The foundational lie in the psyche
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-07-2014, 02:01 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 01:04 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 07:24 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I just call that introspection. ... Silly goose. ... Tongue
Worship is not the same as introspection.

Depends upon the object of worship. Your God lives "out there" somewhere, my God lives in here. Introspection is the only way to find God, hence worship. Tongue

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 02:07 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 05:55 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Define "value". Define "highest". Define "love".
Are you serious? If not, just have me define define. Value=worth highest=greatest love=empathy

Define "worth". Define "greatest". Define "empathy".

We all know you're far too dissolutely vacuous to actually do so.

But keep on restating the same insufficient and inadequately explored deepities. I predict you repeating the exact same trite and inane blather until everyone once again gets bored with your failtacular train to nowhere and abandons thread.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 05:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  It answers how to treat our fellow man, our family and friends. How to esteem others through how we wish to be esteemed.

Quote:It does no such thing. Empathising with someone who disagrees with me does not make me agree with them. Reciprocity is an entirely distinct concept. Neither is sufficient to understand group interaction alone. Are you even trying?
Yes I am trying. I never meant to imply empathizing with someone who disagrees with you makes you agree with them. But it does restrain the reasoning that would hate those who disagree with you.

wut. Empathy is experiential. It doesn't do anything. That sort of tragically simplistic reification is wholly fallacious, but I must at least grudgingly admire the way you don't let little things like not making sense slow you down at all.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 05:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  see above.
Quote:Good to know you haven't changed.

If questioned, crap out vacuous non-answers. If questioned further, re-assert the same meaningless non-answers. Ad infinitem. Profit.
I'm sorry, but explains/answers are rather the same.

Right. So you won't even try to coherently define or explain anything. Gotcha.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 05:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  It requires self sacrifice.

Quote:Experiencing empathy requires nothing, as it is a naturally occurring facet of human emotion. Are you even trying?
I assure you I'm trying. You misunderstand. I was saying empathy causes one to sacrifice self for others when obeyed.

"Obeyed"? That's incoherent. One can't "obey" sensations.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:The OP is incoherent drivel.
If you don't understand it, just say so. I don't mean to imply that you are stupid, but it really isn't that complicated.

No, it's pathetically simplistic, but it's fundamentally flawed and incomplete. That you are incapable of abstract thought is not my problem.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  It simply means that Empathy is not a choice/decision made in the brain but the power of morality.

It is an aspect of the social and neurological web of interaction we call "morality".

So freaking what?

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  Now if you wish to comment on that, then I would love to hear your sincere commentary.

"Morality therefore God" is a shambling cavalcade of oblivious failure. It is not an argument. It has no substance. It is not coherent. It is a waste of everybody's time, including yours.

That is my commentary.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
13-07-2014, 02:16 PM (This post was last modified: 13-07-2014 02:33 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 01:40 PM)childeye Wrote:  I know this is your summation as to how I reason the existence of God. Indeed how can it not be? I've already said your reasoning is a fundamental contradiction based on your misunderstanding of the term God. And with God deemed as imaginary instead of the the highest value, it is not possible that any of my use of terms be viable in your view. But even this should at least point out to you that when you say God does not exist, and cut down others for saying He does, you are being disingenuous. For you know we are not talking about the same thing.

Actually you haven't "reasoned" anything. You've conflated a couple concepts, never shown how they are related, or why, and brushed your hands off, and claimed victory. You actually have done nothing at all excpet assert a few redefinitions, (first you claimed your god was love, now you're claiming it's empathy). You have not accounted for the change, just hoped we didn't notice. You saying someone "misunderstands" something means only "I know better than you", and that's called "self-righteousness", Childish.

(13-07-2014 01:40 PM)childeye Wrote:  He does, you are being disingenuous. For you know we are not talking about the same thing.

Show me ONE Christian theologian that says "God is Empathy".
In fact it is YOU who are out in left field here, despite your pathetic claims to the contrary, and you total inability to rationalize it, other than make repeated nonsensical claims.

And BTW, you can have a concept that perfectly flawlessly reasoned, yet turn out to be false. Reason alone is inadequate. You have no evidence for your love or empathy being anything other than concepts that apply to emotions and behaviors. You have provided no evidence.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 02:52 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 01:52 PM)true scotsman Wrote:  ]Childeye, You are all over the place. Like every other Christian I have ever met.

I specifically asked you: So just to verify. You are saying that "God" is a biological process (empathy or love) of certain organisms not limited to Humans, since as Bucky Ball pointed out other animals feel empathy, and not an all powerful consciousness that created everything by an act of conscious will, correct?

And in response you wrote: I would say that we experience God through a biological existence. I decline to answer the rest as I would rather explore God from a practical provable logic rather than superstition.

You declined to affirm, as a Christian, what your own religion teaches about God and your evasion was pointless because in this post you proceed to affirm that "love or God is a person".

Yes I wanted to explore God from a practical provable logic. I don't see it as pointless. And do you know why? Because I didn't want to debate any personal testimony that could be viably questionable. It wasn't an evasion for any other reason than to avoid pointless and unproductive dialogue. I see nothing wrong with wanting to avoid that.

