![Why do atheists care. [rhet]](/img/uisvg/forum-heading/spirituality.svg){kind=icon}
09 Nov 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYes, God answers through His Word.
Does God answer, and i don't mean retrospectively via the bible? (Genuine question).
How you ask? By His Spirit.
All this talk about spirituality, and everyone has their own definition and point of view. Can you imagine what it must be like to actually know The Truth?
Originally posted by divegeesterAs pointed out earlier, when you find yourself all alone and everyone around you is 'wrong' you need to think long and hard about whether or not it might actually be you that has made the mistake.
It's a generalisation, what's the matter with you. It's amusing that you guys simply can't admit when you are wrong.
Of course questions like this can be resolved by clear discussion about the exact meaning of the sentences in question, but you rejected that opportunity and instead attempted to resolve it via a poor attempt at parody. Your behaviour suggests you are not actually confident that you are correct.
Originally posted by twhiteheadRepeatedly telling me I'm wrong does not make me wrong. That you pointed out your opinion earlier does not make you right. That a couple of your buddies here (one being the author of the OP) back you up, does not make me wrong. Here is the sentence again:
As pointed out earlier, when you find yourself all alone and everyone around you is 'wrong' you need to think long and hard about whether or not it might actually be you that has made the mistake.
Of course questions like this can be resolved by clear discussion about the exact meaning of the sentences in question, but you rejected that opportunity and ...[text shortened]... attempt at parody. Your behaviour suggests you are not actually confident that you are correct.
"Christians in particular also frequently harp on about how they are persecuted"
It's an obvious simple generalisation. That you have chosen to nail your opinion to the wrong flagpole so early in the thread and then lack the humility to admit your error is worthy of "parody" and perhaps you should think hard on how you are sometimes let down by a somewhat sneering need to always be right.
Originally posted by divegeesterAnd I have not claimed otherwise as I am sure you are well aware.
Repeatedly telling me I'm wrong does not make me wrong. That you pointed out your opinion earlier does not make you right. That a couple of your buddies here (one being the author of the OP) back you up, does not make me wrong.
What I have said, is you should think long and hard about your position - something you don't seem willing to do.
Here is the sentence again:
"Christians in particular also frequently harp on about how they are persecuted"
It's an obvious simple generalisation.
Yes. It is. It is not however as you initially claimed a generalization based on a single example, nor is it as you later claimed a generalization about all Christians. It is noticeable that you seem to have withdrawn these claims quietly in the hope it wont be noticed rather than simply admitting your error.
The generalization itself is not wrong.
That you have chosen to nail your opinion to the wrong flagpole so early in the thread and then lack the humility to admit your error is worthy of "parody"
Repeatedly telling me I am wrong does not make me wrong. Provide an actual argument.
and perhaps you should think hard on how you are sometimes let down by a somewhat sneering need to always be right.
I unlike a number of posters I can mention (and I am now adding you to the list) am capable of admitting when I am wrong. In this case, I do not think I am. I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.
Which of these sentences do you currently claim are true:
1. The OP generalizes based on one example.
2. The OP generalizes about all Christians.
3. It is an infrequent occurrence for Christians to 'harp on about how they are persecuted'.
4. (other)
Tackle them one at a time and explain why you think they are true and for the ones you disagree with, admit you were wrong.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI haven't withdrawn anything.
And I have not claimed otherwise as I am sure you are well aware.
What I have said, is you should think long and hard about your position - something you don't seem willing to do.
[b]Here is the sentence again:
"Christians in particular also frequently harp on about how they are persecuted"
It's an obvious simple generalisation.
Yes. It is. ...[text shortened]... nd explain why you think they are true and for the ones you disagree with, admit you were wrong.[/b]
You admit it's a generalisation. Good. Previously your saying the sentence was "ambiguous". I fail to see ambiguity, but I let that go.
Ithe sentence uses the term "Christians" as the religious group being generalised. The generalisation is unsupported by the evidence in the OP.
I'm not contesting the frequency of "Christians harping about persecution", Christians harp a lot about all sorts of stuff much of which I disagree with.
Now please reciprocate.
Originally posted by divegeesterSo, you insist on holding on to an indefensible position rather than admit you were wrong.
I haven't withdrawn anything.
You admit it's a generalisation. Good. Previously your saying the sentence was "ambiguous".
Yes, I admit it is a generalisation, and have never claimed otherwise. Yes, I said the sentence was ambiguous and have never claimed otherwise.
It remains the case that the sentence and the OP as a whole cannot be rationally interpreted as 'generalization based on a single example' and I note your failure to withdraw that claim.
Further given context, and that the writer has since added further clarification, the intended meaning of the OP is no-longer ambiguous.
I fail to see ambiguity, but I let that go.
Don't be so quick to let it go. If you fail to see it then you are arguing a meaning that is not intended.
Ithe sentence uses the term "Christians" as the religious group being generalised.
But it is ambiguous as to whether it is referring to all Christians with out exception or just some Christians. Given the context it should be obvious that it is referring to some Christians.
The generalisation is unsupported by the evidence in the OP.
The generalization is not proved by the evidence in the OP. It is supported.
I'm not contesting the frequency of "Christians harping about persecution", Christians harp a lot about all sorts of stuff much of which I disagree with.
You certainly seem to be contesting exactly that. How is your sentence:
"Christians harp a lot about all sorts of stuff much of which I disagree with."
not a generalization identical to the one in the OP?
Does it mean 'all Christians'?
Is it supported by your post?
Was that another attempt at parody, or will you say it is after the discrepancy is pointed out?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
10 Nov 15
For more context, here is an article talking about "the war on Christmas" nonsense that
kicks off every year [particularly in the USA, but it pops up in the UK and I am sure other
places as well] and looks into why it happens and where it comes from.
Basically saying that as society becomes more diverse [with increasing numbers of non-Christians
of various stripes] that the [still] Christian majority is loosing its privileged position to be treated
in a more equal way with other viewpoints. And that this loss of privilege makes many people
whine and rage and claim to be persecuted. Not everyone does this, not every Christian does this.
Yet both I and the article can quite reasonably say that "Christians frequently 'harp on about how they
are being persecuted.'" Because they do.
In saying this I am neither claiming that all Christians do this, nor generalising from one example.
It's something I/we see all the time, on this forum, in real life, on the news etc etc.
http://theweek.com/articles/587824/war-christmas-back-heres-why-sorry-spectacle-never-goes-away
The same sense of entitlement and fear of loosing privilege is present in the story I posted in the OP.
And is common to almost all the stories about people trying to [or continue to] impose their religion
on others by altering textbooks or ignoring church and state separation and trying to teach creationism
as science etc etc. Particularly when we are talking about the western Christian majority.
There are other factors in play of course, but this is certainly one of them.
Which goes to the bigger point in this absurdly long and pointless argument about whether I over generalised.
Once you let go the absurd claim that I was saying that all Christians acted/thought this way.
Whether it's a generalisation or not is irrelevant because it's true, Christians frequently DO claim to
be persecuted, and almost never actually are [certainly in the west].
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe generalization is not proved by the evidence in the OP. It is supported.
So, you insist on holding on to an indefensible position rather than admit you were wrong.
[b]You admit it's a generalisation. Good. Previously your saying the sentence was "ambiguous".
Yes, I admit it is a generalisation, and have never claimed otherwise. Yes, I said the sentence was ambiguous and have never claimed otherwise.
It remains the ...[text shortened]...
Was that another attempt at parody, or will you say it is after the discrepancy is pointed out?[/b]
Agreed. It is a generalisation and it is not proved.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
10 Nov 15
Originally posted by divegeesterI'm sorry, you're claiming that Christians don't claim to be being persecuted?
[b]The generalization is not proved by the evidence in the OP. It is supported.
Agreed. It is a generalisation and it is not proved.[/b]
Um, all evidence to the contrary, I just posted another example, would you like me to spam 1000 more?
Originally posted by googlefudgeThe only thing that I find is "absurd" is you and twhitehead agreeing that the sentence in your OP is a generalisation whilst disagreeing with me saying that you generalised.
Once you let go the absurd claim that I was saying that all Christians acted/thought this way.
Whether it's a generalisation or not is irrelevant because it's true, Christians frequently DO claim to be persecuted, and almost never actually are [certainly in the west].
I already told you that I agree with most of your core points. This whole silly "parody" of an exchange stems from your inability to simply concede up-front that you generalised Christians in that OP. I fully accept your subsequent rational, explanation and point you are making.
If a Christian makes a post criticising Islam for example, and generalises saying: "Moslems frequently harping on about being persecuted...", there are numourous atheists here who would and have, challenge the generalisation. And rightly so.
Originally posted by googlefudgeOh dear. I said nothing of the sort.
I'm sorry, you're claiming that Christians don't claim to be being persecuted?
Um, all evidence to the contrary, I just posted another example, would you like me to spam 1000 more?
I've said on at least three occasions that I agree with your point but you were wrong to generalise albeit non-intentionally.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
10 Nov 15
Originally posted by divegeester
The only thing that I find is "absurd" is you and twhitehead agreeing that the sentence in your OP is a generalisation whilst disagreeing with me saying that you generalised.
I already told you that I agree with most of your core points. This whole silly "parody" of an exchange stems from your inability to simply concede up-front that you generalised ...[text shortened]... re are numourous atheists here who would and have, challenge the generalisation. And rightly so.
If a Christian makes a post criticising Islam for example, and generalises saying: "Moslems frequently harping on about being persecuted...", there are numourous atheists here who would and have, challenge the generalisation. And rightly so
I disagree, and furthermore, I would not be one of them.
I already told you that I agree with most of your core points. This whole silly "parody" of an exchange stems from your inability to simply concede up-front that you generalised Christians in that OP. I fully accept your subsequent rational, explanation and point you are making.
Your first response to my OP was
"You're not using this one incident to generalise against and stereotype billions of Christians are you?
The answer to which is NO.
Even if my OP was unclear such that it could be read that way [it wasn't] my immediate response back
saying 'no that's not what I was doing' [and a detailed explanation of what I was doing] ends the question.
And yet you continue to harp on.
The only thing that I find is "absurd" is you and twhitehead agreeing that the sentence in your OP is a generalisation whilst disagreeing with me saying that you generalised.
What you accused me of, as I quoted above, is generalising to the entire religion from one example.
I didn't do that.
Saying that Christians often claim to be persecuted when they are not is not a generalisation, it's an observation.
I didn't say "oh I observe some Christians do this, thus I generalise to all Christians and say they all do it",
which would have been both a generalisation and unwarranted.
I observed that "Christians frequently claim to be persecuted".
It's not a generalisation, it's an observation, one I am more than capable of providing evidence for should you
have really failed to observe it yourself.