for them.
I suppose there are some people who might insist on crucifying me because I chose to call them truths when I wrote them up back during my college days. I had just completed a course about the religions of the world, and of course that course was about many a religious claim, assertion and/or belief for which there was little hesitation to describe and declare as truths by religious followers.
Dealing with so much of this stubborn intolerance to simply consider what I wrote up as I intended, I must admit, is not only tiring and disappointing, but somewhat depressing. Then I read a comment like yours that I have bolded above, and my faith in my fellow man is regained!
Indeed, I don't ask for much. Many thanks for perhaps making clear what for too many I have apparently failed to make clear.
I was thinking today of the first time I got a promotion from teacher to school administrator. Later, the principal who hired me said that one of the things that clinched the job for me above other candidates was that in my packet I included something he had never seen another candidate have: a statement of educational philosophy. He said that he didn't necessarily agree with everything in my statement of philosophy, but he chose me because at least I had thought about why I'm an educator that went far beyond simply 'it's a job'.
Having read many of your comments over the years, it's been easy to tell you are more inclined toward fair objective reason and critical thinking than the average person. That's particularly nice to see in an educator. More valuable than some of these other forms of "thinking" that all too often our children are also exposed to.
Glad you are a part of this forum too. Regardless who agrees with you or who doesn't, the balance is badly needed, and again, "balance is key!" -- I don't know and don't really care who this quote belongs to either. It's the truth regardless!
While I too would not call them truths, neither are they assertions, your usual arrogant dismissal of evidence you do not like).
Then we do not disagree about that!
Quote:
This is just evasion. There are valid points in the 10 arguments, and it is a valuable exercise to read them and see where one agrees or disagrees with the various points raised.
I don't disagree with this, but they are NOT Truths.
Quote:
Ironic, considering your "assumptive arrogance" that other people are actually worshiping your god, they just have mistaken beliefs about it, unlike you, who is actually honored to have been selected to be the chosen one that communicates with this god.
If you insist, we can call it "experiential arrogance" because since the Reality I experienced is consciousness it is unquestionably God. IT is NOT an assumption because a conscious Reality is not remotely doubtful TO ME! I also have no doubt whatsoever about its "character: or True Nature making my opinions about other beliefs about God cogent.
Quote:
Also, it is not "assumptive arrogance" with the existence of gods, it is the lack of credible evidence for them.
It absolutely is assumptive and arrogant to think it is the default absent ANY means of assigning evidence to the category NOT GOD!!! What is your method for doing so????
Then we do not disagree about that! I don't disagree with this, but they are NOT Truths. If you insist, we can call it "experiential arrogance" because since the Reality I experienced is consciousness it is unquestionably God. IT is NOT an assumption because a conscious Reality is not remotely doubtful TO ME! I also have no doubt whatsoever about its "character: or True Nature making my opinions about other beliefs about God cogent. It absolutely is assumptive and arrogant to think it is the default absent ANY means of assigning evidence to the category NOT GOD!!! What is your method for doing so????
I've never insisted they be called truths, and I explained why I called them truths back when I wrote them up. No point going on about that yet again, because what they're called has very little to do with what they're about, what my intentions were at the time, or to what extent these observations are fair, warranted and worth considering.
Sharing those observations and thoughts can be viewed as arrogance I suppose, but if that's not a decidedly skewed opinion based on your rather skewed perspective, I don't know what is. Your version of truth that you always want to insist is the truth far as you are concerned. As if there is no other point of view possible and better justified. Not that I've not read all manner of opinion about what my Ten Truths are all about, "good, bad and ugly." Yours is just one of many varied opinions that are all too often typical and predictable given the particular bent of the person expressing their opinion. Yours certainly among the most typical and predictable by now.
You can also call it "assumptive and arrogant" to simply share these observations, but I don't see how I am doing anything here that I don't do with respect to sharing any opinions I share, about anything! I explain what observations I have been able to consider. What sorts of conclusions we might be able to draw or at least intelligently consider amidst all the rest. Draw what conclusions and/or formulate the best justified opinions I can, and I share them.
Again, point out where we agree and/or where are the flaws, and that's all good. Encouraged in fact! All the angst, insult and unnecessary rhetoric drawing attention from where the focus should really be placed is what I can't really well understand or very well respect.
We are all mature reasonably intelligent adults here, right? No need for any of the personal attacks or nonsense I don't think...
