Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-08-2014, 08:01 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 07:56 AM)morondog Wrote:  Don't go blaming us for your short-comings. Your arguments for your opinions are irrational - you can *call* them rational all you want, it will not make it so.
That is a naked assertion. How would you know if they are or are not rational? Can you formulate a proof of the rational method? Hint: Listen to the Molyneux video.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 08:09 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 05:52 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 05:40 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Read the whole article fucknuts...

“Your statements in support of deFOOing are not supported by current professional literature or consistent with the standards [of the college],” prosecutor Peter Osborne said at Tuesday’s hearing.

She gave out blanket advice, under the guise of being a professional, that was not in line at all with professional standards or the literature; as determined by a board of her professional peers. She plead guilty to professional misconduct. There is a big difference from breaking away from abusive relationships, and her advice to completely sever ties like she had because she found her own parent's merely "phony and stifling"; not abusive mind you, just "phony and stifling".

I wonder what professional literature does the prosecutor Peter Osborne mean. Alice Miller, a classic in the field (Drama of The Gifted Child) did not even realize her family was abusive until decades later, IIRC when she had a family of her own. So did John Bradshaw, another classic. If I read Conrad Baars and Anna Terruwe, they too point out the cold behavior of parents as having far-reaching consequences. Sure, they're not the current literature, but it's not like parents took their advice to heart. Instead what we see is an extreme rise in psychopharmacology industry, such as Zoloft and other antidepressants. Drug the kids, destroy 10 % of their brain mass. If families can drug non-compliant kids, this is getting serious in more ways than one - personally, politically, scientifically, financially...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiUeOLfV5z8 (sources below the video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvAR7sxyRe0
Everyone knows that victims of abuse may suffer from Stockholm syndrome, which is bonding with one's abusers and defending them. Stockholm syndrome was described on a case of robbery and abduction in Stockholm. If it can happen with robbers never seen before, then families must be full of it.

If children consider someone on whom they are dependent and spent 20 years with "phony and stifling", then the actual state of family must be much worse. Of course here we are getting into a politically sensitive area. Parents go to therapists who do not blame them but get the child on meds. And if children seek independent help, then shit hits the fan and parents start protesting. I smell rat.

Anyway, that was 7 years ago and whatever prosecutor wanted, he got, so what the hell is your problem? No personal lawsuit, just one slap over the fingers in 7 years due to breaking formalities of the wife's profession, that's a pretty good score in such a sensitive conversation.


"Ms. Papadopoulos gave advice on podcast segments called “Ask a Therapist.” While family separation is sometimes appropriate in cases of abuse, she didn’t assess whether this was properly applied when she made her podcasts, said an agreed statement of facts read at the hearing."


So she is incompetent then? You'd think that someone trained in the field would have a bit more tact and awareness, unless of course her advice was never meant to be actual professional advice and instead was her just twisting it to suite their shared agenda. Ineptitude, stupidity, or purposeful bias; none of those options paint her in any appealing light.


It's also known that angling people to completely break all ties with their families is a hallmark of the cult leader. Jesus (supposedly) did it, Jim Jones did it, Charles Manson did it, David Koresh did it, L. Ron Hubbard did it, Sun Myung Moon did it; and now it appears as though Peter Molyneux is doing it too. But no, I'm sure all of the people who followed Jones to Africa and drank cyanide laced Kool-Aid were all suffering from abusive families...

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 08:33 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
"Oh, you don't believe the Bible? Here are some Bible verses..."
"Oh, you don't believe the Prophet Molyneux? Here are some of his verses..."

Molyneux is a hateful little man. His ideas are rejected by the competent.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
16-08-2014, 08:33 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 08:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  "Ms. Papadopoulos gave advice on podcast segments called “Ask a Therapist.” While family separation is sometimes appropriate in cases of abuse, she didn’t assess whether this was properly applied when she made her podcasts, said an agreed statement of facts read at the hearing."

So she is incompetent then? You'd think that someone trained in the field would have a bit more tact and awareness, unless of course her advice was never meant to be actual professional advice and instead was her just twisting it to suite their shared agenda. Ineptitude, stupidity, or purposeful bias; none of those options paint her in any appealing light.
Looks like the court said, "if you've got a paper, don't talk over the radio, only in one on one conversation in your office." But it has nothing to do with competence. And it was just one incident 7 years ago, no direct advice or specific instructions to a particular person.

(16-08-2014 08:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  It's also known that angling people to completely break all ties with their families is a hallmark of the cult leader. Jesus (supposedly) did it, Jim Jones did it, Charles Manson did it, David Koresh did it, L. Ron Hubbard did it, Sun Myung Moon did it; and now it appears as though Peter Molyneux is doing it too. But no, I'm sure all of the people who followed Jones to Africa and drank cyanide laced Kool-Aid were all suffering from abusive families...
Nope, no hallmark. The cult leaders outright told people to break ties with family in order to move in with the cult leaders, with property and all, not to lead a free and independent life wherever they are. Cult leaders are notorious for NOT telling people to talk to a therapist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 08:40 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 08:01 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 07:56 AM)morondog Wrote:  Don't go blaming us for your short-comings. Your arguments for your opinions are irrational - you can *call* them rational all you want, it will not make it so.
That is a naked assertion. How would you know if they are or are not rational? Can you formulate a proof of the rational method? Hint: Listen to the Molyneux video.

