Mrebo

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

The latter part regarding the misogyny and anti-gay stuff is the kind of religiosity I’m referring to when I say that we shouldn’t be expected to respect religion. If you think that homosexuality is a crime against god, then I don’t respect your opinion and I don’t think that anyone should respect your opinion. If you believe women shouldn’t be allowed to drive, or should be forced to wrap themselves in burkas and other oppressive garb, then I don’t respect your opinion. The list goes on and on. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I find all of those individuals that think that way to be totally unworthy of respect, but their religious views are. I don’t think that that’s unreasonable and no one else should either.

If I’m allowed to play devil’s advocate (guess chyron needs new representation), it wasn’t long ago that the consensus thought oppositely: that accepting gender norm heresies meant one’s opinion didn’t deserve respect.

The tables have turned on religion, at least in most Western countries, but how are we to grapple with “truth” in an objective way? Is it all about consensus?

How about just letting people live their lives? Why can’t there be a consensus about that?

“Gender norm heresies” don’t hurt anyone.

I don’t contest that. But what makes it objectively true?

TV’s Frink said:

Jeebus said:

Secretly taped audio reveals Democratic leadership pressuring progressive to leave race

Caveat #1: Did not read the piece.
Caveat #2: I get the outrage at this sort of thing.

With those things said, isn’t the party supposed to win as many races as possible, and aren’t they meant to push the candidates they think have the best chance to win (right or wrong)? Maybe this stuff isn’t “fair” but it seems totally expected to me.

Agree entirely. And at the end of the day, they’re going to vote with the party the vast majority of the time and probably drift left - e.g. Gillibrand (used to be anti-immigrant and pro-gun); Doug Jones is also known to be more liberal than he let on.

moviefreakedmind said:

The latter part regarding the misogyny and anti-gay stuff is the kind of religiosity I’m referring to when I say that we shouldn’t be expected to respect religion. If you think that homosexuality is a crime against god, then I don’t respect your opinion and I don’t think that anyone should respect your opinion. If you believe women shouldn’t be allowed to drive, or should be forced to wrap themselves in burkas and other oppressive garb, then I don’t respect your opinion. The list goes on and on. It doesn’t necessarily mean that I find all of those individuals that think that way to be totally unworthy of respect, but their religious views are. I don’t think that that’s unreasonable and no one else should either.

If I’m allowed to play devil’s advocate (guess chyron needs new representation), it wasn’t long ago that the consensus thought oppositely: that accepting gender norm heresies meant one’s opinion didn’t deserve respect.

The tables have turned on religion, at least in most Western countries, but how are we to grapple with “truth” in an objective way? Is it all about consensus?

I understand the sincerity of conviction (see the preceding pages) but as we survey history and different cultures, “truth” seems to be whatever those who have power insist it to be.

I get the basic point about not respecting views one finds odious, but is there an objective standard there?

DuracellEnergizer said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

I was raised to be a weird sort of fair-weather literalist. As in my dad said things like “Maybe fossils are just decoration God put there, and maybe the world is only about 10,000 years old. Maybe.”

And on the eighth day God said, “The Earth needs some flare. Fake bones will really bring the planet together.”

Real LOL

Tyrphanax said:

If I lived where Ray lived, I would go in to get my flow chopped.

But I’d tell him to cut it weird and the come here to pretend like he butchered me so we could have some nice forum drama.

I was in Paris about a year ago and needed a haircut pretty badly. Despite not knowing how to describe what I wanted done to my head in French (let alone English), I chanced it. I went into this hole-in-the-wall barber shop across from the hotel. A quaint Paris barbershop, I thought to myself. The dejected looking barber suddenly appeared very excited to have a customer. I sat down and described best I could and he went to work. His hand was shaking like he seriously had Parkinson’s. I can only guess that is the case. It was bad. He braced his hand against my head as he worked. I didn’t want to insult him so I braced myself. I held my breath for long stretches as the scissors neared my ears and imagined the patchy strips he was carving into my head with the clippers. I was tempted to declare it done or make an excuse to rush off but I stuck with it. It was nearing completion and I relaxed a little. It didn’t look half bad. Then he did what I thought he had the sense not to do and pulled out a straight razor. I accepted my fate as he put the blade to the back of my neck. I thought for a moment that my last words might be “let them eat cake.” But I survived. He smiled and said he could go shorter if I liked. I looked thoughtfully in the mirror, turning my head one way then another, trying to hide my relief, and declared it very well done. He asked again and I assured him it was perfect. Happiest I’ve ever left a haircut. I hope I made his day too.

I wager there’s little Ray could do that would upset me, even if I told him to cut it weird.

ray_afraid said:

First day working in the new barbershop. It’s just my own barber n’ me.
Went incredibly well. Especially for a Tuesday. Don’t even know what to expect for Saturday…

Cheers!

Congratulations 😄

moviefreakedmind said:

As embarrassing as this is, I used to be a biblical literalist.

Why? And what changed your view?

Woolly mammoth idea.

Godspeed.

ZigZig said:

Mrebo said:

Zig, what is clear is that your approach does more to obfuscate and impede discussion than chyron’s expression of his certainty. You now seem perhaps somewhat less confused about chyron’s statements so that is progress!

Mrebo, thank you for being so smart. I am sure that the foresight of your interventions will eventually make this thread more clever.

Can’t dispute that.

It is so typical, an ad hominem attack when you have no other argument.