Then we do not disagree about that! I don't disagree with this, but they are NOT Truths. If you insist, we can call it "experiential arrogance" because since the Reality I experienced is consciousness it is unquestionably God. IT is NOT an assumption because a conscious Reality is not remotely doubtful TO ME! I also have no doubt whatsoever about its "character: or True Nature making my opinions about other beliefs about God cogent. It absolutely is assumptive and arrogant to think it is the default absent ANY means of assigning evidence to the category NOT GOD!!! What is your method for doing so????
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
I've never insisted they be called truths, and I explained why I called them truths back when I wrote them up. No point going on about that yet again, because what they're called has very little to do with what they're about, what my intentions were at the time, or to what extent these observations are fair, warranted and worth considering.
Sharing those observations and thoughts can be viewed as arrogance I suppose, but if that's not a decidedly skewed opinion based on your rather skewed perspective, I don't know what is. Your version of truth that you always want to insist is the truth far as you are concerned. As if there is no other point of view possible and better justified. Not that I've not read all manner of opinion about what my Ten Truths are all about, "good, bad and ugly." Yours is just one of many varied opinions that are all too often typical and predictable given the particular bent of the person expressing their opinion. Yours certainly among the most typical and predictable by now.
You can also call it "assumptive and arrogant" to simply share these observations, but I don't see how I am doing anything here that I don't do with respect to sharing any opinions I share, about anything! I explain what observations I have been able to consider. What sorts of conclusions we might be able to draw or at least intelligently consider amidst all the rest. Draw what conclusions and/or formulate the best justified opinions I can, and I share them.
Again, point out where we agree and/or where are the flaws, and that's all good. Encouraged in fact! All the angst, insult and unnecessary rhetoric drawing attention from where the focus should really be placed is what I can't really well understand or very well respect.
We are all mature reasonably intelligent adults here, right? No need for any of the personal attacks or nonsense I don't think...
I acknowledge MY experiential arrogance. But the bold in my post is not an insult. It is an assumption and THAT is a fact UNLESS you can provide the "MEASURE" you use to establish that the evidence we gather is NOT evidence of God!!! I await your revelation expectantly!
I acknowledge MY experiential arrogance. But the bold in my post is not an insult. It is an assumption and THAT is a fact UNLESS you can provide the "MEASURE" you use to establish that the evidence we gather is NOT evidence of God!!! I await your revelation expectantly!
Somehow "awaiting my revelation" doesn't sound entirely honest or sincere, but I suppose it's typical for us to try and ignore the sort of rhetoric that suggests we're just wasting time here, and so I will here again. It's really no sort of "revelation" in any case. It's just facts and evidence or the lack thereof...
At least one measure I've described before is the lack of evidence that keeps us ALL from being believers, or believers in the same god or religion or notions thereof. There is no such evidence, or again, we'd ALL be believers. Just like there is no evidence there is water in a desert despite all the people who might see a mirage and think otherwise. The fact remains there is no such evidence. No water. "No there there." The measure is zero water that can be found despite the mirages. Just like we're ALL believers the Earth is not flat, because there is a lack of facts and evidence that proves the Earth is flat. No matter there are always those who believe "with all their heart" something to the contrary.
The evidence or lack thereof "speaks loud and clear" for most people who PROPERLY assess the facts, evidence and proof we have to consider, objectively speaking. In the same way, there is no evidence that bricks can think, or that dogs can fly, or that water can be turned into wine. The measure is zero evidence any of these claims are true. By evidence and measure, I mean the sort we all clearly, easily recognize and accept as fact, truth. Without debate or controversy.
Otherwise, all the rest are not truths of any similar sort. Other than by way of a good stretch of the imagination and claims of personal experience that are "all over the board" and also quite commonly used as reason to claim something is true, but there is a big difference between actual fact, evidence and truth versus personal claims backed up by only mere say so. Please reference my Truth #1 about this very important distinction if necessary.
That said, I'm sure you will also readily recognize and admit that there are all sorts of claims of evidence that a god exist. Evidence that is "all around us." Whether it be that ray of light shining through the clouds. The mind-boggling myriad of life that covers the earth. That wonderful feeling when we pray or experience while meditating. Of course, and if this is the sort of evidence that proves there is a god for you, religious or spiritual people, then no argument about what you/they believe or why.
However, these are entirely different forms of evidence and proof that most scientists and people like me can easily distinguish, and judge as we do. Basically that "MEASURE" that establishes what is fact, evidence and truth versus what really is nothing of the sort from an empirical science standpoint. That's the standpoint upon which people like me rely upon to establish and/or confirm what is fact, evidence and proof. That distinguishes truth from what is not.
Last edited by LearnMe; 01-27-2023 at 09:21 AM..
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.
