RE: How many of you would punish religious people for being religious?
April 18, 2022 at 8:57 am
At work.
Can't properly/easily split the reply to the two conversations we're now having so I'll drop the spanking one.![Tongue Tongue](https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
Hmmmmm..... your take is that we can't be sure about 'Wisdom' based on 'X', 'Y' and 'Z'.
I wasn't moving to 'Certainty', was just looking for what Ahriman considered in their determination of said wise.
I agree that people knowledgeable in their field should be headed/respected/acknowledged.... but that's not really doing anything for the whole wise side of the chat.
So, you don't (Still) have anything for wise but... I'm supposed to?
Hmmm... is this how it's supposed to work?
Okay then. I'm wise.
You're welcome.
(April 18, 2022 at 8:34 am)Belacqua Wrote:(April 18, 2022 at 8:12 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: Hmmmmm.... so, you've got no way to tell if some one or some 'Thing'(Words, concepts etc) actually is/are 'Wise'?
That seems to be a tad problematic.
I don't think that wisdom is something we can be sure about. It can't be detected by empirical methods. It can't be measured or photographed.
Maybe that will seem problematic if you require some kind of certainty. To me it seems more like something that experts -- experienced people, people who have lived and learned -- will be better able to discern than others, but even such people may disagree.
Can you propose an alternative? Do you have a checklist for wisdom which we could apply to form an objective standard?
Quote:You then wax lyrical about something I've already answered with a 'No'.
Frankly I'm nonplussed as to your reply.
I wasn't talking about you, as someone who wants to punish -- you don't seem to me like the type who would go out of his way to make someone feel bad because you disagree with him. You seem very even-tempered to me, and not at all cruel.
Sadly, not everyone is so easy-going.
Can't properly/easily split the reply to the two conversations we're now having so I'll drop the spanking one.
![Tongue Tongue](https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
Hmmmmm..... your take is that we can't be sure about 'Wisdom' based on 'X', 'Y' and 'Z'.
I wasn't moving to 'Certainty', was just looking for what Ahriman considered in their determination of said wise.
I agree that people knowledgeable in their field should be headed/respected/acknowledged.... but that's not really doing anything for the whole wise side of the chat.
So, you don't (Still) have anything for wise but... I'm supposed to?
Hmmm... is this how it's supposed to work?
Okay then. I'm wise.
You're welcome.