The Dhamma

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke to Philokalia
Your previous post to me began, "You are a materialist though, right." What were the grounds for that question, beyond your prejudgment?

I think he's just reminding you that he's superstitious but trying to add a slight condescending spin while he's at it.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Your previous post to me began, "You are a materialist though, right."


What were the grounds for that question, beyond your prejudgment?

And no, I am not spiritual, nor do I seek to be perceived as such. I'm all about the wisdom, (I also reserve the liberty to discuss Buddhist concepts that I don't personally concur with).

Of course, you should reserve such 'liberty.'

Alright, so you are a materialist, right? I use this simply to indicate the basic idea that only material itself exists.

I am just trying to get a grasp of people.

Originally posted by @fmf
I think he's just reminding you that he's superstitious but trying to add a slight condescending spin while he's at it.

How is 'materialist' condescending?

Originally posted by @philokalia
How is 'materialist' condescending?

It was the word "though", of course. But obviously I mean you. I actually don't think you can help yourself.

Originally posted by @fmf
It was the word "though", of course. But obviously I mean you. I actually don't think you can help yourself.

You read too far into it, my friend.

Originally posted by @philokalia
You read too far into it, my friend.

Actually, it's you I am 'reading'.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Alright, so you are a materialist, right? I use this simply to indicate the basic idea that only material itself exists.

I am just trying to get a grasp of people.

Let's put the word "materialist" to one side for a moment.

You are superstitious and Ghost of a Duke is not superstitious.

There.

Your superstition does not grant you access to some sort of "wisdom" that is unavailable to non-superstious people.

Don't mistake the far-fetched and aspirational things that just so happen to appeal to your imagination for "wisdom".

Originally posted by @fmf
Actually, it's you I am 'reading'.

I don't believe you do a good job of it.

It also just so happens that... I am an authority on myself.

Originally posted by @fmf
Let's put the word "materialist" to one side for a moment.

You are superstitious and Ghost of a Duke is not superstitious.

There.

Your superstition does not grant you access to some sort of "wisdom" that is unavailable to non-superstious people.

Don't mistake the far-fetched and aspirational things that just so happen to appeal to your imagination for "wisdom".

I am satisfied with describing someone as a materialist.

What do you have against the word?

My word isn't loaded. Why do you want to use a loaded word?

Originally posted by @philokalia
I am satisfied with describing someone as a materialist.

What do you have against the word?

My word isn't loaded. Why do you want to use a loaded word?

Either reply to what I bothered to write for you or ignore it and talk to someone else instead.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Why do you want to use a loaded word?

"Superstitious" is not loaded. It means 'belief in supernatural causality'. If you don't believe in supernatural causality, just come out and say it.

FMF: Actually, it's you I am 'reading'.

Originally posted by @philokalia
I don't believe you do a good job of it.

I'm doing just fine. I read this narcissistic drivel of yours a couple of days ago on another thread.

You know what, I think that what actually matters is that, even if I extend these words with litle hope and with a hint of sarcasm...

I'd literally be a really good friend to anyone here in the sense that I am a hyper-social person who woudl love you to come to Korea and enjoy some extensive beers and chess matches in my favorite hang-outs.

Seriously, if any ya'll ever come here I'll take you out to some good eats & drinks and will buy you a dinner as my guest.

None of these debates matter and none of our disagreements matter, and this is what makes the most sarcastic and smarmy politeness I put out meaningful.

Don't believe me?

Hey, I've always meant ot take a vacation in Indonesia. I even thought of going there this summer or next winter (taking a big Euro vacation in 2019 to visit some of my acnestors grave and celebrate my cousins 50th). Maybe we'll get some pics of FMF & I on Surf Boards.

Because that's who I am.

Actually, you're wrong.

People regularly refer to the behavior I described as autistic on the internet.

There's a clinical definition and an operative definition.

You know what, I'm a bit chubby. Make some fat jokes. It's fine. I dig it. it's legit.

It's called... Having thick skin and living well no matter what anyone says.

I treat autistic people with respect and loving kindness in real life, and when I make funny observations on the internet I realize taht I am not immune to the jokes or anything, and I try to brign us all down to a FUN level.

You know, the Internet is not serious business, my friend.

That's the truth.

And truth be told: I am drinking. Have been dirnking for 6-7 hours. I am a big guy, though, and a big drinker, so even a liter of the vodka and some beer still has me on the better side of drunk.

But still, my lips are looser, and I will say that this is a true statement.

There is no possibility of spiritual growth without humility.

I am no better than anyone here. Just look at my ELO. I am NOT a good chess player and blunder frequently. I blunder in my conversations.

I try to be legitimately as friendly and forgiving as possible but it does come off as ingenuine sometimes, and sometimes I am overtly a bit hostile.

Yeah, but look at what I deal with. I am not a Saint and cannot uphold my goal all the time.

But hey, forgive me, guys. At the end of the day the promise stands -- I will buy you dinner and drinks if you come out here and I will be a gracious person regardless of your religious or political beliefs, or your race, gender, sexuality, ability or disability, etc.

I would rather die than be thought of as a petty, vindictive man.

May I be inflicted with disease & rot in the grave before the year is out before I be found to be inhospitable, cruel, petty, or vidnictive to others in a serious, real life situation.

No, it's fine. It's funny and good material that is often delivering very well on the topic.

I can accept, though, that people get triggered soemtimes.

I do not bear grudges.

But sensitivity does not become a man.... I am not sure, though, are you a man?[/b]

Originally posted by @philokalia
Of course, you should reserve such 'liberty.'

Alright, so you are a materialist, right? I use this simply to indicate the basic idea that only material itself exists.

I am just trying to get a grasp of people.

Please note the difference:

1. Are you are a materialist?
2. Alright, so you are a materialist, right?

The 2nd (your preferred choice) is a 'prejudgment' where you are simply asking me to confirm something you have already decided upon.

If you genuinely want to get the grasp of people, don't ask loaded questions.

Originally posted by @philokalia
Dhamma is a pretty explicitly Buddhist concept when you use the Pali spelling, IMO, but IDK, I might be biased due to my personal history.

all religions say pretty much the same thing at their core

Originally posted by @fmf
"Superstitious" is not loaded. It means 'belief in supernatural causality'. If you don't believe in supernatural causality, just come out and say it.

We both know that superstitious has other connotations.

I typed 'define superstition' into Duck Duck Go and these are the three first definitions provided from Wordnik:

n. An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.
n. A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.
n. A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality.

None of these are positive for the position that myself or other Christians maintain.

Equating belief in God with 'superstition' is being sloppy with the notion o fbelief in God and using superstition in a way that it is not normally used. The latter is acceptable if there is some good intention on behalf of the writer or some rigorous work in action.

But is that the case? And, judging from what we read from FMF on this forum, does he have any intention of fairly representing theists? No.

Your contention here is not good for me so I reject it.