(January 17, 2010 at 4:46 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: You crazy diamond Evie
And what's with the new "evinice" word??
Say you had a sand pit with an impression in it, and the object that made the impression was missing. In this instance, couldn't you know or have a good idea of what made the impression without it actually being there? We're not talking about 'evidencing' something anyway. We're talking about working out 'something' of the entity in question.
In the case of the analogy you would have many physical attributes of the print to relate to the thing that left the print, such as the depth, width, length, area, contours etc - Can you name a single case where god has left a print?
Quote:(January 17, 2010 at 4:37 pm)Purple Rabbit Wrote: This is not about making clear to others what god is, but this is the Way of the Dodger. fr0d0 evidently more than anything cherishes the elusiveness of his personal god and is prepared to sacrifice logic for it. The god of fr0d0 is not tangible, not detectable, not provable, not verifiable, not falsifiable. Belief without any evidence or clue whatsoever is random and meaningless yet this is what he's trying to sell. My guess is that fr0d0 himself does not believe in a god since he cannot name one characteristic feature that defines him. It's a classic case of holding on to a dream in spite of knowing better. A strange battle between hope and reason.
You're such a shit Rabbit. Nice mindless rep too VOID.
Not mindless, i find he summed up your tactics quite well.
Quote:I'm not volunteering my interpretation as that's not relevant here. You are free to make up your own metaphysical diversion. With VOID it's future technology. With you it's your own flavour of spirituality.
Metaphysical diversion? There is nothing metaphysical about technology.
Quote:You know very well what we're talking about here, yet you volunteer this dog shit for opinion. Be a sweetie and clear up after yourself.
Better than offering nothing but ambiguity.
.
