RBS
32
↪Frank Apisa
Dude,,,,,,there is nothing in your writings or ideas that makes sense, you are not standing on your own theories, do you think with your broken and unfinished theories you can think of what is philosophy or do you think you are actually doing philosophy.....
You are just rephrasing your one word over and over and that's what is happening with most of the "..k" comments people. I thought you guys will be smart but in reality you guys are just a memory drive of unmeaning-full sentences....
I was thinking and hoping that this forum will be somewhat useful, but now am seeing that most of us here are just doing gibberish and doesn't make any sense.
Good luck with what you are after and what you will learn, for me its enough.... — RBS
I DO NOT KNOW IF GODS EXIST OR NOT.
Those are the first words of my position on the issue. I have no idea of what you are talking about, Maureen.
HERE IS MY POSITION:
I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...
...so I don't — Frank Apisa
Maureen
23
I DO NOT KNOW IF GODS EXIST OR NOT.
Those are the first words of my position on the issue. I have no idea of what you are talking about, Maureen.
HERE IS MY POSITION:
I do not know if gods exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect gods CANNOT EXIST...that the existence of gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that gods MUST EXIST...that gods are needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction...
...so I don't — Frank Apisa
Exactly, which is why my point is and has always been to just say that you don't know if God(s) exist or not and leave it at that. Giving any reasons why this is the case is to suggest that those reason(s) is the basis for why you don't know if God(s) exist, which is entirely unnecessary since no one knows if God(s) exists or not. You or anyone else could simply say: "I don't know if God(s) exist or not," and it would be exactly the same as saying "I don't know if God(s) exist or not," and then giving reason(s) for this. Whether you do or do not give reasons for it, the fact will still always be that you, nor anyone else knows if God(s) exist. I won't even bother to explain again why it is that no one knows if God(s) exist, because I feel like it would be hypocritical of what I just said, not to mention monotonous and repetitious. — Maureen
all of this data comes to me by way of a world class physicist who has taken back several Nobel prizes. He's proven that there is no such thing as particles. So, there can be no question of the scientific validity of each of his statements. — Daniel Cox
Guys, after reading almost all the notes, here is what i would suggest, start with simply putting one sentence or idea forward at a time, there is too much confusion in all your thoughts, — RBS
Christoffer
413
↪Maureen
Atheism is neither agnostic or certain of the non-existence of God. That's the traditional fundamental misunderstanding of atheism. The atheistic approach is simply that without proof or data in support of any claim, that claim shouldn't be made as a fundamental belief. So the notion that God "could exist" becomes irrelevant since it's not even a concept worth entertaining as there is nothing pointing to such an explanation for anything. — Christoffer
Do you realize that is all bullshit? — Frank Apisa
It means whatever a person wants it to mean when using it. — Frank Apisa
For people who use atheist as a descriptor to claim some sort of intellectual superiority to people who use agnostic (for instance) because the topic is not worth discussing...or that it is a useless topic...is bullshit. — Frank Apisa
Christoffer
417
Do you realize that is all bullshit? — Frank Apisa
To you perhaps — Christoffer
It means whatever a person wants it to mean when using it. — Frank Apisa
How do you conclude that to be the true concept of atheism? — Christopher
For people who use atheist as a descriptor to claim some sort of intellectual superiority to people who use agnostic (for instance) because the topic is not worth discussing...or that it is a useless topic...is bullshit. — Frank Apisa
You have a fundamentally limited understanding of what I actually wrote, so that's probably the reason your intellectual level is to just spam "bullshit". If that's the level of intellectual rhetoric and discussion you want to exist on, I think it's easy to deduce which is intellectually superior.
Just sayin
I would welcome a more philosophical response than "bullshit", if you demand not to be intellectually inferior, as per your own way of defining things.
If you want to just take that thought and reword it, we'll have a go at a discussion on a higher level. — Frank Apisa
Christoffer
421
If you want to just take that thought and reword it, we'll have a go at a discussion on a higher level. — Frank Apisa
Or you could have better manners and phrase your arguments better so that I could care to value your opinion. Right now, valuing your argument relevant gets lost whenever I see "bullshit" as an answer. So I'll rather wait for other better-mannered people to discuss with and not waste my time on someone who's level of engagement starts with "bullshit". — Christoffer
You could simply have written, "I don't think my arguments would hold water against you, Frank."
It would have been more concise...and more truthful. — Frank Apisa
Christoffer
422
You could simply have written, "I don't think my arguments would hold water against you, Frank."
It would have been more concise...and more truthful. — Frank Apisa
Nope, you just don't understand my argument and replies with it being bullshit instead of nuanced argumentation. Your post is not worthy of being a philosophical part of a discussion since you are not even trying to be involved in a back and forth discussion. Now you want me to say my argument doesn't hold up, as agreeing that you know better. Your arrogance and attitude have been seen across this forum and I don't feel there's any reason to involve myself in a discussion with someone at your level. Return with better manners and better philosophical respect and I may entertain having a discussion, until then, I cannot value your post as a relevant counter-point to what I wrote. — Christoffer
Christoffer
423
↪Frank Apisa
Write a post with a better philosophical substance so I have something to work from. I can't work from answers like "bullshit". It's not that it's triggering, it's that it's fundamentally lacking relevant substance and I don't think the quality of your post is enough. You write like you were writing Facebook comments or twitter rants, not having a philosophical discussion.
If you can't raise the quality of your writing to a point where the discussion is a progression of ideas, you are merely ranting your emotional opinions. If you can't see that it's the way you write and your attitude that's the problem here, you might not have the ability for self-reflection.
I can't work out well-composed arguments from bullish attitudes and rant-like rhetoric. It's pretty much beneath me and is beneath anyone interested in proper philosophical debate manners. — Christoffer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.