Fair call, Something I'll keep in mind in future.

I think you're being a bit uncharitable here — T Clark

Maybe you’re right. One man’s life changing ephainy is another nonsensical fantasy. I went camping this weekend and it was a delightful dose of perspective.
I had deeply profound moments doing and experiencing nothing more than walking across and field or listening to rain during a storm. These are everyday things, just like numbers reoccurring or deja vu. Yet for me they were deeply meaningful. The point of my “philosophy” (if can call it that) is to get away from letting others dictate what forms of experiences is meaningful.

What I think I did is I forgot this freedom needs to go both ways A person need to be affirm or deny meaning, for themselves, but can’t do so for other people. It’s not that there isn’t objective meaning, we just can’t know with certainty much about it. So we search and discern for myself. If you think 3:33 means something to you, then great but I don’t. That’s okay. I think rain means something to me, but you don’t have to.

What I think I did is I forgot this freedom needs to go both ways A person need to be affirm or deny meaning, for themselves, but can’t do so for other people. It’s not that there isn’t objective meaning, we just can’t know with certainty much about it. So we search and discern for myself. If you think 3:33 means something to you, then great but I don’t. That’s okay. I think rain means something to me, but you don’t have to. — MysticMonist

Now maybe you're being too charitable. The point I was trying to make is that numerologists et. al. are just following an impulse that is built into us all. I'm not afraid to say they are using it in an inappropriate way from a philosophical perspective and that their results are absurd, but they still deserve our good wishes. In my experience, many of them are intelligent and perceptive in other aspects of their intellectual and personal lives.

Now maybe you're being too charitable. T — T Clark

Hmm.. so how do we allow truth to be truth, to speak for itself? I love being overdramitic and say to free God but it’s poetic language. Truth isn’t necessarily God.
If we are too heavy handed then we are just another religion and making more idols.
If we are too lenient, any fanciful idea becomes “your truth”. The individual becomes infallible and real truth is ignored.
I don’t know if there is a perfect middle.
I’ve said this before, but I’d rather be to lenient so that I’m responsible for my own delusions rather than be forced someone else’s.

Oh the conversations with evangelicals isn’t going so well so far. I think the best route maybe to just not care what they think.

I think that the difference is one of dissent, and suppression. We should be able to vehemently verbally disagree, and tell people what we really think 110% of the time, but when we start burning heretics, we've gone astray.

Hmm.. so how do we allow truth to be truth, to speak for itself? I love being overdramitic and say to free God but it’s poetic language. Truth isn’t necessarily God. — MysticMonist

I wasn't really criticizing you. Giving people and their ideas the benefit of the doubt is not a bad way to go.

People tend to see patterns where none exist. I was a psych major once and took one class where we conditioned rats. When scientists condition rats in different ways, you get different behaviors. If you give them regular rewards/punishments for the target behavior and then stop, their behavior extinguishes quickly. If you give them erratic or random reinforcement, it takes much longer for the behavior to extinguish. I think humans are similar in some ways and that explains how, once a response behavior is established, random reinforcement can be more effective than regular. That can mean that a phenomenon which is irregular or random can be more persistent than one that has some regularity, i.e. truth, relation to reality.

I was thinking, how different is numerology from Platonism? It's at least the same impulse, if not the same results.

I was thinking, how different is numerology from Platonism? It's at least the same impulse, if not the same results. — T Clark

The impulse being seeking or expressing truth? I suppose then you’re right. But they both BS at least in the sense that they don’t tell us the whole story, just a distorted piece at best or meaningless jumble at worst. There are a lot of people, the majority I think, to whom Plato is a meaningless jumble.

The impulse being seeking or expressing truth? I suppose then you’re right. But they both BS at least in the sense that they don’t tell us the whole story, just a distorted piece at best or meaningless jumble at worst. There are a lot of people, the majority I think, to whom Plato is a meaningless jumble. — MysticMonist

I was thinking they are similar in that they understand (misunderstand?) the world as an abstract pattern rather than as an independent phenomenon with it's own existence.

The impulse being seeking or expressing truth? I suppose then you’re right. But they both BS at least in the sense that they don’t tell us the whole story, just a distorted piece at best or meaningless jumble at worst. There are a lot of people, the majority I think, to whom Plato is a meaningless jumble. — MysticMonist

I personally don't see a lot of specific value in both of these. What I see is is a need for ones personal perception to make meaning of them, I often think that this may be by design.
I think one may be inclined to subconsciously assimilate/attach a broad statement or idea to a part of their life which somewhat subconsciously requires more thought or attention.
My opinion - A nudge to reconsider or take a different view on ones role in a certain situations is certainly something which holds value. For that reason I would not want to discourage someone who wishes follow them.

I personally don't see a lot of specific value in both of these. What I see is is a need for ones personal perception to make meaning of them, I often think that this may be by design.
I think one may be inclined to subconsciously assimilate/attach a broad statement or idea to a part of their life which somewhat subconsciously requires more thought or attention.
My opinion - A nudge to reconsider or take a different view on ones role in a certain situations is certainly something which holds value. For that reason I would not want to discourage someone who wishes follow them. — Another

Just to make sure we're still talking about the same thing, when you say "both of these," you're still talking about numerology and Platonism, correct?

I disagree that they are both bullshit. I don't hold any truck with numerology, but Platonism is different. Numerology is saying that a regularity exists in the world when none does. It generates incorrect predictions of the future. Platonism, on the other hand, is metaphysics. It describes a way to think about the world and how it behaves. Metaphysics is not right or wrong, it is useful or not useful. Many people have found Platonism usefull for centuries. There are many today, including respected scientists, who think about the world in this way.

I often see people jumping to the defence of others and suggesting that we should be more charitable/sensitive to others feeling and I think this is an honourable trait and these types of comments have on occasion helped me to re evaluate my position.
I do believe however that it is very difficult to predict or control how someone perceives even the most benign comment. Especially without intimately knowing another history and emotional status.
I do think to a degree unless asked for it one should keep their opinions to themself (obviously there are moment where advise should be given without request). I think in a forum like this 'forum' and especially when someone has engaged in a conversation that they should be willing to listen to another unbridled opinion. As much as another opinion would often be misunderstood I think if one holds back and try to hard to dress up an opinion this would only add to the chance for misinterpretation.
Personally if I'm offended by anothers comments I can quickly detach myself from any offence in understanding we are all very different hold different truths and it is only me that give another thoughts any bearing on my own.

I often see people jumping to the defence of others and suggesting that we should be more charitable/sensitive to others feeling and I think this is an honourable trait and these types of comments have on occasion helped me to re evaluate my position.
I do believe however that it is very difficult to predict or control how someone perceives even the most benign comment. Especially without intimately knowing another history and emotional status.
I do think to a degree unless asked for it one should keep their opinions to themself (obviously there are moment where advise should be given without request). I think in a forum like this 'forum' and especially when someone has engaged in a conversation that they should be willing to listen to another unbridled opinion. As much as another opinion would often be misunderstood I think if one holds back and try to hard to dress up an opinion this would only add to the chance for misinterpretation.
Personally if I'm offended by anothers comments I can quickly detach myself from any offence in understanding we are all very different hold different truths and it is only me that give another thoughts any bearing on my own.

Just to make sure we're still talking about the same thing, when you say "both of these," — T Clark

OK my comment were mostly aimed at numerology.
And I didn't say I thought it was BS but that it doesn't hold value for me.

I do believe however that it is very difficult to predict or control how someone perceives even the most benign comment. Especially without intimately knowing another history and emotional status.

I do think to a degree unless asked for it one should keep their opinions to themself (obviously there are moment where advise should be given without request). I think in a forum like this 'forum' and especially when someone has engaged in a conversation that they should be willing to listen to another unbridled opinion — Another

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying we shouldn't express disagreement, even strong disagreement, with others opinions? That we shouldn't expect someone who puts their beliefs out onto the forum shouldn't expect to have to defend them? I certainly disagree with that. I do endorse civility and open-mindedness - a willingness to be convinced.

By the way, you posted this twice.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying we shouldn't express disagreement, even strong disagreement, with others opinions? That we shouldn't expect someone who puts their beliefs out onto the forum shouldn't expect to have to defend them? I certainly disagree with that. I do endorse civility and open-mindedness - a willingness to be convinced.

By the way, you posted this twice. — T Clark

Not sure what happened with it getting posted twice.

Yes you did misunderstand me, this may be my fault.
I meant the exact opposite, as much as I think an amount of care should be taken with how we word thing I don't think we should allow this to impede the ways in which we deceive our views.
To a degree I think in this forum we should be able to give our unbridled opinions.

That is to say within reason

hink an amount of care should be taken with how we word thing I don't think we should allow this to impede the ways in which we deceive our views. — Another

Describe our views

How another perceives our comments is out of our control and I don't think one should over concern themselves with the chance that one might take offence.

Wow, like u said yesterday I should really take extra time and make corrections to my comments before I push send. Sorry

I usually spent quite some time thinking about what I've postafter the fact and consider all the different ways this could be misconstrued, I really don't like the possibilities that go through my head, again I have little control over how others receive my comments, I feel if I curve my statement too much in order to avoid offending someone there is more chance that I have not clearly expressed my opinion.

To a degree I think in this forum we should be able to give our unbridled opinions. — Another

I have had very strong disagreements on this forum, to the point of offending someone. I've also been angry and harsh. I generally try to resolve these situations either on the main forum or as a PM. I've generally been successful with that, in some cases keeping a good relationship with someone I strongly disagree with. It's even better when I can express my thoughts and feelings directly and strongly but in a way that shows respect. I have yet to encounter anyone on this forum who doesn't deserve respect, even when their ideas seem wrongheaded or even morally wrong.

I think you generally meet that standard pretty well. We're all allowed to be imperfect.

I usually spent quite some time thinking about what I've postafter the fact and consider all the different ways this could be misconstrued, I really don't like the possibilities that go through my head, again I have little control over how others receive my comments, I feel if I curve my statement too much in order to avoid offending someone there is more chance that I have not clearly expressed my opinion. — Another

I hope I haven't contributed to your reluctance. A wise person on this forum advised me to let er rip and assume the person you are addressing can take it. That's fine as long as you are comfortable when they let er rip back at you. I have to tell you I don't really think it's the best way, although letting er rip can be fun and satisfying. I've threatened this before - Starting a thread on kindness as a rhetorical strategy.

I agree letting 'rip' will often make one defensive/emotional and impede and fruitful discussion.
Like I said being mindful of others feeling is an honourable trait, I just think 'tippy toeing' around something could remove meaning from a comment or discussion.

I think when I said numerology and Platonism are both BS people understood my iconclastic meaning. I’m well known on here to be a Platonist.
I’ve spent too much time with Zen teachers who make a point of being shocking and uncouth intentionally. Socrates is also very unkind to his critics views. I agree with you another, as long as the statement is made in good faith of not insulting persons we don’t have to too self censoring.

I didn’t take T Clark’s remarks about charity literally but in an intellectualy charitable sense of perhaps I should be open intellectualy to their point of view. It’s a key aspect in our worldviews we share of respecting and valuing diverse views. As he often says one should be able to hold opposing views simultaneously in your mind without loosing it.

Also I think there’s a difference after you’ve talked for a while for a person and get to know them better. Clark and I have talked a lot about a lot of issues so there’s a general understanding there. I think Another we’ve gotten to that point as well and less likely to accidentally offend and can speak more openly.

What would not be cool is this:
Hypothetical New member: I think numerology is so cool and I believe it’s key to understanding the universe. I saw 3:33 and it change my life.
Me: that’s BS and you are an idiot.

That would be beyond decency.

I would think those on this thread so far have been more or less decent. Right?

Me: that’s BS and you are an idiot. — MysticMonist

A statement lime this in my opinion would not be decent.
Saying - "I think that's BS" and following it up with your reasoning.
I think that would be fine, if someone takes out of that you implying they are an idiot, that is on them and out of your control.