Originally posted by Bosse de Nage No, it would be something that breaks new ground, offers a fresh perspective, rather than circling interminably around the same point. Quite a challenge.
It seems to me "quite a challenge" to see whether the people are ready to talk in order to really understand each other and to learn istead of preaching without listening their interlocutors. What is your opinion?
Originally posted by black beetle It seems to me "quite a challenge" to see whether the people are ready to talk in order to really understand each other and to learn istead of preaching without listening their interlocutors. What is your opinion?
It's easy enough to find out whether individual forum participants are hide-bound in their thinking on a certain subject. It's difficult to engage them in dialogue, especially if you're already convinced that you're right and secretly or openly despise their beliefs. Above all, you have to give them a reason to listen to you. Otherwise it's just two different kinds of preachers wrestling.
A French atheist, whose name I forget, said he was amused by how much certain Anglo-American 'evangelical atheists' resemble Christian missionaries. I share his amusement.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage It's easy enough to find out whether individual forum participants are hide-bound in their thinking on a certain subject. It's difficult to engage them in dialogue, especially if you're already convinced that you're right and secretly or openly despise their beliefs. Above all, you have to give them a reason to listen to you. Otherwise it's just two di ...[text shortened]... o-American 'evangelical atheists' resemble Christian missionaries. I share his amusement.
This exact difficulty is my main concern. Personally I am never convinced that I am right. My beliefs are based on my conclusions and my conclusions on evidence and on common sense, and I am the first that examines them constantly. Why one has to have the same beliefs with anybody else? I never claimed such a thing. With this very thread I never intend to "prove" anything. In the contrary, I cannot understand why one has to be stuck in the middle of his so called eternal truth, to turn this attitude into "religion", to mix poletics with this nonsence and to kill people in the name of his so called eternal truth.
What reason did this thread gave you other than the above I mentioned?
Originally posted by black beetle In the contrary, I cannot understand why one has to be stuck in the middle of his so called eternal truth, to turn this attitude into "religion", to mix poletics with this nonsence and to kill people in the name of his so called eternal truth.
Out comes the assumption ... Simplistic thinking -- religion causes war ... 😴 Of course I'm sure KellyJay is ready to kill people in the name of his so-called eternal truth -- ditto jaywill, knightmeister & the rest of the crazy gang.
Never mind. That people adopt intransigent attitudes that fly in the face of the evidence is a fact that requires explanation. I offer you a non-religious example for discussion: Sigmund Freud. Why did anyone believe his nonsense? Did he believe in it himself? What drove him?
In parallel: when you have an intuition -- a hunch -- and it is confirmed, is that evidence that you should trust your intuition?
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Out comes the assumption ... Simplistic thinking -- religion causes war ... 😴 Of course I'm sure KellyJay is ready to kill people in the name of his so-called eternal truth -- ditto jaywill, knightmeister & the rest of the crazy gang.
Never mind. That people adopt intransigent attitudes that fly in the face of the evidence is a fact that requires ...[text shortened]... gmund Freud. Why did anyone believe his nonsense? Did he believe in it himself? What drove him?
It is Your assumption; on the other hand we were not talking for the spiritualism of the individual, which is quite acceptable, but for the blind faith that turns the people into a religionist blob ready to ...you know the drill;
Next, I don't give a fig for Freud. And BTW you ask me why the people believe his nonsense. In my opinion they believe it because even this nonsense, as the "religion" too, is a tool for those who are not ready to face the Life on their own. I willl die. I don't want to die but it is unevitable. I decided to live my life as if this very day is my last. I honour you when I spend my sweet time talking with you. I am not a preacher. I don't spend my time arguing about nonsense, and I expect to learn a thing or two. That's all dude.
I am talking to you because I expect to learn. When I estimate that I will learn nothing I then refuse to spend my time over a silly argument.
Originally posted by black beetle It is Your assumption; on the other hand we were not talking for the spiritualism of the individual, which is quite acceptable, but for the blind faith that turns the people into a religionist blob ready to ...you know the drill;
Next, I don't give a fig for Freud. And BTW you ask me why the people believe his nonsense. In my opinion they believe it ...[text shortened]... I estimate that I will learn nothing I then refuse to spend my time over a silly argument.
