Truth is relative: why do we criticize religion?

Rational basis for debunking?

on fundamental matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind and ethics.

Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip

Re: Truth is relative: why do we criticize religion?

#601  Postby jamest » Apr 24, 2012 12:40 am

lobawad wrote:
jamest wrote:
In future, to avoid coming across as disingenuous or bigotted, I would suggest that you actually justify your condemnations of others' reasoning. If not, then don't fucking bother [me].


I would be happy to justify my condemnations of your reasoning, once you show us some. Just because you staple some numbers and a "therefore" onto a thing doesn't mean you have an argument or reasoning.

On the flipside, I would say that if you lack the capacity to understand a specific perspective, then stfu.

When I stick the knife in, I always explain why. Please don't adjoin yourself to the set of all bigotted and disingenuous bastards. Not at your age.

ETA: "Not at your age" - I had assumed you were 24. I think I was confusing you with [member] 'Lobar'. My apologies to you both, especially him.
Last edited by jamest on Apr 24, 2012 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
 
Posts: 18683
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Truth is relative: why do we criticize religion?

#602  Postby SpeedOfSound » Apr 24, 2012 12:58 am

jamest wrote:
lobawad wrote:
jamest wrote:
In future, to avoid coming across as disingenuous or bigotted, I would suggest that you actually justify your condemnations of others' reasoning. If not, then don't fucking bother [me].


I would be happy to justify my condemnations of your reasoning, once you show us some. Just because you staple some numbers and a "therefore" onto a thing doesn't mean you have an argument or reasoning.

On the flipside, I would say that if you lack the capacity to understand a specific perspective, then stfu.

When I stick the knife in, I always explain why. Please don't adjoin yourself to the set of all bigotted and disingenuous bastards. Not at your age.


I responded to your argument. Why are you avoiding that? Same ole?
User avatar
SpeedOfSound
RS Donator
 
Posts: 32087
Age: 71
Male

Kyrgyzstan (kg)
Print view this post

Re: Truth is relative: why do we criticize religion?

#603  Postby lobawad » Apr 24, 2012 7:14 am

Cito di Pense wrote:
lobawad wrote:
jamest wrote:
lobawad wrote:

Oh my frakking gods I take back all the times I asked you to show your arguments.

You'd better stick to palilogic assertion.

In future, to avoid coming across as disingenuous or bigotted, I would suggest that you actually justify your condemnations of others' reasoning. If not, then don't fucking bother [me].


I would be happy to justify my condemnations of your reasoning, once you show us some. Just because you staple some numbers and a "therefore" onto a thing doesn't mean you have an argument or reasoning.


Meanwhile, two weeks ago:

jamest wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
jamest wrote:I've attributed volition to entities which possess agency. I've attributed agency to something due to the evidence of existential order:

1) There is order.
2) There is agency.
3) There is something with volition.


Great! Assertion 1, Assertion 2, Assertion 3, unrelated by anything like reasoning, unless you are satisfied that numbering your assertions in sequence involves reasoning. Dogma, to put it kindly.

:nono:

The list was provided as a nutshell summary of my progressive conclusions, thus far.


Say, you must be a "bigotted" (whatever that is) bastard without the capacity to understand other perspectives, too.
"Never give succor to the mentally ill; it is a bottomless pit."
- William Burroughs
lobawad
 
Name: Cameron Bobro
Posts: 2545

Country: Slovenia
Georgia (ge)
Print view this post

Re: Truth is relative: why do we criticize religion?

#604  Postby Matthew Shute » Apr 26, 2012 3:25 pm

jamest wrote:When I stick the knife in, I always explain why.


Quite so; you always explain that you're perfectly right. After all, you've specifically experienced some enlightening thoughts on the subject, and these specific experiences have told you that specific experiences can never be trusted. Also, you've already explained this, thus; and we've all specifically experienced your explanations. In addition, you're perfectly right. Plus, nobody else understands or trusts this. If only everyone would understand that you're right, then everyone would understand that you're right. Then we would all specifically experience the correct understanding, and thus have a way to trust that you're perfectly right, and know never to trust specific experiences again.

:cheers:
"Change will preserve us. It is the lifeblood of the Isles. It will move mountains! It will mount movements!" - Sheogorath
User avatar
Matthew Shute
 
Name: Matthew Shute
Posts: 3676
Age: 44

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest