quote:Also, you didn't answer why you habitually belittle people's thoughts.
Because they are not only wrong, they are wilfully and deliberately wrong. What is complicated about this?
quote:But how do you know it isn't accurate?
Look at the 'If Al-Quaida were like the Mormons' thread.
quote:Thus, any points you try to make, regardless of how logical and reasonable they may seem, will be lost because people would rather not listen to someone who treats everyone else like dirt.
I don't; I treat their ideas as the nonsense they are. If people are so attached to their ideas that they cannot separate identity from belief, then they have much worse problems than the rudeness of random internet people.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is too bad KoM took over. I found the discussion fascinating. Most of all because I am one who believes strongly in a "One Religious Path" theology.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: And while I don't subscribe to politeness over accuracy, I trust I have never abandoned reason in order to make a point; indeed, if I did, it wouldn't be much of a point.
There's a difference between making a point and scoring a point, you know.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you think the difference consists in? But if you would, please start a new thread for that. This has turned into a discussion of style rather than substance. Either respond to my ideas, or ignore me; this "your presentation is killing your points" is just sidestepping the issue.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about your presentation is ruining everybody else's enjoyment? Or does nobody matter but KOM?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:this "your presentation is killing your points" is just sidestepping the issue.
KoM, are there any ideas you've expressed here that people haven't responded to dozens of times?
I get that you don't think they've refuted those ideas and so haven't convinced you to change your mind. But you must be bright enough to realize that, in like manner, you haven't refuted anyone else's points nor convinced them in these dozens of discussions.
It's not sidestepping the issue to refuse to respond yet again to your materialist dogma.
quote:Either respond to my ideas, or ignore me
Just as it is beyond our power to make you stop posting mean-spirited and rude anti-religion diatribes, it is beyond your power to force people to ignore your willful and flagrant disregard for the ToS.
Believe me, if this board had an ignore feature, you'd get far fewer responses than you do.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I get that you don't think they've refuted those ideas and so haven't convinced you to change your mind. But you must be bright enough to realize that, in like manner, you haven't refuted anyone else's points nor convinced them in these dozens of discussions.
Well then, why have a discussion at all? You can hardly argue that any new material has been presented by the theists in this thread.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gosh. I guess I just need to take in to consideration (especially when dealing with King of Men) that some people are just little kids trying to act like they rule the world.
Lesson Learned. Also - thanks, Dagonee, for the idea of the ignore feature. I'm creating one in my mind.
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You managed to miss my actual point. Hint: it's in the sentence immediately following what you quoted.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well then, I disagree with your actual point. I have responded to people's theist dogma. If you don't want to have a discussion on which is true, fine, ignore me. If you feel that everything possible in that debate has already been said, fine, ignore the whole discussion. If you want to discuss another aspect of what was posted, again you are perfectly at liberty not to respond to me. But if you want to have a discussion at all, attack my ideas, not my posting style.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since it seems necessary: my point was that the issue hasn't been sidestepped. I didn't say the discussion shouldn't happen again, merely that not having the discussion YOU want to have is not the same as sidestepping the issue.
quote:But if you want to have a discussion at all, attack my ideas, not my posting style.
Well, no, you don't get to decide that.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you don't want people to attack your posting style, and you find your posting style frequently attacked from all points (not simultaneously, but I think it's pretty safe to say that at some point, everyone-or nearly so-who has ever communicated with you has attacked your posting style)...why not change yourself, instead of demanding the rest of the world change for you?
I actually know why, and it's not because you're trying to change people's minds.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM, consider this to be an analogy, taken to extremes:
Poster A: "Hey, let's all discuss things we like!"
Poster X: "I like fluffy bunnies. And ferrets. They are so nice and cuddly and they make me happy."
Poster Y: "Bunnies are vermin. Ferrets bite. And they both urinate all over everything."
Poster X: "Why are you so mean? Boo-hoo! Think what you like, but I'm going to like bunnies."
Poster Y: "Only idiots like bunnies."
Poster A: "Why are we calling Poster X an idiot?"
Poster Y: "You're the one who wanted to discuss things we like. If you can't take discussing how disgusting bunnies are, don't bring them up on a discussion board."
Poster X: "But I like bunnies! Why are you insulting me for liking bunnies?"
Poster Y: "It's the people who like bunnies who're ruining the planet. If you had half an ounce of sense, you'd understand."
Poster A: "Is it necessary to be so insulting? You could just say that you don't share his opinion of bunnies."
Poster Y: "I'm just telling the truth."
Poster A: "Oh, yeah? Well, the truth is that you're a Grade-A jerk, you little..."
*AND THEN THE JANITOR DESCENDS*
----------
Now, we've all seen versions of this little drama play out on a variety of topics, but surely you (and by you I mean KoM) recognize that you play the role of Poster Y every time religion is ever mentioned in a positive way. It's ridiculous, insulting, and pointless, and actually reinforces the kind of thinking that you claim to despise; you are, in other words, only buttressing the opinions of the religious faithful by your actions, and creating the impression that people who share your opinions are by nature hostile to the faithful.
Depending on what you want out of interaction on this forum, this is probably counter-productive.
Rest assured, the atheist POV will not go underrepresented here if you pass up the opportunity to slander some poor soul who made the mistake of mentioning their love of a hypothetical God.
But you KNOW this. So why play innocent?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow. I don't even know what to say. I was hoping to talk to some other religious minded individuals and see what they thought of my views.
I didn't expect this turn into the wonderful world of what's wrong with King of Men, or why theists are stupid, or accuracy vs. politeness. It's awesome where a conversation can go.
Weeeeeeeee! Hatrack, you are pretty amazing sometimes. Posts: 511 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Well, I can't decide what you do, obviously, but I can decide what I respond to.