Of course I think God and/or empathy is a Person. That can be gleaned from many prior posts from other threads. I do not hide that fact. Moreover, you first asked me to give you a method to distinguish between what I was calling God was not imaginary, which of course empathy is not imaginary and that was what I was calling God. I even mentioned I got the impression you meant to be asking something else. Why didn't you just ask if I counted Love or God a person? Obviously I was not afraid to tell you that I do, since I did.

Quote:You also acknowledge that you can't tell me how I can reliably distinguish what you call "God" from something that you may merely be imagining when you say "I cannot prove to you it was Him and not my imagination". Childeye, if what you call "God" is indistinguishable from something that you are imagining then it is imaginary.
To be clear, I can distinguish easily between what is real and imaginary as pertains to my personal experiences. I cannot however provide a method for you to take my word for it. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't make it imaginary.

Quote:I don't give a damn that you think "Atheism is a cold belief system". Atheism is not my belief system and you couldn't possibly know what I believe based on one item that I don't believe. You are an intellectually dishonest person and I don't deal with dishonest people. Your Christian brethren should be embarrassed by you.
I thought you were full of empathy and now you claim you don't give a damn what I think. That's not consistent. And how exactly am I dishonest because you didn't ask a straight question?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 02:54 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 02:01 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 01:04 PM)childeye Wrote:  Worship is not the same as introspection.

Depends upon the object of worship. Your God lives "out there" somewhere, my God lives in here. Introspection is the only way to find God, hence worship. Tongue
You should show bucky ball what You did. He would appreciate that. By the way God lives inside of everything created by His energy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:14 PM (This post was last modified: 13-07-2014 03:20 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 02:54 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 02:01 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Depends upon the object of worship. Your God lives "out there" somewhere, my God lives in here. Introspection is the only way to find God, hence worship. Tongue
You should show bucky ball what You did. He would appreciate that. By the way God lives inside of everything created by His energy.

So you agree with me then that "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6) is meant to be taken literally and I read it as "Bob is the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Bob." and I AM Bob and divine introspection is the only path to God. Yes?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:30 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
Quote:
(13-07-2014 02:07 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Define "worth". Define "greatest". Define "empathy".
Are you serious? What is this Deja vu?

[quote]We all know you're far too dissolutely vacuous to actually do so.
Thank you, I'll take that as I'm not full of it.

Quote:But keep on restating the same insufficient and inadequately explored deepities. I predict you repeating the exact same trite and inane blather until everyone once again gets bored with your failtacular train to nowhere and abandons thread.
Please elaborate on what deepities I have not adequately explored unto your liking if that is not to mundane for your tender intellect. And if not, please at least take some joy in knowing you do not have to define terms like value, highest and love when communicating with me.


Quote:wut. Empathy is experiential. It doesn't do anything. That sort of tragically simplistic reification is wholly fallacious, but I must at least grudgingly admire the way you don't let little things like not making sense slow you down at all.
I agree we experience Love. I can't say Love does nothing. It initiates sorrow for the suffering of others. That's something, and only one of many things it does do. But at least you're trying.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  I'm sorry, but explains/answers are rather the same.

Quote:Right. So you won't even try to coherently define or explain anything. Gotcha.
I'm sorry but you misunderstand again.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  I assure you I'm trying. You misunderstand. I was saying empathy causes one to sacrifice self for others when obeyed.

Quote:"Obeyed"? That's incoherent. One can't "obey" sensations.
Indeed one can. When the sensation of hunger comes, we eat.

Quote:No, it's pathetically simplistic, but it's fundamentally flawed and incomplete.
Well then you can explain why it is fundamentally flawed.
Quote: That you are incapable of abstract thought is not my problem.
After correcting you so many times, with no thank you I might add, and telling you the definitions of basic words which I assume you know since 4 year olds know, my lack of abstract thought is not the problem.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  It simply means that Empathy is not a choice/decision made in the brain but the power of morality.

Quote:It is an aspect of the social and neurological web of interaction we call "morality".
You could put it that way. Nonetheless, we need empathy to consider others in a meaningful way.

Quote:So freaking what?
So let us be thankful.

(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  Now if you wish to comment on that, then I would love to hear your sincere commentary.

Quote:"Morality therefore God" is a shambling cavalcade of oblivious failure. It is not an argument. It has no substance. It is not coherent. It is a waste of everybody's time, including yours.

That is my commentary.
I think you need a hug.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 03:38 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
CE, any word on why any of this drivel of yours matters? Are we supposed to suddenly see the light and become True Christians ™? If not, what's the point of sharing your insight and researches into the meaning of the word empathy and how it may be profitably be conflated with the word God? (or at least how it would be profitable if only pesky cjlr et al would stop pointing out all the fail you're perpetrating).

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
13-07-2014, 03:44 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 01:55 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(12-07-2014 05:47 PM)Dom Wrote:  Childeye, it's time you started to worship me. I have tons more empathy than your current god. If it was up to me, no harm would come to any animal, and that includes people.
How would you do that?

Omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence... all them mighty things. Should be easy peasy to keep things flowing smoothly.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2014, 04:14 PM
RE: The foundational lie in the psyche
(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 02:07 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Define "worth". Define "greatest". Define "empathy".
Are you serious? What is this Deja vu?

Quote:We all know you're far too dissolutely vacuous to actually do so.
Thank you, I'll take that as I'm not full of it.

Oh, you're full of something, all right.

Once again, words require substantive, coherent meanings to be useful. You have amply demonstrated, time and time again, that the best you can manage is empty circular reasoning ("empathy is love is empathy is love is empathy is love is empathy is love..." give me a fucking break). As such I've given up on ever getting a meaningful response from you.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:But keep on restating the same insufficient and inadequately explored deepities. I predict you repeating the exact same trite and inane blather until everyone once again gets bored with your failtacular train to nowhere and abandons thread.
Please elaborate on what deepities I have not adequately explored...

Everything out of your vapid mouth?

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  ... unto your liking if that is not to mundane for your tender intellect.

*too. And "unto" is not used grammatically.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  And if not, please at least take some joy in knowing you do not have to define terms like value, highest and love when communicating with me.

Which only serves to illustrate the problem. Not only do you not know what words mean, but you don't care, so long as you can be self-affirming in your ignorance.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:wut. Empathy is experiential. It doesn't do anything. That sort of tragically simplistic reification is wholly fallacious, but I must at least grudgingly admire the way you don't let little things like not making sense slow you down at all.
I agree we experience Love. I can't say Love does nothing. It initiates sorrow for the suffering of others.

That's just re-asserting the same uncomprehendingly shallow and childish reification.

Protip: if it was semantically void the first time you said it, it'll be semantically void the next time, too.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  That's something, and only one of many things it does do. But at least you're trying.

There's nothing as cute as a fool attempting condescension. 8/10 would troll again.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  I'm sorry, but explains/answers are rather the same.

Quote:Right. So you won't even try to coherently define or explain anything. Gotcha.
I'm sorry but you misunderstand again.

You say: [blithering nonsense].
I say: that doesn't make sense.
You say: [the same blithering nonsense].
I say: that still doesn't make sense. Can you elaborate?
You say: no, you just don't understand.

Uh...

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  I assure you I'm trying. You misunderstand. I was saying empathy causes one to sacrifice self for others when obeyed.

Quote:"Obeyed"? That's incoherent. One can't "obey" sensations.
Indeed one can. When the sensation of hunger comes, we eat.

Oh look, conflation and misunderstanding.

No, hunger is a sensation I (or others) experience as a result . It still cannot be "obeyed". That still doesn't make sense, and you still have no idea what you're talking about.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:No, it's pathetically simplistic, but it's fundamentally flawed and incomplete.
Well then you can explain why it is fundamentally flawed.

Insane troll logic is not valid.

"Empathy exists, therefore Bible" is insane troll logic of the highest calibre.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote: That you are incapable of abstract thought is not my problem.
After correcting you so many times, with no thank you I might add, and telling you the definitions of basic words which I assume you know since 4 year olds know, my lack of abstract thought is not the problem.

If you had any real understanding of what you're parroting you'd be able to develop the ideas. You can't. Others question you, and you remain completely unable to express yourself.

It's somehow appropriate that you refer to 4 year olds. That appears to be the level at which most of your reasoning occurs. No slight on you, mind, that's just theism in a nutshell. Children haven't learned how to vet their pattern recognition, and are inescapably prone to teleological thinking.

At least "lol dictionary" would be a response. Consummately trolltacular and inadequate regardless, but at least a response.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  It simply means that Empathy is not a choice/decision made in the brain but the power of morality.

Quote:It is an aspect of the social and neurological web of interaction we call "morality".
You could put it that way.

Yes. I just did.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  Nonetheless, we need empathy to consider others in a meaningful way.

Citation needed.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
Quote:So freaking what?
So let us be thankful.

Thankful for what? Why?

There's no point being thankful for being human. That's simplywhat we are; no more, no less.

Notwithstanding none of the above is even tangentially related to theism. So there's that.

(13-07-2014 03:30 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(13-07-2014 01:27 PM)childeye Wrote:  Now if you wish to comment on that, then I would love to hear your sincere commentary.

Quote:"Morality therefore God" is a shambling cavalcade of oblivious failure. It is not an argument. It has no substance. It is not coherent. It is a waste of everybody's time, including yours.

That is my commentary.
I think you need a hug.

Top form, my good man. I like when you don't even try to put together germane responses. Dispensing with the charade saves everybody time.

But no, let's explore this. I need a hug, eh? Why do you say so? Do you think I lack affection? Do you think I'm somehow upset? At most I'm mildly bemused by your antics. Do you suppose if I experienced the magic of a hug I would be won over the magic special God sauce and agree with you? 'Cause that'd be some highly entertaining double-down-on-failure type schlock.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: