To seek or to argue?

Originally posted by kd2acz
Well I have answered your question the best way I know how, can't really add to it. I don't pretend to be doing anything more than anyone else here, chatting. There is no soapbox, I have no agenda. Want to play a game of chess? I am only 1150 or so, but would be glad to play a game with you?

-k

Okay, though I have to say I find your attitudes perplexing. On one hand you seem to have strong conviction in your beliefs, yet it seems you are unwilling to take a hard look at them. As such, they are built upon a foundation of sand rather than rock. It's my understanding that that isn't a good thing.

I'll pass on the chess. If you check, it's been a while since I've played chess on this site.

Originally posted by kd2acz
Well I have answered your question the best way I know how, can't really add to it. I don't pretend to be doing anything more than anyone else here, chatting. There is no soapbox, I have no agenda. Want to play a game of chess? I am only 1150 or so, but would be glad to play a game with you?

-k

I just took a look at your profile page and it has 35 games in progress for you already. When I was a paid member, I never had that many. I made the mistake of entering a tournament and joining a clan at the same time and had 21 or 22 games going at once and it was too much for me, even though I am retired. I still have other things to do. I only have two games going now, but they are both against highly rated players on here and I am sure that they want me to take time to play them a challenging game, which I hope to do.

Originally posted by FMF
Can you give an example of someone being "cowardly" towards you?

Lol....

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
From what I've seen, all he does is point out inconsistencies and contradictions in what you say. Is this what you find "rude"? It seems to be what you keep complaining about. It's a juvenile attitude to have.

You're kidding yourself if you believe that the problem doesn't rest with you. You can delude yourself into believing that it's because he "miss ...[text shortened]... at doesn't make it true. That you use scripture to support your delusion is appalling.

I disagree. So I guess we are getting nowhere then.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Not sure what to make of this. The examples you've cited don't really coincide with the point I was trying to make.

The following REALLY threw me at first:
"I can't and wont respect someone who wont change their mind no matter what evidence or
reasons they are given... Even IF they are right."

When I first read it, I took "they" to refer to "som ...[text shortened]... ard, but not completely ridiculous. Please tell me that the latter was your intent.

Hmmm, I probably could have phrased it better.


What I meant is this...

I value open minded enquiry.

Which entails being willing to change your mind if presented with evidence or reasons that justify doing so.

I also value skepticism which entails not believing things unless sufficient evidence is present to justify doing so.

What I oppose is beliefs based on irrational blind faith that are not supported by evidence.


In other words I care about HOW you go about trying to understand the world more than I care about WHAT you
actually believe.

Because nobody is perfect and everyone believes/thinks things that are unsupported, unjustified and just plain wrong.

Someone who is open minded and prepared to engage in reasoned debate and look at the evidence will tend over time
to correct their beliefs and become 'less wrong' over time.

Someone who isn't will likely stay just as wrong as when they started if not get even more wrong.



My point in saying "I can't and wont respect someone who wont change their mind no matter what evidence or
reasons they are given... Even IF they are right." is that someone can be right about a particular issue by sheer
blind luck. But they can't reasonably know that they are right without a process (science/skepticism) that can
objectively test and retest beliefs.

The theists could be (it's logically possible) right that there is an afterlife. Even their particular version of it.

However they have absolutely no way of knowing that they are right (assuming that they were) and their position
is irrational and unsupportable given the evidence we have.

So even if they were correct that their god's exist and so do their afterlives, they are not justified in or correct in believing
that their god exists and that there is an afterlife.

Because the evidence doesn't support it.


I mean look at it this way.

I could tell you that I am absolutely convinced that 3,758,924,335,119,476,375,801 is a prime number.
That there is nothing that you could tell me that would convince me that I am wrong.
And that I don't have any evidence for this I just 'feel it in my bones'....

Would you respect that position or me if it just happened to turn out to be true?

So no the latter was not my intent, it was the former.

However I hope that with this explanation you can agree that this position is not completely ridiculous ;-)

Originally posted by googlefudge
Hmmm, I probably could have phrased it better.


What I meant is this...

I value open minded enquiry.

Which entails being willing to change your mind if presented with evidence or reasons that justify doing so.

I also value skepticism which entails not believing things unless sufficient evidence is present to justify doing so.

What I oppos ...[text shortened]... this explanation you can agree that this position is not completely ridiculous ;-)

"Someone who is open minded and prepared to engage in reasoned debate and look at the evidence will tend over time to correct their beliefs and become 'less wrong' over time. "

That's me!
😏

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Okay, though I have to say I find your attitudes perplexing. On one hand you seem to have strong conviction in your beliefs, yet it seems you are unwilling to take a hard look at them. As such, they are built upon a foundation of sand rather than rock. It's my understanding that that isn't a good thing.

I'll pass on the chess. If you check, it's been a while since I've played chess on this site.