Since I spent the entire thread arguing with you, since I have studied logic and the scientific method, neither of which you seem to have even a tangential acquaintance with, I think I can safely say that it's a *conclusion*, bucko. I don't need some 45 minute video of a clapped out reject "philosopher" to validate it.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like morondog's post
16-08-2014, 09:07 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 08:33 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 08:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  "Ms. Papadopoulos gave advice on podcast segments called “Ask a Therapist.” While family separation is sometimes appropriate in cases of abuse, she didn’t assess whether this was properly applied when she made her podcasts, said an agreed statement of facts read at the hearing."

So she is incompetent then? You'd think that someone trained in the field would have a bit more tact and awareness, unless of course her advice was never meant to be actual professional advice and instead was her just twisting it to suite their shared agenda. Ineptitude, stupidity, or purposeful bias; none of those options paint her in any appealing light.
Looks like the court said, "if you've got a paper, don't talk over the radio, only in one on one conversation in your office." But it has nothing to do with competence. And it was just one incident 7 years ago, no direct advice or specific instructions to a particular person.

Pay more attention Lumi. There were two official complaints filed in 2009 and 2011 respectively, one of which made note of a specific 2007 podcast episode. the commission had a lot to sift through, as it's not like she stopped appearing on her husband's podcasts after that one episode.

"In another podcast, the couple discussed a listener who wrote a letter describing how he cut ties with his family and rerouted his mother’s daily e-mailed pleas titled “We love you” into his junk mail folder.

“She’s trying to push your buttons. She’s trying to appeal to your guilt,” Ms. Papadopoulos said. “The best thing to do under those circumstances is just not to engage. …The moment you respond back, she knows she’s got you.”"


Also, she's clearly not 'competent' enough, or else why would the commission's recommend this?

"Mr. Osborne said the public would be better protected if Ms. Papadopoulos’s shortcomings were remedied, rather than just imposing a punitive measure such as a suspension."

So I guess that you don't consider shortcomings that need remedied to be a sign of incompetence? Consider

Also, you do understand how a podcast works, right? I doesn't fucking matter if it was recorded back in 2009, if it can still be accessed, then it can still be causing harm through misinformation. Actions have consequences, and she clearly didn't think her's through enough.



(16-08-2014 08:33 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 08:09 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  It's also known that angling people to completely break all ties with their families is a hallmark of the cult leader. Jesus (supposedly) did it, Jim Jones did it, Charles Manson did it, David Koresh did it, L. Ron Hubbard did it, Sun Myung Moon did it; and now it appears as though Peter Molyneux is doing it too. But no, I'm sure all of the people who followed Jones to Africa and drank cyanide laced Kool-Aid were all suffering from abusive families...
Nope, no hallmark. The cult leaders outright told people to break ties with family in order to move in with the cult leaders, with property and all, not to lead a free and independent life wherever they are. Cult leaders are notorious for NOT telling people to talk to a therapist.

Peter Molyneux makes a living through donations and the direct-selling his books (because they sure as shit didn't meet the standards to be published by any reputable publisher). In this day and age, you don't need to live on a commune to give your money to your cult leader; we have PayPal. Plus, how many of those other cult leaders were atheists? None of them, they all had religious angles. Is it any wonder why religious cult leaders didn't want or need a licensed psychologist? But he has one, who is married to him conveniently enough.

Yeah, I can't see any possible way for bias or professional misconduct to creep it's way into this, no-siree...

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 09:08 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Now, fellow True Believers, let us gather 'round, and listen to the honeyed words of our Prophet Molyneux (pbuh); lo, let us bathe in the hot, steaming spray of words from his firm and throbbing mind...

Freely admitting to engaging in rampant projection? We have that!




Non sequitur hatred for smart people? No worries, we've got that too!




Delirious misogyny? Oooh, you betcha!




Full-bore psychosis! Oh, yes!




...

Now, many of you have probably heard about James Randi's work exposing faith healers (Peter Popoff being one in particular). And the unmitigated scorn and contempt these people have for those they're scamming. In Popoff's case, so callous as to leave cheques for small change uncashed - Randi and his crew found them in the trash after a show...

Now, who else acts similarly?





(bonus: "joking" about assaulting someone; so much for non-aggression...)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
16-08-2014, 10:09 AM
Re: RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 07:45 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(16-08-2014 07:28 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  And also family doesn't exist, nor abuse or much else of what you've ever discussed here.

I thought your overall point had more value than empirical bickering, I guess I am the fool for listening to your ideas of seeking goodness.
Nobody is a fool for seeking goodness. Rather, family does exist, it's a biological, sexual and material relationship. Abuse does exist too, medically proven. (Bomb in the brain video, it's testable and measurable, look up the Adverse Childhood Experiences study) I can well imagine a person being a fool for denying that.
Furthermore, if you listen to this Molyneux video and look up the Non-Aggression Principle, this is a rational argument, not empirical bickering. Molyneux mentions three Aristotle's principles of thinking. Again, not empirical bickering at all. There is some, but only because people are unable to comprehend a rational argument, as almost everyone here plus Thunderf00t show.

