A Serious Threat to World Peace
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-10-2011, 02:13 AM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
(13-10-2011 10:04 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Defacto.

I'll just assume that someone pissed in your Cheerios.

Hey, Mark.

Quote:I take your point about "ignoring the complexity." I probably need to "round out" my arguments more, or else I will get perceived as a ranter. For example...I should add there is much more to the situation in the middle east than just religious differences...there are financial considerations, land ownership considerations, corporate greed, internal ie inter-Islamic factors all contributing to the volatility of the region. These issues need to be addressed too.

Those are good points. That being said, I think it's a step further than needing to address them too. All of those things, religion included, form a system. The system can't be dealt with in parts. The whole needs to be addressed.

I don't know what your background/position is on systems thinking, but from what I've gathered, you're an MD. If that's true then I assume that you know what I mean when I say that a human body can be analysed by taking it apart and looking at the pieces, but you only gain knowledge about what it truly is and how it works when it's assembled and functioning and all of the emergent properties can be seen.

Personally, I'd never say there's nothing wrong with religion, nor would I say that there's nothing wrong with, say, pancreatic cancer. But they're both just parts of a larger whole. Problematic parts. But parts of a whole that exist in relationship with other interdependent parts within that whole. You wouldn't just hack out a cancerous pancreas without understanding skin, infections, anaesthetics, blood pressure, hormones, insulin (I'm sure you know better than me how long that list is) and most importantly, how they interrelate.

Just taking that analogy to its logical conclusion, what do you think is more dangerous? A cancerous pancreas, or advocating its excision while ignoring the dynamic of the system of which it is a part?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

Matt, you're not seeing the wood for the trees. You are also criticising others for their comments about topics that you yourself admit you don't know much about. You're very easily upset and seem to take it personally when anyone disagrees with you. You always finish your comments off with your trademark salutation, yet there's little evidence of peace, love or empathy in anything you say. You write like you are an angry bull in a pen. Why don't you cool your jets?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2011, 08:27 AM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
Absolutely. Religion gotta go.

I have reverse-engineered the whole pile back to tao.

Here's some surprising data. "Stoning blasphemers" is actually a key element in "religious faith" from YHWH. I built "faith" using the science of simulation and found two important conclusions. Faith= Moral certainty. By using simulation, a "conceptual drama" is re-enacted over and over in the mind - like filling out the whole script. Feel the rough surface of the stone, the mass, the weight of the responsibility - and if you're on the side of angels, you'll know...

Tested it "in the field," as it were. This guy thought I was wrong - I knew he was wrong... yada ...yada. We got in an argument over it - where we defined our boundaries, waiting for the other to swing first - pretty much a stalemate. Then he tried to raise "righteousness" against my "moral certainty" - He basically "unmaned" himself...

And simulation? Brain evolved to simulate mind. Simulate future in mind. Simulate mind of another in mind... once you find the tao of faith=moral certainty, it's obvious that "god" is simulation of mind of another in mind. (Image of God)There's no need for religion at all with that tao.

But one thing atheists in general miss, is identity. "I am that I am/I am the being." With simulation, it is obvious the "believer" is god - so by denying the existence of god - an atheist is denying his own existence to the believer. First commandment? Believer is god - atheist acts as believer is god - there is no error, there is no admitting to fantasy on the part of the atheist; and if the believer is "self-illuminating" that one may find the way back from religion through faith.

And there's no need to define terms. "Faith" as I have found it is more like the Name(YHWH)- and tao is tao.

Case closed. Religion - eternally damned. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2011, 11:37 AM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
Hey, Defacto.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! No one can know of our forbidden love, my precious buttercup!!!

Hey, Mark.

I feel that your response was unfair. I began what I felt was an exceptionally calm response with "good points" and somehow I wound up being characterised as an emotional jerk. I didn't even say that you were wrong.

Believe me, Mark, I've been pissed at you at times. This was not one of those times.

How about this? Reread my post with a calm voice in mind. Imagine me saying, "hey, Mark, sure is a nice day. You raised some interesting points. I like them. I'd like to take it a little bit further." Then I invite you to comment on systems theory and the examples I gave and respond to the pancreas question I ended with.

Then, if you are willing, I'd like for you to explain what you mean when you say I'm missing the wood for the trees. I assume that that idiom is the same as what I'm familiar with, "the forest for the trees." If that's so, I'm confused, because I'm specifically saying that the individual parts aren't what's important, the whole is. If you could elaborate and clarify I would appreciate it.

And just so we're seeing eye to eye, I am comfortable admitting the limits of my knowledge. I am not a biblical scholar. I think that it's important to admit where one's limits are rather than pretending one knows things that one does not. But not being a specialist does not mean that one cannot discuss a matter. I recognise that you know a great deal about the Bible, more than me in fact. I also acknowledged that you probably know more than me about the human body. I actually know quite a bit about the human organism, but certainly not as much as a doctor; which I think you are, correct me if I'm wrong. What I am saying, generally speaking, and we've had this argument before, is that I feel that there is a gap between the depth of your Biblical knowledge and the conclusions you draw. There is nothing wrong with me criticising/scrutinising your conclusions. So I politely ask that you do not dismiss me just because I can't quote scripture just as I will not dismiss you if the two of us talk about, say, memetics, Universal Darwinism or hockey (I assume there's more hockey in Canada than Australia Cool ). All of that being said, this isn't a scripture issue for me, this is a systems issue and I know a great deal about systems theory.

As for how I sign off, the sure fire way to know if I'm actually pissed off is if I don't sign off that way. That being said:

Peace and Love and Empathy, Mark,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2011, 12:14 PM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
(14-10-2011 11:37 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Defacto.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! No one can know of our forbidden love, my precious buttercup!!!

Hey, Mark.

As for how I sign off, the sure fire way to know if I'm actually pissed off is if I don't sign off that way. That being said:

Peace and Love and Empathy, Mark,

Matt

LOL....

So I was right? Nice sign off. I didn't think your sig. was too appropriate. Don't be too miffed at me, Matt. I guess it's because I called you Mark or maybe because I disagree with you. It's not that big of a deal.

I always wonder why people put bumper stickers on their car like, "Jesus Loves You" then they road rage. There's a responsibility for what we flippantly portray. We are either hypocrites or we are not so I don't put bumper stickers on my car. I do try to live up to my signature though; it's easier to peal off.

Really, no hard feeling... it's in fun. Get over it. I like your writing.

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2011, 07:25 PM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
Hey, Defacto.

I'm a nice guy. I honestly wish well to everyone. Honestly. That doesn't mean I can't be ornery when people poke me with sticks Cool

I believe it was the great Brodie of Mallrats fame who once quipped:
Quote:You fuckers think just because a guy reads comics he can't start some shit?

I aint a hypocrite, I'm a human, baby Cool

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-10-2011, 08:00 PM
RE: A Serious Threat to World Peace
(14-10-2011 07:25 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Defacto.

I'm a nice guy. I honestly wish well to everyone. Honestly. That doesn't mean I can't be ornery when people poke me with sticks Cool

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

All sticks of war have been fully retracted and secured, sir.

..honey bun.. that is Wink

But just wait till I call you out on that signature Stark uses.... you will not survive my stickery. Tongue

Who can turn skies back and begin again?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: