Life, The Universe, And Everything; Continued

[Japedo]

 

I need a new monitor now! Gawd that was hilarious!

[Ouroboros]

Is there actually anyone at home, or has someone hooked up Eliza? Is Buddy actually a human?

Extreme! (And it reminds me that I wrote one of those Eliza programs myself in the 80's... quite cool stuff...)

 

But anyway, if Buddy exist as a real human or not? Well, I can testify to that. He does exist. I've met him once and we talked for a bit. Actually he's a pretty nice guy, believe it or not. I think a lot of the problems you have with him is that he's trying really hard not to offend anyone and he really wants to discuss these things without necessarily force anyone to change their beliefs. I guess we're alike in a way, but on different sides of the fence.

[Sparrow]

Is there actually anyone at home, or has someone hooked up Eliza? Is Buddy actually a human?

Extreme! (And it reminds me that I wrote one of those Eliza programs myself in the 80's... quite cool stuff...)

 

But anyway, if Buddy exist as a real human or not? Well, I can testify to that. He does exist. I've met him once and we talked for a bit. Actually he's a pretty nice guy, believe it or not. I think a lot of the problems you have with him is that he's trying really hard not to offend anyone and he really wants to discuss these things without necessarily force anyone to change their beliefs. I guess we're alike in a way, but on different sides of the fence.

 

HanSolo, he probably is a very nice guy in reality, but it's like talking to a robot.

 

Either way, he doesn't look like he wants to discuss anything. You can't pin him down to any particular point, nor can you get an answer that is in any way definite. It also seems like you can get him to say he's unsure in any definite way.

 

It's like trying to juggle jello or swim in the air.

 

Children have opinions and are willing to discuss, they can be quite definite and wiling to express an idea, but it seems not Buddy.

 

And as for being in the Lion's den. Didn't he read the instructions? If he wanted to have a real conversation, he could have went to the arena.

 

And not offending anyone? Sorry but you can't have a discussion without the possibility of having a difference of opinion. I mean really, how old is he? 11 years old? Strong disgreement is part and parcel of being an adult. At his age he should be tough enough to be able to tolerate someone telling him "he's wrong" in a very strong manner.

 

He is allowed to disagree ... and in the Lion's den he's allowed to disagree quite strongly.

 

I think you may be right and he's a nice guy, but he really needs to start discussing because it really ain't much a discussion despite the number of pages.

 

Thanks HanSolo.

 

Spatz

[BuddyFerris]

...

I think you may be right and he's a nice guy, but he really needs to start discussing because it really ain't much a discussion despite the number of pages.

 

Thanks HanSolo.

 

Spatz

Hello Sparrow.

What would you like to discuss? I've offered you the floor a couple of times; you're still welcome to pick an issue. If you would like, I'd be glad to launch a target or two, such as Dano's actual age, or Japedo's likelihood of preserving her sanity until the teens are out of the house. We could do the validity of the reductionist approach to explanations of sentience, or the question of physical descriptions for abstract thought and communication.

 

We could do evidence. Would it help you to talk about the evidence?

HalBuddy

[BuddyFerris]

Is there actually anyone at home, or has someone hooked up Eliza? Is Buddy actually a human?

Extreme! (And it reminds me that I wrote one of those Eliza programs myself in the 80's... quite cool stuff...)

 

But anyway, if Buddy exist as a real human or not? Well, I can testify to that. He does exist. I've met him once and we talked for a bit. Actually he's a pretty nice guy, believe it or not. I think a lot of the problems you have with him is that he's trying really hard not to offend anyone and he really wants to discuss these things without necessarily force anyone to change their beliefs. I guess we're alike in a way, but on different sides of the fence.

Kind words for a guy who disagrees with me on almost everything except a place to eat breakfast. Kidding, of course. I think we probably agree on 95% of everything except God.

 

You and I almost understand each other. I'm doing my best to stay with you on the logical moves; I'll get it eventually. Meanwhile, in spite of our disagreements, I have nothing but respect and fond affection for you and your family; hope you're all doing well.

Buddy

[Sparrow]

...

I think you may be right and he's a nice guy, but he really needs to start discussing because it really ain't much a discussion despite the number of pages.

 

Thanks HanSolo.

 

Spatz

Hello Sparrow.

What would you like to discuss? I've offered you the floor a couple of times; you're still welcome to pick an issue. If you would like, I'd be glad to launch a target or two, such as Dano's actual age, or Japedo's likelihood of preserving her sanity until the teens are out of the house. We could do the validity of the reductionist approach to explanations of sentience, or the question of physical descriptions for abstract thought and communication.