About Poster Y, it seems to me that he is being perfectly reasonable : He doesn't like bunnies, he gives very credible reasons why he doesn't, and then people jump all over him. You will please note that I have called nobody an idiot. If I may rephrase, a better analogy would be
Poster Y : Your reasons for liking bunnies are ridiculous.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well now, on the subject of just what people are calling names. Here is my post that started the whole brouhaha:
quote:In case it escaped you, the point I'm subtly making here is that your 'different view' is just more of the same bovine fertiliser in a new and not very improved package.
You will please note that I am attacking the idea and not the man. Then here are some of the responses:
quote:Well KoM, I really couldn't care less what you think. From what I've read of your posts in the other religion threads, this is my impression of you: Bitter, rude, and disrespectful.
quote:Do you not realize that you are being a mean spirited jerk?
quote:It's just you being mean.
quote:Man, King of Men, what bug crawled up your butt and hatched eggs to make you so down, sarcastic and negative about everything?!
I am perhaps not the most objective judge, but it does seem to me that this is attacking the man and not the language, and certainly not the idea.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought you were ignoring me? But anyway, do you feel that I have badly mis-represented the spirit of these posts?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did I say I was ignoring you or was I typing about an ignore feature?
I really do, at least mine. I wasn't attacking you. I was letting you know how I read the sentiment behind a lot of your posts. Nothing more or less.
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well then, I wasn't attacking Luet, I was letting her (him?) know what I thought about her ideas. And without any reference to body parts, at that.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm really sorry that it came out on this thread, but my comment to you was in general. It wasn't specific to this thread. I've read a lot of your comments that seem (to me and maybe it's just me!) to be negative.
The reference to body parts wasn't literal - it was just the way I put it. I was trying to be light about the whole thing and that clearly didn't work.
I'm sorry if I offended you with my posts. Honestly, I'm not in 'it' to offend people. I've got a lot more to gain by opening dialogue as opposed to turning it into an argument. At the same time, I've got to be honest and say that the disregard you show towards any idea that differs from your own is offensive to me.
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I took no offense; I was merely trying to show that the charge of hard language can cut in two directions.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't understand what is unclear. People have objected to the language I used to present my points. Some of them have done so in equally harsh language. This seems to me somewhat inconsistent.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now I understand what you meant. I think. Let me know if I'm off base... The words people use to convey their feelings can be counter-productive. For example, my bug/butt reference. I get that, completely. I even agree with you.
What I was also trying to convey (through the use of the wrong words to get my point across, so who knows if i'll get it right this time) is that the sheer emotion behind your words - hard language or not -, the way you string words together period is sometimes read as confrontational and argumentative.
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well then, I wasn't attacking Luet, I was letting her (him?) know what I thought about her ideas.
Luet was putting forward an idea of the universe that he/she had come up with after some hard thought and tentative exploration. While you might disagree with those ideas, and/or find them unproductive, it's uncharitable of you to criticize them so harshly without acknowledging the trust that Luet has implicitly placed in you by sharing.
By volunteering something that he/she admits is a work in progress, the assumption is that critiques -- which are welcome -- will also be gentle.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: It's not a matter of warm fuzzies. It's a bit hard to explain if one doesn't believe that. I have trouble with organized religion, but I have more trouble with not believing in anything but rather frustrating philosophers. I so hate nilism or the idea that life is meaningless. Perhaps neither side does enough to explain things. So one needs to be open to the whole picture.
Rather than spending another whole page talking about KoM...
Syn, I absolutely agree with especially this part:
quote: I believe that whatever god is it can't really be separated from people. It's a part of them.
My understanding is that this is what we call the Holy Spirit. The analogy I use to help me think about this in a trinitarian way (again - it is an analogy - a way to try to grasp the ungraspable) is to think about it as light. All of the light of the universe is "God" - the concept of light; our sun, for the purpose of this analogy would be Jesus; fires, stars, candles, lightbulbs would be the god that is in us. Lesser, but still the same and part of the whole.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well then, I wasn't attacking Luet, I was letting her (him?) know what I thought about her ideas.
Luet was putting forward an idea of the universe that he/she had come up with after some hard thought and tentative exploration. While you might disagree with those ideas, and/or find them unproductive, it's uncharitable of you to criticize them so harshly without acknowledging the trust that Luet has implicitly placed in you by sharing.
By volunteering something that he/she admits is a work in progress, the assumption is that critiques -- which are welcome -- will also be gentle.
YES. Thank you Tom. Being criticized was not the issue for me. Being told my ideas were in essence 'cow ****', I found insulting. Because religon, or lack thereof, is such an intensely personal thing, an attack on my ideas seems to be an attack on me.
KoM: The truly hilarious part of all this, is that while I think you can be rude and disrespectful, I've thought many of the same things that you say. (For instance, in "If the Mormans were like Al Qaida" thread, I agree with points about the Bible, and how people just blindly follow it. To me the Bible is another set of mythology, like the Ramayana, or the Vedas.) I just think it's a matter of wording your points in a way that doesn't come off as: I'm better than you, smarter than you, and I know the truth and you don't. Nobody knows the truth. Nobody can say for sure what happens when we die. If we knew that, then religion would probably cease to function.
kmbboots: I like your imagery of light. In my mind, that's another way of saying 'energy.' In the end, it's something that connects humans to one another, and nature, etc.
P.S. Didn't any of you read Homecoming? Luet is a female name, thus I am a female. Posts: 511 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unrelated, but KOM, if you like metal you'd probably love that Slayer song Cult. I like that song, but I don't think religion is completely bad, it just has a few bad seeds in it ruining everything like anything else does... But it's still a cool song with good lyrics.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