My characterization of your argument (your argument, not you) is not an ad hominem attack. And certainly no different than your characterization of chyron’s views in this thread.

At least, Chyron defended his thought and position without attacking his interlocutors. Which makes him quite respectable. Not you.

See above.

Perhaps if I had merely said your approach was “clumsy, immature or disrespectful” (as you called chyron’s words) you wouldn’t have though it ad hominem.

The rest of your post is so ridiculous that I will not answer it better than Possessed already did.

You seem to have responded to my post anyhow.

Possessed said:

Yes, how DARE he suggest that belief in things that can’t be proven be treated as that, beliefs, and not “the truth”. That’s just crazy talk.

It’s a rhetorical hangup I see no value in.

Zig, what is clear is that your approach does more to obfuscate and impede discussion than chyron’s expression of his certainty. You now seem perhaps somewhat less confused about chyron’s statements so that is progress!

The article you link isn’t terribly responsive. Here, we are discussing matters of faith. Certainly there are claims in the Bible that can/should be analyzed in a factual/scientific way. Did Jesus exist? Did the Jews flee Egypt? Was the Earth created in 6 days? Was there a world flood?

After scrutiny one may conclude there is not evidence or even contradicting evidence, but only after such scrutiny can it be discounted. But in this discussion, I thought we were discussing a elements that are not falsifiable.

Biblical literalism is something we might discuss though I don’t know if anyone here subscribes to it.

Handman said:

I am super depressed.

You need to talk to a therapist or doctor. It won’t just go away on its own.

LordZerome1080 said:

Even though I’m good at most things, I have a math deficit due to me being on the spectrum which has restricted me to only being able to do the 1st-4th-grade math. This is making finding a job very frustrating.

What are your strengths?

ZigZig said:

Mrebo said:

Then there is a post like Zig with his spaghetti monster sarcasm.

It is everything but a sarcasm (and the Flying Spaghetti Monster is everything but mine):

"Because of its popularity and exposure, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is often used as a contemporary version of Russell’s teapot—an argument that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon those who make unfalsifiable claims, not on those who reject them. "
(https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster)

This movement tries to illustrate the nonsense of treating religious beliefs and rational facts on the same level. That is why it seemed relevant to me in this particular discussion.

And your answer shows how much the Flying Spaghetti Monster is an appropriate parable in the present case…

I’m well aware what it is. And your post was clearly sarcastic (thus why I referred to your sarcasm). If you/those who purport to believe in the fsm were actually sincere, then the comparison would make sense. That of course would undermine your intended point.

As for debating religion as if it were scientific fact, I think it is conceded early and often by religious folk that that is wrongheaded. So at the end of the day, the fsm proves nothing.

Possessed said:

Chyron hasn’t even GAVE his reasons. That’s what most are curious about.

I acknowledged that in my post above and he has explained at least a couple of times why he isn’t giving reasons for his certainty. I don’t think he should be made to cobble something together when he doesn’t feel competent to express himself on the matter. Does anyone doubt chyron’s sincerity on the certainty of his belief? Is any reason for his certainty going to satisfy anyone?

moviefreakedmind said:

You say that stuff all the time so forgive me for not understanding your stance.

You must be thinking of somebody else.

In challenging chyron’s unabashed certainty what are you looking for? To understand his reasons? Granted, chyron has conceded he doesn’t feel competent to defend his reasons and has thus disclaimed any desire to do so. Make of that what you will, but how many pages should be spent on deriding his certainty?

Then there is a post like Zig with his spaghetti monster sarcasm.

I can only guess that the intent is compel him to admit a level of doubt you think a reasonable person should hold. It’s rather like going after a guy to compel him to admit that maybe, just maybe, his wife doesn’t love him and is going to leave him. Even if he has all kinds of “evidence” to the contrary and utter conviction, those on the outside can suspect it is nonetheless plausible.

moviefreakedmind said:

And it’s the religion thread. I’ve noticed that Mrebo seems to think that any objectionable statement just needs to be ignored and if you push it then obviously you’re obsessed or just care too much.

That’s incorrect but thank you for playing.

I don’t know why so many of y’all care so much about chyron’s certainty.

Akin to?:

“INTERROGATING ZUCKERBERG” — A Bad Lip Reading

Possessed said:

Fine. I “respectfully hold the opinion” that presenting your beliefs and opinions as absolute truth and fact is problematic. Feel better?

I feel…nothing. Must be what (real) truth feels like. The nature of truth has been debated for eons. Even Obi Wan refers “truths” in a way suggesting “truth” not to be entirely objective. Zig’s post is also on that vein. Depending on your particular persuasion you may shun the concept altogether. I agree with CatBus that argument is all very tedious. In context here, there should be no doubt what chyron means when he speaks of truth.

Possessed said:

Don’t be willfully ignorant.

Not an answer. Willful ignorance may be evidenced by not understanding what chyron and CatBus posted.

Possessed said:

It is tho

Is that truth or just what you believe?

ZigZig said:

chyron8472 said:

To some degree, I can not answer some of those follow-up questions in a meaningful way, because
(…)
2) certain answers that readily come to me assume certain truths that people call into question. And I can not convince people of those truths.
(…)

True. Though, some people do present themselves as though their opinion is the correct one.
…and that probably also includes me.

When you use words like “truths” to describe your beliefs, is it difficult not to think that you present your opinion as the correct one.

Clearly. And I think chyron (and CatBus) explain why that isn’t problematic.