 

We could do evidence. Would it help you to talk about the evidence?

HalBuddy

 

OK - let's talk tomorrow

 

It's 00:30 for me and my english deteriorates with lateness.

 

However, whilst you feel you may have offered me the floor, I'm still waiting on the answers to the questions I've originally asked.

 

Be that I won't get anything from those, I think of some new items for tomorrows.

 

tschüss

 

Spass

[BuddyFerris]

...

He is allowed to disagree ... and in the Lion's den he's allowed to disagree quite strongly.

....Spatz

Sparrow,

My wife was asked to critique a book written in the 70's on a woman's place in the church. Her take on the book: the author stated her perspective, which was self-described as biblical feminism. Then she talked briefly about the scholarly issues of culture and language use. Then she concluded the book by restating her premise, but 'quite strongly' with castigation of earlier generations, ascribing motives impossible for the culture. An unpersuasive tome reflecting the author's strong feelings and sense of injustice, but not answering the basic questions.

 

Disagreeing 'quite strongly' here in the Lion's Den may be likened to recreational spleen venting, but does it add credibility to a position or to a criticism? You might consider being direct with content and reason if you hope to inform. On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

[R. S. Martin]

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

 

That is nobody's fault but your own. You can read her profile. You can read her posts. You can learn much about a person from that. You have no right to ask for more. There is no indication that you read my other post, or the posts I referred you to. If you are as willing to learn as you indicated I think you will read some of the recommended readings. Otherwise, you can expect to be crushed like the spineless spider you come across as being.

 

On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

You, too, are impressive in your capacity to insult and condescend. Such a pretender at being polite and passive. I would like to see your honest response to Grandpa Harley's post of his personal account--you want to know about people's personal lives, he's offering you something. My guess is you can't respond to it genuinely because it exceeds the cruelty your religion allows you to deal with. We've had those cases on here. You just won't read them--you thick-skulled know-it-all.

[Ouroboros]

Kind words for a guy who disagrees with me on almost everything except a place to eat breakfast. Kidding, of course. I think we probably agree on 95% of everything except God.

 

You and I almost understand each other. I'm doing my best to stay with you on the logical moves; I'll get it eventually. Meanwhile, in spite of our disagreements, I have nothing but respect and fond affection for you and your family; hope you're all doing well.

Buddy

It's Mutual.

 

I'm trying to become a bit easier in my handling of people with alternative views of life. And of some reason, I tend to get a fairly good reception from the more "liberal" or secular Christians that come and visit us here, while the hard core fundamentalists hate my guts. After all, I don't claim to know everything so an honest dialogue is only healthy for all of us.

 

When it comes to my logical mind twisters, I don't expect anyone to get everything all the time, I think there's a lot of things that I know or consider today that maybe came as a seed from someone else many years ago. And sometimes I'm not ever sure I understand my own twisted mind either.

 

My view is that I say what's on my mind (and I can be completely wrong). If I do get an answer it can change my opinion and give me new ideas, but if I don't get an answer or the person don't understand me, it's not so important to me. I'm just hoping that maybe it started a process in the other person and he/she will come to some new conclusions over time, and maybe eventually we talk again and he/she got even something better to provide that would also influence me. After all we're in this boat (planet) together, We better try to make the best of it. And fair and honest dialogue is good.

 

My family is doing just great, and my grand parents left a couple of days ago - back to Svedala. Kids just fine. I hope all is good with yours too.

 

I had to teach one of my sons in argumentation for and against First Cause, the Morality argument, Fine Tuned universe and much more the other day. Quite fun. I told him I play the role as a Christian and try to convert him and see what arguments he can come up with. I give him a C-. He failed in some of them, but some he did pick up pretty good. So watch out. Next generation will be prepared.

[BuddyFerris]

...

You, too, are impressive in your capacity to insult and condescend. Such a pretender at being polite and passive. I would like to see your honest response to Grandpa Harley's post of his personal account--you want to know about people's personal lives, he's offering you something. My guess is you can't respond to it genuinely because it exceeds the cruelty your religion allows you to deal with. We've had those cases on here. You just won't read them--you thick-skulled know-it-all.

Dear RubySera,

GrandpaH has alluded to some difficult times in his past that aren't mine to probe. He's said nothing that needs my approval. I respect that his experience is both dramatic and personal, and I'll not intrude there uninvited. My stories are part of the dialog; his are too. We'll cover most of the important things eventually; for now we're still learning how to talk to each other.