I am not sure what attitudes you are referring to and as for strong conviction in beliefs, well yes I do have them. But, I fail to see how that has anything to do with desiring people to think about how they communicate with one another and exercising a little decency. Granted, some people may like that, but I see some pretty offensive exchanges back and forth among some, on both sides at times. My intent when I started the thread, was to shine a light on what I thought to be, I don't know, disheartening? It is not a deep thought or idea. Do you think the idea ' Do to others as you would have them do to you', built on sand?

-k

Originally posted by galveston75
I disagree. So I guess we are getting nowhere then.

Well I doubt your going to listen to me any more than ThinkOfOne or FMF but I have to
tell you that I agree with everything ThinkOfOne has been telling you.

You and Robbie don't answer questions (that you don't like) you evade them and often insult the
person asking them and/or play the hurt victim.

I can't speak for anyone else but that's certainly how you look to me and I suspect that you
look that way to many if not most poster here...
At least I hope so...


I don't know what it is that you see when FMF keeps asking you questions but what it looks
like to me (us?) is FMF asking perfectly reasonable and often simple questions which you are
totally failing to address.

FMF comes across as dogged and very patient and polite.

You don't.

Originally posted by RJHinds
"Someone who is open minded and prepared to engage in reasoned debate and look at the evidence will tend over time to correct their beliefs and become 'less wrong' over time. "

That's me!
😏

Um, no.

In fact it's the diametric opposite of you.

You are closed minded, not prepared to engage in reasoned debate, totally ignore the evidence,
and tend to accrue ever more incorrect beliefs and become 'more wrong' over time.

You are the living breathing (hopefully) embodiment of what it is that I oppose.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well I doubt your going to listen to me any more than ThinkOfOne or FMF but I have to
tell you that I agree with everything ThinkOfOne has been telling you.

You and Robbie don't answer questions (that you don't like) you evade them and often insult the
person asking them and/or play the hurt victim.

I can't speak for anyone else but that's cert ...[text shortened]... iling to address.

FMF comes across as dogged and very patient and polite.

You don't.

I agree that the two JWs can do a lot of ducking and dodging, but FMF is unreasonable and annoying, IMO. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
I agree that the two JWs can do a lot of ducking and dodging, but FMF is unreasonable and annoying, IMO. 😏

You should focus your mind ray on him Ronald Jonah Hindus. 😛

Originally posted by RJHinds
I agree that the two JWs can do a lot of ducking and dodging, but FMF is unreasonable and annoying, IMO. 😏

"Annoying" questions so often go straight to the heart of the issue at hand, especially when there's "ducking and dodging" going on.

Originally posted by kd2acz
I am a bit new around here but think I have a fairly good handle on the regular players, and the out comes of constructive debate. It seems as any thread, no matter how started ends up off topic (rabbit holes) and leaves people pissed. I have seen a lot or articulation in making points, I for one am not very good at this... And will probably not win many. ...[text shortened]... ring, do we seek or are we just arguing? Seems to be very little respect for one another.

-k

See, the thing is, theists (in particular the fundies) and atheists are playing two entirely different games.
- The theist typically asserts some proposition A which is inconsistent with the physical laws which govern the universe we exist in.
- Atheist comes along and puts down a detailed argument B demonstrating that A is untenable.
- The theist then responds with assertion C which, though it counters B in isolation, leaves him wide open for a finishing blow when considering B & D together.
- The atheist quizzes the theist about the problem with C (by mentioning B & D together)
- The theist then responds with assertion C (which we've already established suffers a fatal flaw)
- The atheist rephrases his argument in an attempt to force the theist into admitting his response C doesn't actually counter the atheists counter-argument B
- The theist then responds with assertion C....
.
.
.
The theist the responds with assertion C...

I am here only to argue (debate), and I get annoyed when theists play this game.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Um, no.

In fact it's the diametric opposite of you.

You are closed minded, not prepared to engage in reasoned debate, totally ignore the evidence,
and tend to accrue ever more incorrect beliefs and become 'more wrong' over time.

You are the living breathing (hopefully) embodiment of what it is that I oppose.

I do not know how you get that idea.

If I remember correctly, jaywill corrected me on a point in scripture that I admitted to have taken wrongly and became more right as a result of it. I have solid reasons for my belief in the Creator God and the Lord Jesus the Christ, which I have been willing to debate. I have presented evidence as to why evolution is so stupid and have debated that with an open mind , as well. I have even presented the scientific findings on the Shroud of Turin as proof of the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ and debated it with an open mind.

Certainly, I have proved that I am willing to change my mind, if given convincing evidence, as I am sure jaywill would attest. However, I don't recall being given any other convincing evidence that should have changed my view on any other issue on here. Don't forget that we are on the Spirituality Forum, so what more could one ask from a person with my superior knowledge and experience on the subject? 😏

P.S. Now the JWs are too indoctrinated and stubborn to change their views and most of the evolutions are too, but not me!

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by googlefudge
FMF comes across as dogged and very patient and polite.

Why thank you.