(July 24, 2014 at 4:03 am)Riketto Wrote: In theory you got a good point.
In reality your point is meaningless.
If this website would be attended by people that know what they are talking about then i would have to agree with you but when you find people that post in the philosophy or religious forums without having a clue about the meaning of these things then everything at times become a big joke and when you are dealing with jokes everybody tend to forget the good manners.
If i would have to complain about the bad jokes that people in this forum make about me i should complain every single day but i don't so i don't expect that people complain about me.
Until you invest in a mirror, you will always get the same response, on any site where people have an education, or an interest in science, or a lack of belief in unprovable spiritual or religious ideas.
You've had some good ideas, but they are too mixed-up with random ideas that you clearly just thought of, without being able to test them, or caring whether they are even testable.
That works fine for self-study. I have lots of spiritual or superstitious ideas. But when I think about mentioning them, I stop and ask, "Why should anybody listen to me?" The answer is-- if I'm trying to change someone's thinking, I need compelling logical reasons for them to spend the mental effort to change their thinking. Just liking my own answer isn't a good enough reason to make other people listen to it. You wouldn't listen to someone telling you that God is a Pink Unicorn-- no matter how sure that person believed that, or how strongly they insulted you for refusing to accept their belief.
Many of your posts and links are corrupted because they are too obviously connected to an unprofessional bias. For example, you link to spiritualist websites to argue vegetarian morality, when your "audience" needs something more solid-- strong philosophical arguments, or better yet, actual scientific results (and not "interpreted" by biased sources, actual links or descriptions of the science).
Many people have asked you to present your arguments in a way that is meaningful to non-Riketto humans, but you generally have not done this. The result is that you are mocked.
If you want to argue, and say "Everyone else does it too," or think you are free to say whatever you like, that's fine-- you are free to do so. But nothing will ever change-- nobody will listen to the many GOOD arguments you make, because you've made too many weak ones. It's too bad for me-- as an agnostic, I'm fairly "spiritual," and I'm strongly vegetarian. If you listened better to what people have said, you could have been a strong ally. Instead, I have to try hard not to let people think all vegetarians are as illogical as they think you are.