Fair enough, but I object to categorising RHP Christians as members of 'a religionist blob' -- they're a lot more peculiar than that ... Mob dynamics is a fascinating topic, though, albeit seriously depressing at times. Have you read Elias Canetti's 'Crowds & Power'? It was like having my all mental polarities reversed at once, to borrow Robert Anton Wilson's expression.
Your life philosophy sounds much like mine. "Laughter before death" ...
Originally posted by black beetle edit: "In parallel: when you have an intuition -- a hunch -- and it is confirmed, is that evidence that you should trust your intuition?"
No. It is like chess. I have to evaluate everything according to many parameters. This evaluation is not a static but a dynamic process.
Would you be prepared to consider intuition -- your 'Self knowledge', as a yoga practitioner might put it -- as a potentially valuable tool at least?
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Fair enough, but I object to categorising RHP Christians as members of 'a religionist blob' -- they're a lot more peculiar than that ... Mob dynamics is a fascinating topic, though, albeit seriously depressing at times. Have you read Elias Canetti's 'Crowds & Power'? It was like having my all mental polarities reversed at once, to borrow Robert Anton W ...[text shortened]... ds much like mine. "Laughter before death" ...
Arguments can lead to better things!
So do I, they are not. But I would be glad to see that they understand that religionism is dangerous.
Now you give me the creeps -I always suspected that your bloody philosophy looks like mine, but to hear this affirmation from you in person, well this is dreadful.
Arguments do lead to better things allright -welcome to this thread, this is the issue here. But first you have to hear what the other guy suggests;
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Would you be prepared to consider intuition -- your 'Self knowledge', as a yoga practitioner might put it -- as a potentially valuable tool at least?
You evaluate, the situation changes and a new arises, you evaluate again;
Originally posted by black beetle =
Now you give me the creeps -I always suspected that your bloody philosophy looks like mine, but to hear this affirmation from you in person, well this is dreadful.
Of course, now that you say it, it's not the case at all -- I cancel myself out, much like silence is an impossible concept.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Would you be prepared to consider intuition -- your 'Self knowledge', as a yoga practitioner might put it -- as a potentially valuable tool at least?
In another thread I posted this:
Caliph Ar-Radi was walking in the country, and stopped in a lovely garden, replete with lawns and flowers. His courtiers immediately began to dilate on the wonders of the garden, to extol its beauty, and to place it above all the wonders of the world.
"Stop", cried the Caliph. "As-Suli's skill at chess charms me more".
Al-Masudi, 10th century
Did you ever been aware of the fact that chess opens a window to other people's unique minds? This is one of the reasons why the Arabs considered the chess something more than a game; by that time the Christians were killing each other over a stupidity. This is religionism. Feel free to contrast it with the noble War over the chessboard. Omar Kayam has a very special rubai. You read it, you bow.
Originally posted by black beetle Did you ever been aware of the fact that chess opens a window to other people's unique minds? This is one of the reasons why the Arabs considered the chess something more than a game; by that time the Christians were killing each other over a stupidity. This is religionism. Feel free to contrast it with the noble War over the chessboard. Omar Kayam has a very special rubai. You read it, you bow.
Nice story.
Yes, and chess opens a window onto my own mind -- the mountain I have to climb. But sometimes people who are fantastic chess players can't be trusted in any practical matters.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage Of course, now that you say it, it's not the case at all -- I cancel myself out, much like silence is an impossible concept.
That's what I mean. Evaluation is an ever self-controversy. I want to stay silent but suddenly I must talk. I talk and I see it 's meaningless. While I know I know nothing I am free to know everything. Then evaluation again and so on.
Of course you are fully aware that you are obnoxious, my honey-tongue brother. The quality inside me that bothers you is a mirror of yourself.
And then we laugh!
11 Sep '08 10:50
Really incapable of a decent conversation??
Back to Top