Convinced misguided actions are a foolish. If you were of any doubt you could at least seem openly wise.

Those things do exist, I see it. But family is a concept. It has a natural biological purpose, but Having a purpose doesn't make something exist any more or less than another.concept. The concept of something has a value onto itself. You should understand that philosophical idea.

Odd, you appreciate his use of the classical philosopher logics. I thought you disregarded that as bad philosophy. Especially would of thought you were heavily against Aristotle in most ways when it came to your scientific thread arguments. I'm sad to say I might be having less respect for you,than I had previously on an intellectual,level.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 10:14 AM (This post was last modified: 16-08-2014 10:25 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(16-08-2014 09:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Pay more attention Lumi. There were two official complaints filed in 2009 and 2011 respectively, one of which made note of a specific 2007 podcast episode. the commission had a lot to sift through, as it's not like she stopped appearing on her husband's podcasts after that one episode.

"In another podcast, the couple discussed a listener who wrote a letter describing how he cut ties with his family and rerouted his mother’s daily e-mailed pleas titled “We love you” into his junk mail folder.

“She’s trying to push your buttons. She’s trying to appeal to your guilt,” Ms. Papadopoulos said. “The best thing to do under those circumstances is just not to engage. …The moment you respond back, she knows she’s got you.”"


Also, she's clearly not 'competent' enough, or else why would the commission's recommend this?

"Mr. Osborne said the public would be better protected if Ms. Papadopoulos’s shortcomings were remedied, rather than just imposing a punitive measure such as a suspension."

So I guess that you don't consider shortcomings that need remedied to be a sign of incompetence? Consider

Also, you do understand how a podcast works, right? I doesn't fucking matter if it was recorded back in 2009, if it can still be accessed, then it can still be causing harm through misinformation. Actions have consequences, and she clearly didn't think her's through enough.
Oh, there were three complaints? Thanks for the info, I didn't know that. So what? From my own experience, the podcast is 100 % spot on precise and quite competent. What is your argument? Do you want to say that people are not competent to judge their own 20 or so years of experience with their parents? Do you mean that they can be re-programmed by a piece of media? If so, they probably shouldn't watch Six Feet Under on TV. That's an even more lame argument than video games causing violence Drinking Beverage

(16-08-2014 09:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Peter Molyneux makes a living through donations and the direct-selling his books (because they sure as shit didn't meet the standards to be published by any reputable publisher). In this day and age, you don't need to live on a commune to give your money to your cult leader; we have PayPal. Plus, how many of those other cult leaders were atheists? None of them, they all had religious angles. Is it any wonder why religious cult leaders didn't want or need a licensed psychologist? But he has one, who is married to him conveniently enough.

Yeah, I can't see any possible way for bias or professional misconduct to creep it's way into this, no-siree...
Well, here's a cult leader who married a licensed psychologist Consider
And you're the guy who judges the book not by content, not by cover, but by the publisher. And also doesn't know the author's name. Tongue Molyneux (Stefan, not Peter) is a writer and playwright and his novel God of Atheists has great reviews.

(16-08-2014 10:09 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Convinced misguided actions are a foolish. If you were of any doubt you could at least seem openly wise.

Those things do exist, I see it. But family is a concept. It has a natural biological purpose, but Having a purpose doesn't make something exist any more or less than another.concept. The concept of something has a value onto itself. You should understand that philosophical idea.
I don't see what's your problem. Concepts have no essence, they're a connection of a word, an idea and some phenomenon.

(16-08-2014 10:09 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Odd, you appreciate his use of the classical philosopher logics. I thought you disregarded that as bad philosophy. Especially would of thought you were heavily against Aristotle in most ways when it came to your scientific thread arguments. I'm sad to say I might be having less respect for you,than I had previously on an intellectual,level.
Of course I do appreciate that. Logic is objective, it's mostly Aristotle and Kant. It's just that most of the highly appreciated philosophers made huge mistakes, especially Plato, then Socrates at the end of his life in Plato's account and Rene Descartes. Even Kant gave a nod to the argument from force wielded by a prince, probably because he had to.

(16-08-2014 08:40 AM)morondog Wrote:  Since I spent the entire thread arguing with you, since I have studied logic and the scientific method, neither of which you seem to have even a tangential acquaintance with, I think I can safely say that it's a *conclusion*, bucko. I don't need some 45 minute video of a clapped out reject "philosopher" to validate it.
I haven't seen you actually do logic. And mentioning logic together with scientific method, which is not the same thing, only makes me more suspicious.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-08-2014, 10:21 AM
Re: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
I have much more respect for Peter Molyneux, even if he gets ahead of himself and over hypes the outcomes he can create. His mind and motivation are admirable, you just know it'll never be achieved because he doesn't self analyze and question his ability.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: