(June 13, 2015 at 7:54 am)comet Wrote: we can, at best, use a type of understanding like we have with "Annoyed and Angry." So discussing the deference between "belief" and "faith" is for people that are not interested in how the universe works but rather they are trying pin point their own belief with less "facts" and more "words" as the axioms.
Here is some practical advice for you. Learn to express your feelings and opinions as such. If you had said "I feel" that people who dwell on the meaning of words instead of empirical facts don't care about how the universe works, you might at least get a response, like "why do you think that"? Instead, since you choose to present yourself as the expert on peoples true intentions, you just come off as a buffoon.
(June 13, 2015 at 7:54 am)comet Wrote: The problem is it is not anchored in understand or even definitions. It is anchored in vernaculars, or what Christ called sand. I call it bullshit. When we get to this level the hiezenburger uncertainty in understanding applies. We can't know the exact definition and The exact meaning at the same in philosophy. fubar-ed.
So is there a question in there for me or are you just here to call bullshit based on more of your vaporous innuendo? Those who are interested in philosophy probably understand something about it that is escaping you. I know you like to come off as mr. science, but no one here is going to buy into your self bestowed credentials. You have a thuggish interpersonal style which I don't appreciate.