 

Yes you are overly idealistic. Before you make one more statement on here you need to read two hundred ....

I apologize for not responding sooner; I was interrupted at work on this one and must not have finished it.

I've read a few of the threads and profiles here and will gladly read those you suggest. I wouldn't think of trivializing the distress many here have gone through. Enough for now.

Buddy

[BuddyFerris]

...

I had to teach one of my sons in argumentation for and against First Cause, the Morality argument, Fine Tuned universe and much more the other day. Quite fun. I told him I play the role as a Christian and try to convert him and see what arguments he can come up with. I give him a C-. He failed in some of them, but some he did pick up pretty good. So watch out. Next generation will be prepared.

You're absolutely right; you do say what's on your mind; a plus, I might add. You will serve your son well if you teach him to think for himself, and to evaluate what he's told before accepting it. All's well; later.

Buddy

[Sparrow]

...

He is allowed to disagree ... and in the Lion's den he's allowed to disagree quite strongly.

....Spatz

Sparrow,

My wife was asked to critique a book written in the 70's on a woman's place in the church. Her take on the book: the author stated her perspective, which was self-described as biblical feminism. Then she talked briefly about the scholarly issues of culture and language use. Then she concluded the book by restating her premise, but 'quite strongly' with castigation of earlier generations, ascribing motives impossible for the culture. An unpersuasive tome reflecting the author's strong feelings and sense of injustice, but not answering the basic questions.

 

Disagreeing 'quite strongly' here in the Lion's Den may be likened to recreational spleen venting, but does it add credibility to a position or to a criticism? You might consider being direct with content and reason if you hope to inform. On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

 

Geez Buddy, stop being so hyper-sensitive. Are you trying to prove my point? You're in the lion's den; what do you expect?

 

I'll prepare some straight-forward questions and points today - you said you offered me the floor - please stick to the commitment.

 

Spatz

[BuddyFerris]

Disagreeing 'quite strongly' here in the Lion's Den may be likened to recreational spleen venting, but does it add credibility to a position or to a criticism? You might consider being direct with content and reason if you hope to inform. On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

Geez Buddy, stop being so hyper-sensitive. Are you trying to prove my point? You're in the lion's den; what do you expect?

 

I'll prepare some straight-forward questions and points today - you said you offered me the floor - please stick to the commitment.

 

Spatz

Dear Sparrow,

Make up your mind, dear lady. Either I'm an insensitive boor or a hyper-sensitive weakling. Consistency is the heart of credibility.

Prefer honest exchange to carpet bombing; I don't wither under fire; been shot at before; didn't care for it; I will critique your aim, shooter, if that's your druthers.

Buddy

[Grandpa Harley]

Word to the wise... and I only bring it up since I had problems deciphering what you mean, Sparrow is German. She writes in excellent English, but if something can just about stump me as a native speaker (well, I AM English) then to someone in a second language, I think there may be contention...

 

Just sayin'

[Antlerman]

...

Where I see the church being the Antichrist, it’s when they take you off the path of self-discovery into following their rules. At that point, you stop growing and become enslaved to the priests. How many pastors out there do you truly think have the answers for everyone, let alone themselves?

That's a telling point, AM. I've known a number of pastors personally over the years, and they fall into two categories. Those who are humble enough to admit they are still in the process of discovery and those who are still in the process of discovery but are troubled that anyone might notice it. It's an unfortunate cultural dilemma; pastors are expected to know answers for the masses as are doctors and teachers and politicians. We're to the place with literacy and information access now so that patients are almost as insightful as their health care providers, students have as broad an exposure to information as their professors, and pastors are having a hard time keeping up.

That’s a good analogy. Doctors are expected to be gods, and many carry that persona straight into their personalities and become arrogant asses. Pastors are looked to as leaders of culture, but the problem is hardly any are educated in areas of philosophy and sociology to really be equipped in that role. Historically when the church controlled society with a grip around what information was allowed to be available for public ingestion, the role as social leaders was simpler – they dictated what was acceptable belief, and then eliminated anything else through force. They only needed to understand acceptable doctrine.

 

Today society is open and philosophies from the world over permeate our societies, so a pastor trying to teach the old traditions in a new world has a difficult task. Most pastors don’t even understand the sorts of questions people are asking, let alone have any sort of relevant answer.

