Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(August 22, 2014 at 11:28 am)whateverist Wrote: Wait, did you mean the philosophy sub-forum devoted to the true meaning of philosophy as defined by Rikky or just the academic sort of philosophy? Because we definitely have that one. In common parlance philosophy is often used to stand for ones creed or most basic system of beliefs. So you'll also find threads of that sort there. You might argue that yours deserves its place there on that basis. But this neighborhood seems the more appropriate setting to me.
I do understand very well what make sense and what doesn't according to you guys.
Absolutely not, you can argue in your own defense all you want, but the consensus according to "us guys" is that your head is so far up your own ass that you've licked your colon clean.
Quote:
I also do understand that to a smoker or a drinker does make sense to smoke or drink.
Unfortunately when you reach a stage in which the mind get twisted with the wrong idea the wrong become right.
Self-analysis?
Quote:
The creed and belief are most often own interpretation of the truth.
Eg. take the Taliban or the Is.
They think that the truth is to chop those who refuse to convert their neck off.
Philosophy can not be interpreted any way so there is no room for creed or belief.
If you prevent the free flow of a river everything get changed.
The truth is one for everybody and that is the end of the story so when you come up with creed or interpretation you show once again that you haven't got a clue about philosophy and his meaning.
Oh I see, so your creed isn't a creed but just a philosophy and beyond reproach because you label it as such. Your own interpretation of the truth though isn't like those delusional other interpretations of truth because it's the REAL truth that applies to everybody, unlike those "real" truths that Isis and the Taliban claim apply to everybody. And we know that your word is more trustworthy than the words of those other loonies because....you say so, and we should acknowledge your say so as valid because....you're just special....and you say yours is the right way because it has to be....because you said so...like how those other people that chop the heads of others say so. But we know their so say isn't valid because...they aren't special like you.
freedomfromfallacy » I'm weighing my tears to see if the happy ones weigh the same as the sad ones.
(August 28, 2014 at 12:46 pm)Tartarus Sauce Wrote: ......Oh I see, so your creed isn't a creed but just a philosophy and beyond reproach because you label it as such.
I did invited you you guys to explain the meaning of philosophy several times but all you came up with is some copy and paste from wiki.
Nothing else really and now you are telling me that my understanding of philosophy is all garbage.
If you really want to dismiss my ideas you should came up with your own understanding of philosophy.
If you haven't got any as you have shown so far then you should admit it rather than trying to knock down my argument with NO argument.
I also asked you how it is possible to fulfill man desire for infinite peace of mind and happiness within this finite universe but again no answer.
I am talking about philosophy or love for wisdom but you show once again that you haven't got a clue about philosophy.
You lose once again.
(August 29, 2014 at 10:50 am)Riketto Wrote: I did invited you you guys to explain the meaning of philosophy several times but all you came up with is some copy and paste from wiki.
Nothing else really and now you are telling me that my understanding of philosophy is all garbage.
If you really want to dismiss my ideas you should came up with your own understanding of philosophy.
If you haven't got any as you have shown so far then you should admit it rather than trying to knock down my argument with NO argument.
I also asked you how it is possible to fulfill man desire for infinite peace of mind and happiness within this finite universe but again no answer.
I am talking about philosophy or love for wisdom but you show once again that you haven't got a clue about philosophy.
You lose once again.
Projection is not an argument.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
August 29, 2014 at 2:28 pm (This post was last modified: August 29, 2014 at 2:52 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: If you don't understand the meaning of the term CONTRADICTORY then you wouldn't know the meaning of the word OXYMORON.
Your issue isn't just that you don't understand that there's no self-contradiction in the word 'atheist', but that you also don't understand what 'expression', 'phrase', or 'figure of speech' mean either, at least in this context.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: What is contradictory in anyone thinking that God does not exist?
Even if it were contradictory, it would not be an oxymoron. We're trying to teach you English, here. A paradox is self-contradicting, but the word 'paradox' is not an oxymoron. 'Paradoxically unparadoxical' would be one, though.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: An atheist think that God does not exist but at the same time he-she proceed toward God so God exist despite the believe that he does not exist.
That we proceed toward God AND that doing so would mean that God exists are both unsupported assertions, and therefore worthless as evidence. Believing that God doesn't exist isn't a very fair representation either, most of us merely think God is highly unlikely.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: This is highly CONTRADICTORY mister therefore i can say that atheism is an oxymoron.
Repeating that it's contradictory over and over won't make it so, and if it were true, it still wouldn't make the word an oxymoron because, English.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: Now you guys can say that you do not proceed toward God therefore your believe is not CONTRADICTORY but the evidence is there to show that you do proceed toward God.
Saying there is evidence without presenting it is typical of people who are lying about having evidence.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: One more oxymoron is the fact that you guys think that your philosophy forum talk about philosophy when in fact 99% of the threads in that forum have absolutely nothing to do with philosophy but that is one more problem of yours.
Again, even if your claim is true, it's not an oxymoron.
(August 15, 2014 at 3:54 am)Riketto Wrote: Now if you want to talk about whether you proceed toward God or not i am fully available to discuss that point.
Let's talk about your unwillingness to accept the word of native speakers of a language about how their language works. My Russian is about as good as your English, and I would never dream of asserting to multiple native Russian speakers that my understanding of a word is the correct one when they agree I am misunderstanding it.
(August 17, 2014 at 6:48 am)Riketto Wrote: Oh, a yogini that swear
That is not very nice.
I've not noticed a particular avoidance of swearing or arguing online by yogis or yoginis. The most obnoxious poster I've ever encountered was a yogi.
(August 17, 2014 at 6:48 am)Riketto Wrote: Anyway after all your bla, bla, bla, you haven't told us why it is not contradictory.
That's because it not being contradictory is not even the main reason it's not an oxymoron.
(August 17, 2014 at 6:48 am)Riketto Wrote: Explain where is the logic in someone who say that God does not exist and at the same time proceed toward God by trying to learn and improve his-her life all the time.
Until you prove that trying to improve our lives is 'proceeding toward God', there's no need to explain the logic of not believing it's true. We don't believe it's true because you haven't established that it is, in fact, true. Funny how that works, eh?
(August 17, 2014 at 6:48 am)Riketto Wrote: Tell us where do you think that that effort will eventually lead to?
A life well-lived, while it lasted.
(August 18, 2014 at 9:39 am)Riketto Wrote:
(August 17, 2014 at 1:04 pm)rasetsu Wrote: Again, it has nothing to do with contradiction.
Is the word "atheism" a pair of terms? No it is not. It's one word. Therefore it's not an oxymoron.
In reality there are two.......opposed or markedly contradictory terms......that are......... placed in conjunction for emphasis.
On one side we got the guy who say that God does not exist, on the other side there is the reality that God exist for the reasons that i already said so the contradiction is there.
If you're right about God existing, not believing that is not a contradiction, just incorrect. If I think the sun revolves around the earth, that's not a contradiction, just wrong.
(August 18, 2014 at 9:39 am)Riketto Wrote: Wrong again yogini.
The guy who say that God does not exist refer to the idea that something outside his existence is not there when in fact is there so the contradiction is external not internal therefore there is NO singularity.
The contradiction in an oxymoron must be an internal contradiction, contained within the terms themselves. Being in contradiction with reality is just wrong, not a self-contradiction. A 'theistic atheist' or 'atheistic theist' would be examples of oxymorons.
(August 29, 2014 at 2:28 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Until you prove that trying to improve our lives is 'proceeding toward God', there's no need to explain the logic of not believing it's true. We don't believe it's true because you haven't established that it is, in fact, true. Funny how that works, eh?
Very funny indeed!
How did you established that the road of continually learning and improving your life does not take you eventually to God?
You haven't so far so how can you dismiss the fact that it MAY take you there?
You dismiss something when you got the clear evidence not before.
You want the evidence from me?
Suppose the road to God is 1000 miles.
I am getting closer to the goal so i can see the end while you are far behind and obviously you can not perceive anything.
I can tell you that God is there but until you get closer to God you want be able to perceive anything so in a way i can understand your point.
On the other hand it is unlikely that your progress will move much faster until your desire to fulfill man natural desire for infinite peace of mind makes some progress.
The oxymoron that we are arguing about is all about the contradiction.
On one hand you want to go ahead in learning and improving your life and at the same time refusing to believe that at the end of the journey there is God before you got the evidence that God is not there.
But again you haven't explained how it is possible to fulfill man desire for infinite peace of mind in this finite universe.
(August 29, 2014 at 2:28 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Until you prove that trying to improve our lives is 'proceeding toward God', there's no need to explain the logic of not believing it's true. We don't believe it's true because you haven't established that it is, in fact, true. Funny how that works, eh?
Very funny indeed!
How did you established that the road of continually learning and improving your life does not take you eventually to God?
I can't prove it yet, but it is on my to-do list. I just have a few more possibilities for the title of "ultimate destination of personal improvement" to get through first. They are:
* health
* peace of mind
* Valhalla
* Timbuktu
* the happy place
* over the rainbow
* god
You see? There it is. Gawd only knows when I'll get to it though. You have no idea what a bitch it is to prove a negative.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: Very funny indeed!
How did you established that the road of continually learning and improving your life does not take you eventually to God?
I can't prove it yet, but it is on my to-do list. I just have a few more possibilities for the title of "ultimate destination of personal improvement" to get through first. They are:
* health
* peace of mind
* Valhalla
* Timbuktu
* the happy place
* over the rainbow
* god
You see? There it is. Gawd only knows when I'll get to it though. You have no idea what a bitch it is to prove a negative.
Health is only part of the whole so it can't possibly lead to human emancipation.
Peace of mind yes but how can you dismiss that God and peace of mind are not the same thing?
Timbuktu not as the matter is the transformation of pure thought.
The happy place without peace of mind is not complete.
Over the rainbow and into the peace of mind yes but it could also take you to the sewer.
God yes.
So keep on trying whatever but try to choose more carefully ok!
(August 29, 2014 at 2:28 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Until you prove that trying to improve our lives is 'proceeding toward God', there's no need to explain the logic of not believing it's true. We don't believe it's true because you haven't established that it is, in fact, true. Funny how that works, eh?
Very funny indeed!
How did you established that the road of continually learning and improving your life does not take you eventually to God?
I don't have to establish it, you have to support your case, since you're making the positive claim. You have the burden of proof, and if you don't meet that burden, I shouldn't believe you.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: You haven't so far so how can you dismiss the fact that it MAY take you there?
Because an argument from ignorance is a fallacy. Me not being able to prove something ISN'T true doesn't take you one whit closer to proving it IS. I can't prove that the invisible empire of the underwear gnomes isn't where a certain percentage of missing undergarments wind up to further the gnome king's ambitions toward world domination, either. Life is too short to take ideas whose only claim to truth is that they haven't been proven not to be true, seriously.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: You dismiss something when you got the clear evidence not before.
When the claim is something the person making it doesn't seem to be in a position to know, I am certainly justified in dismissing it until I have clear evidence the person knows what they are talking about and isn't just self-deluded.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: You want the evidence from me?
That would be nice, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: Suppose the road to God is 1000 miles.
I am getting closer to the goal so i can see the end while you are far behind and obviously you can not perceive anything.
I can tell you that God is there but until you get closer to God you want be able to perceive anything so in a way i can understand your point.
That's nice, but why should I believe there's a God, there's a road to God, that we are both on it, or that you are farther ahead than me? The simplest answer to you thinking you can perceive things other people can't is that you're fooling yourself. We know people fool themselves. We don't know any of the stuff you're trying to convince us of, and your argument seems to boil down to 'trust me'. That's exactly the sort of person I don't trust: someone I don't even know who wants me to trust them on something they can't demonstrate is true.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: On the other hand it is unlikely that your progress will move much faster until your desire to fulfill man natural desire for infinite peace of mind makes some progress.
In real life, someone who wants to me to take a path can do a lot more to convince me than sell me on getting motivated to take a path that hasn't been established to exist yet. You sound like you're selling a self-help book. And infinite peace of mind is NOT what I desire, only a reasonable modicum of it. Wanting an infinite amount of it sounds greedy, and possibly hazardous.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: The oxymoron that we are arguing about is all about the contradiction.
We're not arguing about an oxymoron. We're arguing about whether the word 'atheist' is an oxymoron, like the word 'parkway' (it's not for parking) or 'apartment' (they're together). It's usually a humorous observation about an apparent contradiction that doesn't really exist. The 'park' in 'parkway' refers to the landscaping around the roadway, not to parking. Apartments are dwelling units in the same building, so rather than being one dwelling, they are numerous dwellings 'apart' from each other despite being in the same building. Oxymora are fine for humor ('airline food', amIright?), but not only are you not getting it right in this case, you're taking it way too seriously.
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: On one hand you want to go ahead in learning and improving your life and at the same time refusing to believe that at the end of the journey there is God before you got the evidence that God is not there.
Yes, why would I not want to go ahead in learning and improving my life regardless of whether God is there or not?
(August 30, 2014 at 2:24 am)Riketto Wrote: But again you haven't explained how it is possible to fulfill man desire for infinite peace of mind in this finite universe.
I don't desire infinite peace. It sounds infinitely boring. Or like brain death. Have you already achieved this state? I'm thinking it would explain a lot.