 

This is why you see the declared “war on culture”, hoping to go to the government to push science out of the classroom in favor of religious instruction, blatantly guising itself as science in order to sneak in, trying to get prayer mandated in classroom in sneaky sideways efforts to promote make their jobs easier through the indoctrination of children. They can’t do what they once could so easily, so rather than educate themselves and try to make themselves relevant in the arena of ideas, they get political. Very telling indeed!

 

The real question should be, are Pastors supposed to be social leaders? Why not simply be guides in a chosen religious philosophy, and let people who seek that out be the participants in a society as individuals? What makes a pastor qualified to be a social leader? Tradition?

 

(We should probably differentiate between church, religion, and belief. They kind of get blurred in conversations like these. I don't consider myself religious, I wonder about organizations that call themselves churches but act like businesses, and I wonder what to do with 'believers' who have hope but no faith.)

I’m quoting this to come back to. You do raise a good point. They do get all blurred together in conversation. Out of time for now…

[Vigile]

Why not simply be guides in a chosen religious philosophy, and let people who seek that out be the participants in a society as individuals?

 

They seek out the role of social leadership because many are politically motivated. Religion wants a seat at the politcal table because they want total control over the lives of their congregation and society in general. It's important to fight them every step of the way on this matter.

[Sparrow]

Ok Buddy,

 

Since you promised (by implication) to have a real discussion, here are my opening points:

 

1. You profess to be a christian, yet from reading your numerous postings, without your actually denying it, you don’t seem like much of one. You have some ideas that are certainly not doctrinal and definitely not biblical. Since the Bible and the doctrine form the very essence of the Christianity, much of what you say indicates that you have some weird “Christianity without Christ†belief. Perhaps I’m wrong, but whatever you call I think I’d like to understand.

 

2. When I contemplate life, the universe and everything, I admit there are many things that I don’t understand or have only a very shallow knowledge of. I also know that I will get to the end of my life, whether it is very long, and still will have only scratched the surface of all the interesting things there is to know. At no time do I automatically assume “god†or something magical spiritual when I encounter a anomaly or some un-explainable event. My automatic assumption is usually and more than likely will be in the future, that something natural and not yet understood has occurred, yet when I read your texts Buddy, I get the distinct impression that for you it is nearly the opposite and you firstly assume “god†or “magicâ€, and then have to be argued out of it. Am I seeing this correctly?

 

3. You often resort to the science†won’t solve everything†straw man type of argument. This is grossly annoying as no one is saying that science will solve everything. So let me say it right up front now “Science will NOT solve everything. So thanks for telling us something we all already know. You can collect a 50 cent cigar at the door as you if you want.†Honestly Buddy, we know science won’t solve everything, and it’s a straw man argument to imply that everyone is saying that.

 

I’m picking you up on this because whilst you may not have said these words explicitly, reading over your comments you imply this strongly on a number of occasions and it is just plan wrong. It’s insincere and totally untrue.

 

It’s akin to the religious zealot who is anthropomorphising “science†into a sinister and demonic consciousness that is deliberately trying to destroy the world. It’s nonsense, it’s crap. Please stop doing this.

 

If you are as intelligent as you seemingly like everyone to think you are, then please realize that you’re quite transparent of this front.

 

4. OK, evidence. Where is it Buddy? You said you were willing to speak “evidenceâ€, so spit out. Habeas Corpus! Where is it? Just remember that evidence for “Godâ€, in fact any “godâ€, would be one of the greatest scientific discoveries. So if you have, lay it out and let us all have a look. Please don’t keep us waiting.

 

5. You still haven’t given a satisfactory answer of what it is you hope to gain by all of this. What’s the point? You having a “chat†(I won’t call it a discussion) with a number of people and you’ve made it quite clear that your mind won’t be changed. So what is it? Are you just here to “chew the proverbial fatâ€, or something?

 

I mean, if you here just to say you disagree then fine, piss off now. I can hear a street preacher any day of the week if I want. I don’t have to have it on a web site that exists for people like me (and not like you). Just consider there has to be a place where people like me can mix with like minded individuals without having a street-preacher coming in and witnessing.

 

So are you “witnessing�

 

So, there’s some starting points. Don’t disappointment now Buddy. I took you seriously and took you up on your offer.

 

Spatz

[Grandpa Harley]

Why not simply be guides in a chosen religious philosophy, and let people who seek that out be the participants in a society as individuals?

 

They seek out the role of social leadership because many are politically motivated. Religion wants a seat at the politcal table because they want total control over the lives of their congregation and society in general. It's important to fight them every step of the way on this matter.

 

This is why my usually sanguine brother bemoans the fact that we don't burn clerics any more...

[Sparrow]

Disagreeing 'quite strongly' here in the Lion's Den may be likened to recreational spleen venting, but does it add credibility to a position or to a criticism? You might consider being direct with content and reason if you hope to inform. On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

Geez Buddy, stop being so hyper-sensitive. Are you trying to prove my point? You're in the lion's den; what do you expect?

 

I'll prepare some straight-forward questions and points today - you said you offered me the floor - please stick to the commitment.

 

Spatz

Dear Sparrow,

Make up your mind, dear lady. Either I'm an insensitive boor or a hyper-sensitive weakling. Consistency is the heart of credibility.

Prefer honest exchange to carpet bombing; I don't wither under fire; been shot at before; didn't care for it; I will critique your aim, shooter, if that's your druthers.

Buddy

 

Oh Buddy , stop being a self-righteous twat.

[Sparrow]

Dear Sparrow,

Make up your mind, dear lady. Either I'm an insensitive boor or a hyper-sensitive weakling. Consistency is the heart of credibility.

Prefer honest exchange to carpet bombing; I don't wither under fire; been shot at before; didn't care for it; I will critique your aim, shooter, if that's your druthers.

Buddy

 

Don't prove to me you really are HAL or Eliza by avoiding the issue and providing a "critique" of my aim.

 

Just have a discussion about the point on this page - I'll be satisfied with that.

 

Spatz

[BuddyFerris]

Word to the wise... and I only bring it up since I had problems deciphering what you mean, Sparrow is German. She writes in excellent English, but if something can just about stump me as a native speaker (well, I AM English) then to someone in a second language, I think there may be contention...

 

Just sayin'

Thanks, Grandpa. Point taken. Stay after me on clarity. I don't particularly like wasting my time and yours on imprecision.

Buddy

(Your English ain't bad for an Englishman.)

[Grandpa Harley]

Disagreeing 'quite strongly' here in the Lion's Den may be likened to recreational spleen venting, but does it add credibility to a position or to a criticism? You might consider being direct with content and reason if you hope to inform. On the other hand, if you just want to insult, you're impressive.

 

Apart from the philosophy implied in your insults, I still know very little about your own journey or thinking.

Fubby

Geez Buddy, stop being so hyper-sensitive. Are you trying to prove my point? You're in the lion's den; what do you expect?

 

I'll prepare some straight-forward questions and points today - you said you offered me the floor - please stick to the commitment.

 

Spatz

Dear Sparrow,

Make up your mind, dear lady. Either I'm an insensitive boor or a hyper-sensitive weakling. Consistency is the heart of credibility.

Prefer honest exchange to carpet bombing; I don't wither under fire; been shot at before; didn't care for it; I will critique your aim, shooter, if that's your druthers.

Buddy

 

Oh Buddy , stop being a self-righteous twat.

 

for the Americans - Twat - British English slang term for female genitals. It is thought in some quarters to originate with a slang term for a small herring that has been flattened and smoked, and its passim resemblance to female genitals. I prefer the term 'bacon bap' as a subtle method of calling someone one one...

[Vigile]

This is why my usually sanguine brother bemoans the fact that we don't burn clerics any more...

 

My recently deceased grandfather once told me that if he knew then what he knows today, he and his brothers would have shot the young Adventist minister when he first rode into town and then hid the body in the cess pool beneath the outhouse.

 

The same grandpa was once roped into attending a church service while visiting. During the sermon he leaned over to some random woman sitting next to him and whispered loudly "if I had a beebee gun I think I could take him out from here.

 

He lived to 92 and was the only one in my entire family who never fell for the meme.

[Grandpa Harley]

Requiesat in Pace, Grandpa Vigile! I like the cut of his jib!

[Antlerman]

Why not simply be guides in a chosen religious philosophy, and let people who seek that out be the participants in a society as individuals?

 

They seek out the role of social leadership because many are politically motivated. Religion wants a seat at the politcal table because they want total control over the lives of their congregation and society in general. It's important to fight them every step of the way on this matter.

I agree. My argument is that they are politically motivated because they are philosophically impotent. They can't compete with ideas, so they try to usurp position through politics. Politics is not about the merits of an idea, but emotional persuasion. Why do you think the idea of hell exists? If you can't sell based on the merits of a product, tell them what will happen if they don't buy it! Must be lacking merits, I'd say.